UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

[X]Annual Report Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of Thethe Securities Exchange Act of 1934
  
 For the fiscal year ended OctoberDecember 31 2018, 2021
  
OR
  
[  ]Transition Report Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
  
 For the Transition Period from to           _________________________

Commission File No. 000-51128001-32404

POLARITYTE, INC.

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

DELAWAREdelaware06-1529524

(State or other jurisdiction

of incorporation or organization)

(I.R.S. Employer

Identification No.)

123 Wright Brothers Drive1960 S. 4250 West

Salt Lake City, Utah 8411684104

(Address of principal executive office)

Registrant’s telephone number, including area code (385) 237-2279(800)560-3983

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act: NONE

Title of each classTrading Symbol(s)Name of each exchange on which registered
Common Stock, par value $0.001PTENASDAQ Capital Market

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

Common Stock, Par Value $0.001

(Title of class)

NASDAQ Capital Market

(Name of exchange on which registered)

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 every Interactive Data File required to be submitted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§ 232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit 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 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, a smaller reporting company, or an emerging growth company. See definitionthe definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer,” “smaller reporting company” and “emerging growth company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.

Large accelerated filer[  ]Accelerated filer[X]
Non-accelerated filer[  ]Smaller reporting company[X]
Emerging growth company[  ]

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.

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

The aggregate market value of the common stock held by non-affiliates as of AprilJune 30, 2018,2021, was $192 million.$80,190,567.

The outstanding number of shares of common stock as of January 7, 2019,March 25, 2022, was 21,456,643.89,498,691.

Documents incorporated by reference: None.Portions of the registrant’s definitive proxy statement for the Special Meeting of Stockholders called for May 12, 2022 (2022 Proxy Statement) are incorporated into Part III hereof. The 2022 Proxy Statement will be filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission within 120 days after the registrant’s fiscal year ended December 31, 2021.

 

 

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page
PART I
Item 1.Business14
Item 1A.Risk Factors2120
Item 1B.Unresolved Staff Comments4133
Item 2.Properties4133
Item 3.Legal Proceedings4234
Item 4.Mine Safety Disclosures4235
PART II
Item 5.Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities4235
Item 6.Selected Financial Data[Reserved]4336
Item 7.Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations4337
Item 7A.Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk4844
Item 8.Financial Statements and Supplementary Data4844
Item 9.Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure4844
Item 9A.Controls and Procedures4944
Item 9B.Other Information5345
Item 9C.Disclosure Regarding Foreign Jurisdictions that Prevent Inspections45
PART III
Item 10.Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance5345
Item 11.Executive Compensation5745
Item 12.Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters6245
Item 13.Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence6345
Item 14.Principal AccountingAccountant Fees and Services6446
PART IV
Item 15.Exhibits, Financial Statement Schedules6546
Item 16.Form 10-K Summary48

As used in this annual report, the terms “we”, “us”, “our”,“we,” “us,” “our,” “the Company”,Company,” and “PolarityTE” mean PolarityTE, Inc., a Delaware corporation, and our wholly owned Nevada subsidiaries (direct and indirect), PolarityTE, Inc., PolarityTE MD, Inc., PolarityTE RD,Arches Research, Inc., Utah CRO Services, Inc., IBEX Preclinical Research, Inc., and IBEX Property LLC., unless otherwise indicated or required by the context.

PolarityTE,POLARITYTE, the PolarityTE Logo, POLARITYRD, POLARITYIS, POLARITYRX, “WELCOMEWELCOME TO THE SHIFT”,SHIFT, WHERE SELF REGENERATES SELF, COMPLEX SIMPLICITY, IBEX, SkinTE, OsteoTE, CartTE, AdipoTE, MyoTE, NeuralTE, AngioTE, LiverTE, UroTE,ARCHES, and BowelTESKINTE are all trademarks or registered trademarks of PolarityTE. Solely for convenience, the trademarks and trade names in this report may be referred to without the ® and ™ symbols, but such references should not be construed as any indicator that we will not assert, to the fullest extent under applicable law, our rights thereto.

2
 

Forward-looking Statements

This Annual Report on Form 10-K contains forward-looking statements. Risks and uncertainties are inherent in forward-looking statements. Furthermore, such statements may be based on assumptions that fail to materialize or prove incorrect. Consequently, our business development, operations, and results could differ materially from those expressed in forward-looking statements made in this Annual Report. We make such forward-looking statements pursuant to the safe harbor provisions in Section 27A of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 19951933, as amended (the “Securities Act”), and other federal securities laws.Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”). All statements other than statements of historical facts contained in this Annual Report are forward-looking statements. In some cases, you can identify forward-looking statements by words such as “anticipate,” “believe,” “contemplate,” “continue,” “could,” “estimate,” “expect,” “intend,” “may,” “plan,” “potential,” “predict,” “project,” “seek,” “should,” “target,” “would,” or the negative of these words or other comparable terminology. These forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, statements about:

(A)the timing or success of obtaining regulatory licenses or approvals for initiating clinical trials or marketing our products;
(B)the initiation, timing, progress, and results of our pre-clinical studies or clinical trials;
(C)sufficiency of our working capital to fund our operations in the near and long term, which raises doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern;
(D)infrastructure required to support operations in future periods, including the expected costs thereof;
(E)estimates associated with revenue recognition, asset impairments, and cash flows;
(F)variance in our estimates of future operating costs;
(G)future vesting and forfeitures of compensatory equity awards;
(H)the effectiveness of our disclosure controls and our internal control over financial reporting;
(I)the impact of new accounting pronouncements;
(J)size and growth of our target markets; and
(K)the initiation, timing, progress, and results of our research and development programs;programs.

Factors that may cause actual results to differ materially from those contemplated by such forward-looking statements include, without limitation:

the ability to comply with regulations applicable to the delivery of our services;
 the ability to meet demand for our services;
 the timing or successability to deliver our services if employees are quarantined due to the impact of commercialization of our products;
COVID-19;
 the pricing and reimbursement of our products;
the initiation, timing, progress, and results of our preclinical and clinical studies;
the scope of protection we can establish and maintain for intellectual property rights covering our product candidates and technology;
 estimates ofdevelopments relating to our expenses, future revenues,competitors and capital requirements;
industry;
 new discoveries or the development of new therapies or technologies that render our products or services obsolete or unviable;
outbreaks of disease, including the COVID-19 pandemic, and related stay-at-home orders, quarantine policies and restrictions on travel, trade, and business operations;
political and economic instability, whether resulting from natural disasters, wars, terrorism, pandemics, or other sources;
the ability to gain adoption by healthcare providers of our products for patient care;
the ability to find and retain skilled personnel;
the need for, and ability to obtain, additional financing in the future;
 our ability to comply with regulations applicable to the manufacture, marketing, sale and distribution of our products;
general economic conditions;
 the potential benefitsinaccuracies in estimates of strategic collaboration agreementsour expenses, future revenues, and our ability to enter into strategic arrangements;
capital requirements;
 developments relating to our competitorsfuture accounting pronouncements; and industry; and
 
other risksunauthorized access to confidential information and uncertainties, including those listed under Part I, Item 1A. Risk Factors.data on our information technology systems and security and data breaches.

Given theForward-looking statements relate to future events or to our future financial performance and involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties, and other factors that may cause our actual results, performance, or achievements to be materially different from any future results, performance, or achievements expressed or implied by these forward-looking statements. Any forward-looking statement in this Annual Report on Form 10-K and the documents incorporated by reference herein reflects our forward-looking statements,current view with respect to future events and is subject to these and other risks, uncertainties, and assumptions relating to our operations, results of operations, industry, and future growth. Given these uncertainties, you should not place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements. Except as required by law, we assume no obligation to update or revise these forward-looking statements for any reason, even if new information becomes available in the future.

��

This Annual Report on Form 10-K also contains estimates, projections, and other information concerning our industry, our business, and the markets for certain diseases, including data regarding the estimated size of those markets, and the incidence and prevalence of certain medical conditions. Information that is based on estimates, forecasts, projections, market research, or similar methodologies is inherently subject to uncertainties, and actual events or circumstances may differ materially from events and circumstances reflected in this information. Unless otherwise expressly stated, we obtained this industry, business, market, and other data from reports, research surveys, studies, and similar data prepared by market research firms and other third parties, industry, medical and general publications, government data, and similar sources.

3
 

PART I

Item 1. Business

PolarityTE - Welcome to the SHIFTOverview

PolarityTE, Inc., headquartered in Salt Lake City, Utah, is a young and growing commercial-stage, biotechnology company founded in 2016 -developing regenerative tissue products and biomaterials. Our first regenerative tissue product is SkinTE. On July 23, 2021, we believe the first of its kind. We are focused on the design and development of novel technology platforms that promote the regeneration of complex, cellular-derived tissue substrates and the propagation of self-organizing composite systems. We have developed, and will continue to evolve these technologies and platforms through uniquely targeted and yet comprehensive approachessubmitted an investigational new drug application (“IND”) for SkinTE to the interactome. The interactome is the complete set of physical interactions between molecules within a cell that underlies most genotype-to-phenotype relationships and modulates nearly all complex biological pathways and cellular networks seen in living systems. Understanding this, we believe that to effectively deliver our advanced technologies to patients we must not simply deliver products, but rather robust platform systems and evolving technology foundations that are intelligent, multi-functional, and able to adapt and evolve. Over the last year we have established and advanced three of our pipeline programs consisting of our core “TE” program, (which includes our first commercial product, SkinTE), our Related Technology Derivative program (“RTD”), and our Advanced Research Center program (“ARC”).

A glossary is provided at the end of this Item 1, which you may find helpful in reading this report.

Vision

We aspire to be a global biotechnology company that provides superior, tangible, and pragmatic platform technologies that provide superior results to patients, while reducing costs and promoting improved health economics for patients, providers, and payors. We believe this can be accomplished through our pursuit of complex simplicity, which embodies the development of robust cell/tissue-derived therapies that can be efficiently produced and deployed. PolarityTE is committed to delivering transformative technology that positively impacts humanity.

PolarityTE was founded by a dedicated group of doctors and scientists from The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, who left to become part of something bigger. Something that could transform the future of medicine. We believe that living systems require more than a simple singular input (for example a growth factor, stem cell, or nano-particle), to produce a complex output. Therefore, we took a different direction and developed multi-tiered platform technologies that propagate the necessary complex substrate required for regenerating fully-functional tissue, such as skin, bone, cartilage, muscle, blood vessels, and neural elements, as well as solid and hollow organ composite tissue systems. We have engineered and developed our regenerative materials and core tissue substrate technology platforms to allow us to induce, maintain, and promote the integrated polarity, organized assembly, and interface development of cells and tissues, so that they replicate regenerative healing in the body and are not seen as foreign by the immune system.

The core technology of TE products is minimally polarized functional units (“MPFUs”) consisting of self-complexing intelligent regenerative materials (“SCIRM”). SCIRM within an MPFU form polarizing, multi-cellular aggregates that act as an intrinsic, regenerative bio-reactor capable of expanding, proliferating, and synthesizing cells, materials, factors, or systems necessary for regenerating full-thickness, three-dimensional tissue. The TE products we develop begin with the patient’s own tissue to produce SCIRM that address the specific tissue or system needed for the patient’s care. Our product pipeline focuses on the development of regenerative products for a variety of tissue types and organ systems that are commonly altered, injured, or destroyed by a variety of diseases, pathologies, traumatic events, and medical interventions.

SkinTE, our first tissue product, was registered with the United StatesU.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in August 2017, and is now commercially available for(the “FDA”) through our subsidiary, PolarityTE MD, Inc. (“PTE-MD”), as the repair, reconstruction, replacement, and regeneration of skin in patients who have a need for treatment of acute or chronic wounds, burns, surgical reconstruction events, scar revision, or removal of dysfunctional skin grafts. We are pursuing a regional plan for commercial rollout that began in late October 2018, and we now have 24 sales representativesfirst step in the field marketing SkinTE.

OsteoTE is designed to utilize the patient’s bone to repair, reconstruct, replace, supplement, or regenerate bone damage or defects. We registered OsteoTE with the FDA in December 2018. We are preparingregulatory process for the first application of the product in a clinical setting, which we are endeavoring to achieve in the first half of 2019.

Human cells, tissues and cellular and tissue-based products (“HCT/Ps”) are governed by specific FDA regulations the provideobtaining licensure for a registration pathway that is different than the pathway for traditional drug candidates. SkinTE and OsteoTE are both registered as HCT/Ps under Section 361351 of the Public Health Service Act.

The FDA subsequently issued clinical hold correspondence to us identifying certain issues that needed to be addressed before the IND could be approved. We haveprovided responses to the FDA, and on January 14, 2022, the FDA notified us that the clinical hold had been removed. The IND approval enables us to commence the first of two expected pivotal studies needed to support a numberbiologics license application (“BLA”) seeking a chronic cutaneous ulcer indication for SkinTE. Our first planned pivotal study under our IND is a multi-center, randomized controlled trial evaluating SkinTE in the treatment of additional TE products under development.diabetic foot ulcers classified as Grade 2 in the Wagner classification system (“Wagner 2 DFUs”) entitled “Closure Obtained with Vascularized Epithelial Regeneration for DFUs with SkinTE,” or “COVER DFUs Trial.” We plan to enroll up to 100 patients at up to 20 sites in the U.S. in the COVER DFUs Trial, which will compare treatment with SkinTE plus the standard-of-care to the standard-of-care alone. The following table illustratesprimary endpoint is the statusincidence of our TE product pipeline.

 

RTDDFUs closed at 24 weeks. Secondary endpoints include percent area reduction (“PAR”) at 4, 8, 12, 16, and ARC represent research24 weeks, improved quality of life, and developmentnew onset of new science and product opportunities based on whatinfection of the DFU being evaluated. As we learned while developingpursue the TE platform. RTD is focused on altered state analytes forfirst study, we plan to engage in discussions with the generation of composite materials that can be utilized for the augmentation, modulation, and regulation of cell and tissue-derived systems. ARC is focused onFDA regarding the design and implementation of the second pivotal study.

Beginning in 2017 we developed internally a laboratory and research capability to advance the development of gene transfer, small molecule synthesis, composite therapeutics,SkinTE and alterationrelated technologies, which we operate through our subsidiary, Arches Research, Inc. (“Arches”). At the beginning of self-propagating cell/tissue-derived bioreactors.

The following table shows theMay 2018, we acquired a preclinical research projects we are pursuing through RTD and ARC programs.

We have significant research facilities and a well-educated and skilled team of scientists and researchers. These resources are highly beneficialveterinary sciences business to the work we are doingbe used, in part, for preclinical studies on our TEregenerative tissue products, and in RTD and ARC. Wewhich we operate through our subsidiary IBEX Preclinical Research, Inc. (“IBEX”). Through IBEX, we also offer preclinical research services to unrelated third parties on a contract basis,basis.

SkinTE

The Importance of Skin

Skin has several functions. It provides a barrier to water loss and pathogens, and protects against diverse forms of trauma, including thermal, chemical, and ultraviolet radiation. Skin keeps us in touch with our environment through a host of nerve endings, regulates body temperature, and enhances metabolic functions. Skin is an active immune organ functioning as a first line of defense against a wide spectrum of common pathogens encountered on a regular basis. Biosynthesis of melanin in the skin reduces the harmful effects of ultraviolet light. Skin is a ready source of vitamin D, which we offer underplays an important role in maintaining healthy levels of serum calcium and resorption of bone.

The clinical significance of skin is illustrated by the trademark POLARITYRD. Contract research services help us defraymorbidity associated with chronic wounds, burns, and cutaneous defects. A 12-month prospective observational study of diabetic foot ulcers first published in Diabetic medicine: a journal of the costsBritish Diabetic Association in 2018 reported that out of maintaining a first-rate research facilitygroup of 299 patients, 17.4% had some sort of amputation of the foot and allow us6.0% of the 299 patients underwent revascularization surgery. A report published on Medscape in June 2018 states that pressure injuries are listed as the direct cause of death in 7-8% of all patients with paraplegia. And according to meet companies pursuing new technologies that may be opportunities for collaborative or strategic relationships going forward.

Limitationsstatistics collected by the National Burn Repository, the mortality rate from 2008 to Clinical Standards of Care, Regenerative Technologies and Tissue Substitutes

Clinical Standards of Care for Tissue Replacement

While both the literature and current practice indicate that the clinical standard of care remains the replacement of “like with like” (i.e. skin for skin, bone for bone, cartilage for cartilage), to date, many regenerative technologies, tissue engineered products and wound care products, have focused on “large scale manufacturable materials” and “off the shelf” designs, as opposed to employing a more patient-specific approach. Many of these types of products are xenografts, allografts, or alloplasts in part to allow for abundant sources of raw materials for the products. We believe these products merely act as synthetic cell/tissue substitutes, which are incapable of delivering true regeneration or regenerative potential of complex tissue systems and, therefore, why such products continue to fail to deliver results that are comparable to an autologous tissue graft (i.e. skin graft, bone graft, cartilage grafts etc.)2017 among burn patients treated at surveyed burn centers is approximately 3%.

We believe that historically the fieldsregeneration of regenerative medicine, tissue engineering,full-thickness skin with all the processes and appendages that enable it to some extent, cell-therapy have remained characterized by tremendous potential and promise for the future yet continueperform its vital functions is critical to remain limited by the pursuitlong-term, positive patient outcomes following serious skin injury.

4

Limitations of “artificial and/or synthetic” approaches that are overly reductionist, and thus fail to deliver “complete systems.” Some current regenerative medicine approaches try to isolate a single cellular population to regenerate a tissue, such as adipose-derived stem cells. Others try to deliver a molecule to manipulate cell function, such as driving cell growth and expansion, or coax one cell type to become another. Another approach tries to create some form of a scaffold that resembles the target tissue with specific properties designed to mimic that tissue. We believe these approaches incorrectly focus on the synthesis or engineering of singularities (i.e., a type of cell, a type of molecule, or type of matrix) in an attempt to build a complex tissue from the ground up, which we believe creates an incomplete system without interactions, diverse cells and molecules, or a natural environment to direct organization.Other Skin Treatment Therapies

Real Limitations: Using Skin as an Example

Current clinical standards and practice adhere to the concept that skin should be replaced with skin whenever possible in settings where patients have suffered the loss of such tissue. Understanding this, medical professionals are left with a decision to attempt to temporize a wound bed with an allograft, useautograft (using the patient’s own skin in a skin graft,graft), an allograft (using human skin from a donor), or apply a variety of skin substitutes to provide a skin-like barrier while the margin of the wound heals through secondary intention and contraction. Presently,Historically, harvest and placement of autologous full-thickness skin results in the best outcome within wound beds because it most closely resembles the full-thickness skin that was lost. However, full-thickness harvest of skin inherently also results in a full-thickness skin defect at the donor site, which requires primary closure (skin edge approximation and suturing) so as not to leave a gaping wound behind. Because of this absolute limit on how much autologous full-thickness donor skin can be harvested without leaving behind a non-closable wound, medical professionals can only harvest small, elliptically-shapedelliptically shaped pieces of such skin from areas of redundancy, which is termed full-thickness skin graft (FTSG)grafting (“FTSG”).

It is because there remains only a finite supply of FTSG donor material and sites that medical professionals often rely on the harvest of split-thickness skin grafts (STSG)(“STSG”) for coverage of voids of the integument to get better coverage and more skin. STSGs, however, do not represent the true anatomy or function of native skin because such graftSTSG harvest procedures onlycommonly take the top 1/10,000th100th of an inch of the patient’s own skin and therefore do not capture all the necessary cellular and tissue elementscomponents and structures required for the regeneration of normal skin (Figure I).

Figure I. Common Site Locations for Skin Graft Harvesting. The left figure depicts the process and common locationskin. Because of where a split-thickness skin graft (STSG) is harvested from with a vibrating razor that shaves off the very top 1/10,000th of an inch of skin as depicted in the skin cross section. STSGs are often then meshed (pocked with holes like a screen door) to allow for improved stretch over surfaces and to permit fluid drainage to pass through the graft and avoid build up under the graft like a bubble. The right figure depicts the common sites where full-thickness skin grafts are harvested from patients. Note that these areas are often hidden in anatomic locations where there are creases or folds to place the resulting scar from primary linear closure in aesthetically considerate places.

After the failure to harvest all the necessary skin structures cellular elements and tissue interfacescomponents from the STSG donor site, the patient is left with an incomplete top layer of skin covering the initial defect (recipient site) and a remaining bottom layer at the donor site. In this setting, both donor and recipient sites contain incomplete skin, which often results in dysfunctional, painful scar tissues and lifelong morbidities.

Because ofDue to the limits of STSG and FTSG and the type of procedures required for such harvests, the industry has continued to investigate skin substitutes and skin alternatives that can be used in place of native cutaneous substrate.skin. Among these alternatives or options are a culturecultured epithelial autograft (a form of manipulated autograft,autograft), allograft (tissue grafts derived from a donor of the same species as the recipient but not genetically identical), xenograft (a tissue graft or organ transplant from a donor of a different species from the recipient), and alloplast. Noneengineered skin substitutes. To our knowledge, none of these substitutes have been able to replicate the appearance of native skin or regenerate full-thickness skin or the cutaneous appendages (hair(e.g., hair follicle, sweat gland, sebaceous glands, etc.), which are necessary for the development of full-thickness, functionallynormal skin.

Our Solution - SkinTE

The core technology of SkinTE is minimally polarized hierarchically organizedfunctional units (“MPFUs”). MPFUs are multi-cellular segments created from a piece of the patient’s healthy skin. SkinTE allows the patient to regenerate full-thickness, three-dimensional skin (similar to a FTSG) by contributing a much smaller skin sample, while reducing the scarring and morbidities associated with STSGs, and producing results we believe to be superior to STSGs and synthetic skin substitutes. SkinTE can be utilized by a variety of health care providers in an operating room, wound clinic, or doctor’s office. The process begins with the collection of a skin sample from the patient and shipping the sample in a temperature-controlled shipping box to our FDA-regulated biomedical manufacturing facility. The harvested skin is used to manufacture SkinTE, which is expeditiously returned for application to the patient’s wound. Processing of the skin creates multi-cellular segments that are optimized for grafting, which retain the progenitor cells found throughout the skin, including the hair follicles. The product is not cultured or expanded ex-vivo, and no enzymes, growth factors, or serum derivatives are utilized during manufacturing. The final product, SkinTE, is delivered in a syringe and has the consistency of a paste. Following wound bed preparation, SkinTE is spread evenly across the entire surface of the wound and engrafts within the wound in a similar manner to traditional skin grafts. Once integrated with the wound bed, the product expands and regenerates full-thickness skin across the entire surface.

The forgoingGiven our significant real-world experience with SkinTE in clinical settings for a variety of wounds and several supporting publications, we believe SkinTE can be successful in closing full-thickness complex wounds, such as DFUs penetrating to tendon, capsule, and bone classified Wagner Grades 2 through 4; Stage 3 and 4 pressure injuries; and, acute wounds. Full-thickness DFUs that penetrate to deep structures are best classified as University of Texas Grades 2 and 3, corresponding to Wagner Grades 2 through 4, and are at the highest risk for progressing to amputation with very few treatment options and a paucity of high-level data related to current treatment options. Similarly, Stage 3 pressure injuries involve the entire thickness of the skin example shows that the traditional approachand Stage 4 pressure injuries have exposed muscle, tendon, or bone. Due to regenerative medicine that competitors employ is anchored within tissue engineering algorithms that—while cost-effective becauselimited reliable solutions, these injuries affect a large number of mass production and scalability—are incongruent with living cells, dynamic tissues, and reactive systems, and, therefore, fail to produce outcomes that effectively heal and alleviate suffering.

Our Solution

people for extended periods of time. We believe that focusing our bio-generative SCIRM technology platformsefforts in these hard-to-treat wound types, where there are fundamentally newsignificant unmet needs, can deliver substantial positive impacts in patients’ lives and inherently promote a drastically different approach to current conventional cell therapy efforts, regenerative technologies, and current products. Therapeutic singularities such as a single stem cell, a single growth factor, a single scaffold, or a combination of such singularities are unable to engineer a complex tissue in vitro for subsequent deployment into living systems. Recognizing the complexity of tissue regeneration as absolutely requiring cell-to-cell and cell-to-tissue polarity, interfaces, gradients, modulation, and multiplex system interactivity and real-time integration, we embrace a substantially more complete form of tissue regeneration that is biologically sound and evolutionarily cohesive with the dynamics of living systems.

We have designed and developed an entirely new form of regenerative cell/tissue therapy platform based on SCIRMs organized in complex MPFUs that when deployed into a wound or tissue defect undergo integrative regenerative healing within the system in which it was deployed by effectively acting as its own bioreactor and thus expanding, proliferating, and synthesizing those cells, materials, factors, and systems necessary for full-thickness generation and regeneration across a spectrum of tissue substrates and organ systems.

Our technology platform is based on complex living tissue systems and the interfaces that drive cell-tissue-matrix polarization events. We recognize there is something powerful, reactive, and dynamic controlling tissue generation, which is the interactome; the whole set of interactions a cell is impacted by, both intra and extra-cellularly. Cells rarely act on their own to create functional repair or regeneration, but rather tissues have functionally-organized cellular aggregates called appendages (almost like small organs), which run, and even regenerate, the composite tissues they are a part of when altered, stimulated, and processed in certain ways.

We believe each person’s cells and tissues have vastly different and dynamic profiles (genes, RNA, proteins, metabolites, etc.) and, therefore, different requirements when it comes to the regenerative potential or healing capacity of tissue-based systems. With this in mind, we designed our core “TE” platform technology to focus not on singularities, but on regenerating complete tissue systems.

Our core “TE” platform and self-complexing intelligent regenerative materials technologies are based on our ability to create MPFUs, which contain polarizing multi-cellular aggregates capable of expanding, proliferating, and synthesizing those cells, materials, factors or systems we believe are necessary for integrative full-thickness three-dimensional tissue regeneration, not simply two-dimensional cell sheets. Instead of starting with artificial materials, synthetic factors, or altered cell suspensions, our platform begins with the patient’s own (autologous) tissue and those components, appendages and substrates we believe are necessaryvalue for the development of an expandable and self-propagating complete system. The key attributes of our platform technology include the following:SkinTE franchise for several reasons.

5

 Patient-Generated Cell Source:The human body often identifiesAlthough these distinct wound types may occur in patients with different demographics and rejects foreign cells, creating the potential for tissue rejection, additional surgery,have different etiologies, they have common characteristics including significant wound depth, significant wound volume, frequent presence of tunneling and foreign or allogeneic body reactions like residual scarring. We address this by using healthy autologous tissue taken from the patient to regenerate cellsundermining, and tissues that the body identifies as “self” rather than foreign. Our goal is to allow a recipient to receive our product and generate new tissue without triggering an allogeneic, or foreign tissue, rejection.
Stem Cell Niche Utilization for Self-Propagating and Self-Organizing Functional Tissues: We utilize techniques for capturing the “stem cell niche,” the microenvironment within a tissue that interacts with stem cells to signal cell growth, development, renewal, and differentiation. While the stem cell niche historically has often been left behind by the commonly used split-thickness autograft methodology, we believe that it is necessary for the regenerationexposure of functional tissue. Without the stem cell niche, we believe new tissue will form a scar and lose the functionality of the original tissue from which it was regenerated. By including the stem cell niche within the autologous tissue that is harvested, we believe the natural function of the small piece of tissue is preserved as it regenerates into a larger piece that can fill the patient’s targeted tissue. This is designed to minimize painful scarring, lesions, and other growth anomalies that often accompany autologous regeneration without the stem cell niche. This design approach also allows regeneration of the tissue’s normal layers and appendages and provides full-tissue coverage without relying on secondary surgery or in-growth of the surrounding tissue. We believe inclusion of the stem cell niche allows us to regenerate tissue with its naturally complex layers intact.critical structures.
 Wounds with these characteristics often require multiple treatment stages in order to fill volume and cover exposed structures before proceeding to traditional skin grafts or more invasive reconstruction. There is a paucity of high-level data to guide the progression through these treatment options.
 Polarity MaintenanceIn our experience, wound care providers are focused on finding better treatments due to their unaddressed challenges and Enhancement to Harness Stem Cell Niche Regeneration: A cell’s polarity refers to its interactive communication with neighboring cells, including the directionseriousness of their outcomes, where failure of treatments may result in which a cell should grow. This enables cellsboth the acute occurrence and tissues to carry out specialized functions. Our platform carefully maintainselevated lifetime risk of amputation, long-term disability, and enhances the polarity of the stem cell niche to harness its regenerative capacity by mirroring the way tissue develops in the human body. By maintaining and enhancing the polarity of regenerating tissue, our platform is designed to preserve the natural cell and three-dimensional tissue structure, and thereby the functionality of regenerated tissues and appendages.
The Person as the Bioreactor: Instead of using a manufactured or engineered environment to support the regenerative process, our platform uses the human body as a bioreactor by applying our product to the patient and allowing regeneration to occur there. We believe this allows the patient’s own body to provide the ideal nutrients and extracellular environment for controlled healing of the regenerative tissue. This approach also reduces turnaround time for delivering product to the patient, as our manufacturing process does not involve growing cells in an industrial, synthetic bioreactor. In addition, utilization of the patient as the bioreactor during cellular tissue propagation further reduces relative costs, which are passed onto patients, providers, and payor systems.

Reducing Barriers ~ Arming More Healthcare Providers with Tangible and Pragmatic Technologies:We believe that novel technologies must thrive in the trenches of medicine and be easily utilized by a full spectrum of providers to truly deliver value and make an impact in patients’ lives. We recognize that a technology that is limited by who can administer it or setting of care where it can be used creates barriers and limits access to those who need it. Our goal is to design and develop therapies, technologies and products which overcome these limits by delivering new standards of care, which are easily utilized by ALL providers, across ALL settings of care.

death.

Our Competitive Strengths

Clinically, we believe SkinTE is highly differentiated from current treatment alternatives in these hard-to-treat wound types. In real-world experience and data from preliminary studies conducted to date, we believe that SkinTE has covered exposed critical structures, completely filled in wound depth including tunneling, and ultimately provided complete and durable wound closure with the regenerated tissue having many of the important characteristics of native skin such as pliability, strength, sensation, ability to sweat, and hair growth. In contrast to a multi-staged approach combining numerous treatments in an algorithm dictated by wound progression, SkinTE can be applied directly into deep wounds with exposed structures, typically requires only a single application in the vast majority of cases and, unlike other products in this space, may not require a skin graft to achieve final closure. In our experience, providers treating complex wounds are most concerned with reliably covering deep structures, as this mitigates a substantial risk factor for the patient and converts the wound to a lower grade that is more manageable. We believe that covering deep structures and filling wound volume with newly generated vascular tissue is an important advantage of SkinTE and differentiates SkinTE from other treatments that have increased failure rates in these hard-to-treat wound settings. Another valuable aspect of SkinTE clinically is that it is created from a relatively small skin harvest that is well tolerated by the patient.

We believe that patients with complex wounds face significant unmet needs, and that providers are motivated to better address them. If future clinical trials conducted under our key competitive strengthsIND demonstrate outcomes similar to those observed in real-world experience and preliminary clinical studies, we believe that SkinTE has the potential to shift practice patterns, accelerate adoption, and capture a significant portion of these hard-to-treat wound markets.

Clinical Trials

Under the SkinTE IND

Our IND for SkinTE was opened in January 2022. Our first planned pivotal study under our IND is a multi-center, randomized controlled trial evaluating SkinTE in the treatment of diabetic foot ulcers classified as Grade 2 in the Wagner classification system (“Wagner 2 DFUs”) entitled “Closure Obtained with Vascularized Epithelial Regeneration for DFUs with SkinTE,” or “COVER DFUs Trial.” We plan to enroll up to 100 patients at up to 20 sites in the U.S. in the COVER DFUs Trial, which will compare treatment with SkinTE plus the standard-of-care to the standard-of-care alone. The primary endpoint is the incidence of DFUs closed at 24 weeks. Secondary endpoints include percent area reduction (“PAR”) at 4, 8, 12, 16, and 24 weeks, improved quality of life, and new onset of infection of the DFU being evaluated. As we pursue the first study, we plan to engage in discussions with the FDA regarding the design and implementation of the second pivotal study.

On June 25, 2021, we entered into a statement of work with a contract research organization to provide services for the clinical trial described in the IND at a cost of approximately $6.5 million consisting of $3.1 million of service fees and $3.4 million of estimated costs. The estimate increased $1.4 million from the $5.1 million estimated at September 30, 2021, due to additional costs expected for longer trial subject follow up (6 months versus 3 months) and a corresponding increase in trial subject visits. In July 2021 we prepaid 10% of the total cost recited in the original work order, or $0.5 million, which will be applied to payment of the final invoice under the work order. Over the approximately three-year term of the clinical trial the service provider shall submit to us for payment invoices on a monthly basis for units of work stated in the work order that are completed and billable expenses incurred.

6

Pre-IND

PolarityTE conducted several clinical trials before it filed its IND for SkinTE, which were conducted on a post-marketing basis with SkinTE as a 361 HCT/P. These clinical trials include the following:

PursuingBurns and Traumatic Wounds

We initiated a head-to-head trial comparing SkinTE to the Development of a Complete System that Rivals the Clinical Standard of Care: We believe that we have designed and developed a technology platform that may displace the current clinical standard of care in complex tissue regeneration, reconstruction and/or replacement efforts. Currently, the clinical standard of care for the reconstruction of complex tissue voids relies on autologous tissue transplantation. For example, critical defects of the skin, bone, cartilage and other tissues are most appropriately treated through the autologous graft or flap coverage. While these efforts remainSTSG, the clinical standard of care, in most settings, such processes result simplythe first quarter of 2018. Eight patients were enrolled in the transplantationtrial and the primary endpoint for the trial was graft take. Data from the trial was published in the Journal of tissue from one areaBurn Care & Research in September 2020. Eight patients with deep-partial/full thickness burns had a portion of their wounds treated with SkinTE and the remainder of their burn treated with split-thickness skin grafting. The SkinTE treated wounds had graft take and achieved closure by their last follow-up with a single application. A single adverse event at a SkinTE harvest site secondary to a dehiscence (technical error) occurred requiring secondary closure at the time of the bodypatient’s definitive grafting procedure. There were no other adverse events pertaining to another region. Such movement of autologous tissue materials often provides “coverage” but does not resultthe SkinTE applications in significant expansionthe trial.

Diabetic Foot Ulcer (DFU) Trials

DFUs are chronic wounds and represent one of the cellular entities or tissue substrates. costliest, and medically significant, health related morbidities encountered during a patient’s lifetime. The estimated annual U.S. payor burden of DFU ranges from $9.1 billion to $13.2 billion according to a 2014 article in Diabetes Care, a publication of the American Diabetes Association. The outpatient management of DFUs represents the major contributing cost to the health care system. Inadequate assessment and management with chronicity of treatment is one of the primary cost drivers and failures of care.

SkinTE was used to treat 10 patients (11 DFUs) in a pilot trial completed in June 2019, and first reported at the Symposium on Advanced Wound Care Fall 2019. The following are the results as determined by independent review:

(1)10 of 11 (90.9%) DFUs healed within eight weeks of a single application of SkinTE
(2)Median time to closure was 25 days
(3)DFU sizes ranged from 1.0 to 21.7 cm2
(4)One patient was removed from the study at week three due to adverse events not related to the study or SkinTE procedure
(5)No SkinTE-related adverse reactions were observed

After the limited ability to expand beyond 1:1 – 1:4 ratios, donor site size and morbidity must be taken into consideration when harvesting autologous tissues. Understanding these limitations that exist within the clinicaltrial, we conducted a multicenter, randomized controlled trial evaluating SkinTE plus standard of care (SOC) versus SOC alone in treatment of diabetic foot ulcers [NCT03881254] (the “DFU RCT”). In July 2021, we have soughtannounced final data from the DFU RCT. The size of the study was 100 patients who were evaluated across 13 sites, with 50 participants receiving SkinTE plus SOC and 50 receiving SOC alone. The primary endpoint was percentage of ulcers closed at 12 weeks. A secondary endpoint was percent area reduction (PAR) at 4, 6, 8, and 12 weeks.

The trial met the primary endpoint of wound closure at 12 weeks and secondary endpoint of Percent Area Reduction (PAR) assessed at 4, 6, 8, 10, and 12 weeks. Final analysis of the DFU RCT shows the following:

(1)Primary Endpoint: 70% (35/50) of participants receiving SkinTE plus SOC had wound closure at 12 weeks versus 34% (17/50) of participants receiving SOC alone (p=0.00032)
(2)Secondary Endpoint: Percent Area Reduction (PAR) assessed at 4, 6, 8, 10, and 12 weeks was significantly greater for the SkinTE plus SOC treatment group vs SOC alone (p=0.009)
(3)90% (45/50) of SkinTE plus SOC treated participants received a single application of SkinTE
(4)Treatment with SkinTE plus SOC increased the odds of wound closure by 5.37 times versus SOC alone (p=0.001)

Mean (SD) values for PAR at weeks 4, 6, 8, 10, and 12 by treatment group

WeekSkinTESOC
474.0 (27.63)22.0 (149.92)
682.9 (26.35)21.2 (160.60)
880.7 (35.16)26.8 (147.42)
1079.7 (54.07)45.6 (114.18)
1284.3 (39.46)50.5 (92.24)

7

Venous Leg Ulcer (VLU) Trials

VLUs are a type of chronic wound and constitute a significant burden on the worldwide health care system and are often refractory to treatment. Up to one-third of treated patients experience four or more episodes of recurrence. Delivering all the elements of native skin can potentially reduce the recurrence rate.

SkinTE was used to treat 10 patients in a pilot trial completed in September 2019, and first reported at the Symposium on Advanced Wound Care Fall 2019, where PolarityTE received recognition as Best Abstract. The following are the results as determined by independent review:

8 of 10 (80%) VLUs closed within 12 weeks of a single application of SkinTE;
Of the two VLUs not deemed closed within 12 weeks: one VLU was the largest in the study (12.2cm2), and closed within 13.5 weeks post a single application of SkinTE; one VLU was previously deemed closed, and reopened prior to the two-week durability visit as a result of external factors unrelated to the SkinTE procedure;
Median time to closure was 21 days; and
No SkinTE-related adverse reactions were observed

We started a multicenter, randomized controlled trial evaluating SkinTE versus standard of care in treatment of VLU [NCT03881267] (“the “VLU-RCT”), but decided in the first quarter of 2021 to suspend that trial after 29 patients were enrolled because we believed that our resources would be better used in future clinical trials conducted under an open IND that can be used in our eventual planned BLA submission. In February 2022, we announced final data from the VLU RCT. The 29 patients who were evaluated across 10 sites, with 14 participants receiving SkinTE plus SOC and 15 receiving SOC alone. The primary endpoint was percentage of ulcers closed at 12 weeks. A secondary endpoint was percent area reduction (PAR) at 4, 6, 8, and 12 weeks.

The trial met the primary endpoint of wound closure at 12 weeks and secondary endpoint of Percent Area Reduction (PAR) assessed at 4, 6, 8, 10, and 12 weeks. Final analysis of the VLU RCT shows the following:

(1)Primary Endpoint: 71% (10/14) of participants receiving SkinTE plus SOC had wound closure at 12 weeks versus 33% (5/15) of participants receiving SOC alone (p=0.046)
(2)Secondary Endpoint: Percent Area Reduction (PAR) assessed at 4, 6, 8, 10, and 12 weeks was significantly greater for the SkinTE plus SOC treatment group vs SOC alone (p=0.000035)
(3)93% (13/14) of SkinTE plus SOC treated participants received a single application of SkinTE

Mean (SD) values for PAR at weeks 4, 6, 8, 10, and 12 by treatment group

WeekSkinTESOC
461.7 (53.13)19.7 (77.03)
670.1 (52.43)21.4 (96.36)
879.1 (51.97)33.5 (89.10)
1082.0 (50.81)42.8 (68.60)
1282.6 (50.52)65.4 (43.98)

Market Opportunity

The primary markets for SkinTE are wounds from traumatic injury, chronic wounds (including DFUs, VLUs, and pressure ulcers), burn wounds, and acute wounds, such as traumatic wounds, and wounds from surgical procedures.

We believe SkinTE is suitable for treating a number of acute wounds. In 2017 the inpatient traumatic injury rate was 524.3 persons for every 100,000 people. This resulted in an estimated 1.8 million traumatic injuries per year requiring inpatient hospitalization, of which approximately 5% are directly related to open wounds.
The National Diabetes Statistics Report published in 2020 by the Centers for Disease Control stated that there are approximately 34.2 million diabetes sufferers in the United States. The American Diabetes Association report on the economic costs of diabetes in 2017 states that the direct medical cost of diabetes in that year was $237 billion. A 2005 article estimated the number of DFUs at between 1.2 and 3.0 million, and a 2003 article estimated the prevalence of unhealed DFUs after 12 weeks of conventional treatment at between 1.0 and 2.5 million. The estimated annual US payor burden of DFU ranges from $9.1 billion to $13.2 billion according to a 2014 article in Diabetes Care.

8

A 2010 article reports the prevalence of venous ulcers at approximately 600,000 annually, and a subsequent 2014 article reports that on average between 33% and 66% of these ulcers persist for six weeks and are, therefore, referred to as chronic, resulting in approximately 200-360 thousand patients per year that we believe would be potential candidates for treatment with SkinTE.
Pressure Ulcers are common in hospital systems, increase patient morbidity and mortality, and are costly for patients and the healthcare system. According to the Agency for Healthcare Research & Quality (AHRQ) there are more than 2.5 million individuals that develop pressure ulcers annually, and approximately 600-700 thousand people are admitted to hospitals with one or more pressure ulcers. Of these ulcers, approximately 77% are treated with both topical therapies and excisional surgical debridement.
The American Burn Association estimates that every year over 450,000 serious burn injuries occur in the United States that require medical treatment and that approximately 40,000 of these result in hospitalization.

Our Plan for Advancing SkinTE

Our IND for SkinTE was accepted by the FDA in January 2022, and this enables us to commence the first of two expected pivotal studies needed to support a BLA for a chronic cutaneous ulcer indication for SkinTE. We expect to begin enrolling subjects in the COVER DFUs Trial in the second quarter of 2022. We also expect to engage with the FDA during 2022 regarding the design of the second pivotal study we plan to conduct under our open IND.

Products subject to BLA requirements must be licensed under the Public Health Service Act to be marketed. In order to be licensed, a BLA must demonstrate the safety, purity and potency of the product candidate based on results of preclinical studies and clinical trials. A BLA must also contain extensive chemistry, manufacturing, and controls (CMC) and other manufacturing information, and the applicant must pass an FDA pre-license inspection of the manufacturing facility or facilities at which the product is produced to assess compliance with the FDA’s current good manufacturing practices (“cGMP”) requirements. Satisfaction of FDA licensure requirements typically takes several years, and the actual time required may vary substantially based on the type, complexity, and novelty of the product. PolarityTE cannot be certain that any BLA approvals for its products will be granted on a timely basis, or at all.

The steps for obtaining FDA approval of a BLA to market a product in the U.S. ordinarily include:

completion of preclinical laboratory tests, animal studies and formulation studies under the FDA’s good laboratory practices regulations;
submission to the FDA of an IND for human clinical testing, which must become effective before human clinical trials may begin and include independent Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval before the trials may be initiated;
performance of one or more adequate and well-controlled clinical trials in accordance with Good Clinical Practices to establish the safety and efficacy of the product for each indication;
submission to the FDA of a BLA, which contains detailed information about CMC for the product, reports of the outcomes and full data sets of the clinical trials, and proposed labeling and packaging for the product;
satisfactory review of the contents of the BLA by the FDA, including the satisfactory resolution of any questions raised during the review;
satisfactory completion of an FDA Advisory Committee review, if applicable;
satisfactory completion of an FDA inspection of the manufacturing facility or facilities at which the product is produced, packaged, labelled, tested, or held to assess compliance with cGMP regulations, to assure that the facilities, methods, and controls are adequate to ensure the product’s identity, strength, quality, and purity;
satisfactory completion of inspections of clinical trial sites to verify the accuracy and reliability of data that has been submitted to FDA; and
FDA approval of the BLA including agreement on post-marketing requirements or commitments, if applicable.

9

Preclinical tests typically include laboratory evaluations of product chemistry, toxicity, and formulation, as well as animal studies, and an IND sponsor must submit the results of the preclinical tests, together with manufacturing information and analytical data, to the FDA as part of the IND. Even though our IND for SkinTE is open, the FDA can request additional information and testing pertaining to the product and the procedures for manufacturing and delivering the product.

Our preliminary experience indicates that SkinTE may benefit patients with immediately life-threatening conditions and other serious diseases or conditions. In 2009, the FDA implemented new regulations related to Expanded Access Investigational New Drug Applications (“Expanded Access INDs”), which are often colloquially referred to as “compassionate use,” and pertain to the use of an investigational drug or biologic when the primary purpose is to diagnose, monitor, or treat a patient’s disease or condition, rather than to obtain the kind of information about the drug that is generally derived from clinical trials. The FDA has proposed several processes for obtaining Expanded Access INDs, which we will evaluate for potential implementation now that the IND for SkinTE is open. Under FDA regulations the amount that may be charged for SkinTE used under an Expanded Access IND must be authorized by the FDA and, if authorized at all, may be limited to our direct costs of manufacture. We believe, however, that an Expanded Access IND may enable us to provide SkinTE to providers treating persons with life-threatening or serious diseases and conditions, and thereby maintain existing, and develop an autologous tissue that requires minimal donor sitenew, relationships with physicians in the wound care industry.

Potential Product Enhancements or Additions

SkinTE POC

Our SkinTE point-of-care device is intended to permit the processing and can be significantly expandeddeployment of SkinTE immediately following the initial harvest at the point-of-care. SkinTE POC is in the development stage.

SkinTE Cryo

SkinTE Cryo allows PolarityTE to offer multiple deployments from one original harvest through a cryopreservation process. Using one harvest for multiple deployments may improve patient treatment when a patient is susceptible to multiple chronic wounds, the provider suspects a patient might require a second deployment of SkinTE due to past non-compliance with rehab protocols, or the provider elects to use a staged deployment on the patients themselves.

Novel Platform Technology. Our technology platform deploys activated MPFUs into a patient with a large wound due to wound location or other tissue defect with the goal of regenerating fully-functional, polarized tissues and hierarchically organized tissue structures. We design the MPFUs to facilitate the expansion, proliferation, and synthesis of the cells, materials, factors, and systems that we believe are necessary for complete, full-thickness generation and regeneration across a spectrum of tissue substrates and organ systems. Rather than relying on a single stem cell, growth factor, or scaffold, we believe that complex tissue regeneration requires a dynamic composite cellular interface to engineer a complex tissue thattherapeutic circumstances. SkinTE Cryo is expected to integrate into living systems. We design our core tissue substrate materials to create complex functional living tissue systems in a way that mirrors natural healing in the bodydevelopment stage and is not seen as foreign bya long-term development project.

PTE 11000

PTE 11000 is an allogenic, biologically active dressing for use in wound care and aesthetics to accelerate healing of skin. It is a composition made using cadaveric tissue via a proprietary process. It is currently in the immune system. preclinical phase of development, and we cannot predict when that phase may be complete.

Other Tissue Regeneration Products

We believe our platform technology will produce superior outcomesinnovative technologies may be platforms for providers and patients.

Deep Pipelinedeveloping therapies that address a variety of Additional Potential Applications. We believe our platform’s capabilities can be extended across many indications, including skin, bone, cartilage, muscle, blood vessels, and neural elements, as well as solid and hollow organ composite tissue systems.

For example, we believe there are currently unmet medical needs that can be addressed by the regeneration of cartilage for the treatment of osteoarthritis and facial reconstruction, the regeneration of fat-for-fat transfers during plastic surgery procedures, the regeneration of nerves following traumatic loss, the regeneration of blood vessels for vascular grafts, the regeneration of the urogenital epithelium and submucosa for urethral strictures and bladder reconstruction following tumor removal, the regeneration of liver tissue for liver fibrosis or failure, and the regeneration of bowel tissue to prevent leaking where the bowel is reconnected or replaced due to excessive loss from trauma, surgery, or congenital defects. We believe the significant number of product opportunities afforded by our platform will generate sustainable growth opportunity.

Shortened Product Development Timelines. Since our core TE product candidates all stem from a common platform technology, we believe we can accelerate research and development, pre-clinical model prototyping, and product development in a manner that is efficient and optimized across tissue substrates.

Scalable Manufacturing and Distribution Capability. Because we believe our technology can be applied across a variety of tissue substrates, we believe we are able to prototype, model, and develop products for commercialization relatively quickly. We have developed flexible manufacturing processes, systems, and facilities that we believe can allow us to quickly respond to increases in demand and market forces. Because we believe we can apply our technology to many types of tissue and organ systems, we believe we can effectively scale and reproduce the manufacturing and distribution of multiple pipeline products at the same time. In addition, we believe we can leverage our platform technology to create a variety of substrate sub-platforms and related technology derivative arms, which can act either as additive technologies to core TE products, or as stand-alone products. We believe we may also be able to integrate our technology with other off-the-shelf products (e.g., to cellularize an acellular scaffold or function with existing dressings).

Our Growth Strategy

Complete the full commercial launch of SkinTE and establish SkinTE as an improvement over the standard of care for skin tissue injuries, including wounds, burns, and scars. We believe that SkinTE has the potential to supplant prevailing methods of wound and burn care because, unlike existing treatment options, it is designed to regenerate full-thickness skin using small samples of the patient’s own tissue. Rather than being limited by dimensions of the tissue received, SkinTE is designed to regenerate significantly beyond the sample size. Our regional commercial rollout of SkinTE commenced in late October 2018, and is focused on severe wounds and burn patients at key regional centers as, in our experience, these patients are often in critical need of large areas of skin regrowth and may have limited available healthy skin to use for skin grafts. Along with the treatment of severe wounds and burns,foreseeable future we intend to marketapply our business and financial resources to the SkinTE for chronic wounds, surgical reconstruction events, including cosmeticIND and elective surgeries, and for scar revision or the removal of dysfunctional events.

Based on our internal analysis of annual patient volumes and relative wound sizes, we estimate the annual addressable markets within the United States for burn wounds, surgical reconstruction and traumatic wounds, and chronic wounds are $3 billion, $23 billion, and $24 billion, respectively. These markets are largely contained within the approximately 127 burn centers, 600 level I-III trauma centers, and greater than 2,000 wound care centers and clinics within the United States.

Capitalize on our scalable manufacturing capabilities and the 361 HCT/P regulatory pathway to commercialize additional pipeline products quickly and efficiently. In addition to SkinTE, we are actively preparing and advancing two additional TE core products, OsteoTE and CartTE, for FDA registration using the 361 HCT/P pathway that does not require FDA approval prior to market entry. Our current expectation is to rely on the versatility of our platform technology, the 361 HCT/P regulatory pathway, and our scalable manufacturing capability to develop and launch these two new products over the next two years.

Explore partnership or collaboration opportunities for pipeline candidates, as well as potential acquisitions or in-licenses of complementary product candidates. We are actively exploring the possibility of partnership or collaboration opportunities with third parties, which we believe could be used to facilitate the commercial adoption of our pipeline candidates worldwide or in certain territories. We are selectively evaluating the formation of collaborative alliances, product licensure and distribution agreements, and integrated product offerings, as well as opportunities to accelerate the commercializationBLA and development of our products. In the future, we also expect to consider the acquisition or in-license of complementary product candidates.

SkinTE

General

Our first product,work on SkinTE is registered with the FDAPOC, and is now commercially available for treatment of defects of the skin. SkinTE is created from a small piece of the patient’s own tissue, which is extracted and then manufactured using our proprietary technology platform to expand and regenerate full-thickness, fully functional skin with what we believe to be the critical layers, including epidermis, dermis and hypodermis, and appendages including hair follicles and glands. Each application of SkinTE is patient-specific and designed for a single deployment. We believe SkinTE offers a compelling alternative to current standards of care for skin regeneration.

PolarityTE designed SkinTE for use by physicians and other healthcare professionals in the treatment of patients who have suffered from an event, disease, or process, or who have an acquired defect that has resulted in the functional loss or absence of the skin. Specifically, SkinTE is designed for the treatment of chronic wounds such as diabetic foot ulcers, acute wounds, chronic burn wounds or scars, acute burn wounds, scars of the integument, and defects from medical or surgical resection or reconstruction events that require skin coverage. According to a 2015 report from MedMarket Diligence, LLC, more than 250 million wounds are expected globally by 2020. And according to Statistics MRC’s 2016 Global Regenerative Medicine Market Outlook, the global market for regenerative medicine and tissue engineering is expected to grow to $101.3 billion by 2020.

During the fiscal year ended October 31, 2018, we established the product logistics, interactions with hospitals, and our clinical operations and market access teams, so that we can handle all aspects of manufacturing and commercializing an autologous skin product. During this limited market release we serviced over 50 patients. We have no reported adverse reactions from any of the applications of SkinTE. We hired our first sales force and have been building out our first regional release since October 2018. The full national release of SkinTE is planned for 2019.

SkinTE is registered as a 361 HCT/P with the FDA pursuant to Section 361 of the Public Health Service Act and 21 CFR 1271. An HCT/P is defined as an article containing or consisting of human cells or tissues that are intended for implantation, transplantation, infusion, or transfer into a human recipient. Products that qualify as 361 HCT/Ps are not subject to the FDA’s pre-market clearance or approval requirements, but rather can be immediately listed for commercial use with the FDA and are then subject to post-market regulatory requirements such as compliance with current good tissue practices (cGTP), adverse event and deviation reporting, and post-market inspections by the FDA. For more information on the 361 HCT/P regulatory pathway, please see “Government Regulation” and “Risk Factors – Risks Related to Registration or Regulatory Approval of Our Product Candidates and Other Government Regulations.”

Our Wound, Burn and Skin Reconstruction Treatment Solution – SkinTE

We described in detail above the real limitations of the standard of care in tissue regeneration as applied to skin. We designed SkinTE to address the limitations from which current wound and burn treatment methods suffer. We designed SkinTE to combine the advantages of autologous STSGs with those of FTSGs. Notably, SkinTE is designed to provide not only the large surface area treatment capability of STSGs, but also the restoration and smaller, less morbid donor site associated with FTSGs. In essence, we believe our minimally manipulated SkinTE product can provide an expandable form of a FTSG.

To our knowledge, SkinTE is the only fully autologous, homologous skin regeneration product available for the treatment of wounds and functional losses of the skin of human patients. We face competition from providers of FTSGs and STSGs, as well as other companies developing and selling skin substitutes. We are aware of several companies focused on the wound market, including Avita Medical, Integra LifeSciences, Wright Medical Group, MiMedx, Osiris, Organogenesis, Allosource, MTF Biologics and Vericel. Any advances in regenerative medicine by a competitor may be used to develop therapies competing against SkinTE. However, to our knowledge SkinTE is the only fully autologous homologous skin regeneration product available for the treatment of wounds and functional losses of skin that enables the patient to regenerate his or her own skin with all the functions of full thickness skin, including hair, sweat glands, sebaceous glands, capillary beds, and all layers of skin, including epidermis, dermis, hypodermis, and subdermal fat. We believe SkinTE produces a superior result for patients that challenges the current standard of care and the therapies offered by other companies in the wound care market.

SkinTE is composed of small viable cellular and tissue-based units, which we call MPFUs, that retain all the components of skin that we believe are required to regenerate full-thickness skin. The initial processes underlying the function of SkinTE are analogous to those responsible for the healing of an autologous skin graft, namely imbibition, inosculation, and neo-vascularization. During imbibition, SkinTE, and the small cellular and tissue based units that comprise it, survive through the direct application of the SkinTE “paste” on the wound bed, exchanging nutrients and waste within the fluid of the wound bed. Inosculation is the stage in which the capillaries and blood vessels already present within the wound bed begin to align and connect with those present within the graft. Neovascularization marks the ingrowth of new blood vessels into the wound bed and out of the graft, with vasculogenesis describing the formation of new vessels from cellular precursors present within the wound and graft, and angiogenesis referring to the sprouting of new vessels from pre-existing ones. Due to their size and composition, we design the small cellular and tissue based units within SkinTE to have reduced metabolic demand and to be capable of surviving through diffusion, and to readily excrete metabolic waste, resulting in what we believe can be less ischemic damage when compared to FTSGs. Reduction in ischemic damage has the potential to decrease scar formation and provide a more functional result. Following completion of the initial stages of integrating and healing within the wound bed, the SkinTE product is designed to begin forming and organizing discrete areas of full-thickness skin. We have observed in preclinical animal testing that these regenerative centers of full-thickness skin then expand out radially across the wound, eventually coalescing with each other and the margins of the wound.

Unlike the currently marketed skin substitutes of which we are aware, each SkinTE tissue-product is derived entirely from the patient’s own skin and is not combined with any other tissue-engineered substitutes. We believe these differences allow SkinTE to regenerate all the important layers of the skin as well as the necessary cutaneous appendages for the development of functionally-polarized, hierarchically organized autologous, homologous skin.

The SkinTE Process

SkinTE is designed as an all-in-one system to make the process as simple and efficient as possible for the user—whether that individual is a surgeon, medical doctor, physician assistant or nurse in an operating room, wound clinic, emergency department, doctor’s office or forward operating military base. When a new clinical center or practice is activated to begin using our SkinTE product, we ship a supply of all-inclusive harvest boxes (see the image furthest to the left above) to the facility for convenient on-site, off-the-shelf storage for that user and facility. Each harvest box contains all the materials and instruments needed to perform the relatively standard skin excision procedure to obtain the tissue sample, and all the pre-paid/pre-completed shipping labels, and a one-touch, cool pack shipping box that maintains the temperature within the harvest box as it is delivered to a PolarityTE biomedical manufacturing facility.

At our manufacturing facility, we use proprietary techniques to create a paste-like product from the small piece of healthy patient tissue that preserves the original tissue’s microenvironment and allows new cells to integrate into existing, healthy cells, with similarly organized assembly and interface development. Following manufacturing at our facility, the SkinTE product is shipped back to the provider at a time that best suits the patient and provider’s scheduling and location needs (i.e., operating room, procedure clinic, in-patient bedside, out-patient doctor’s office). Our goal is to be able to return the ready-to-use SkinTE product to physicians as early as the same day. We have observed, however, that most physician requests have been for return within 24-72 hours from tissue harvest. At application time, once the patient wound bed is prepared per clinical guidelines, SkinTE is dispensed onto the surface of the wound bed (see the image in the middle above). The wound is dressed using a non-adherent, occlusive, non-absorbent dressing placed directly over the SkinTE product (see the image furthest to the right above), with recommended dressings that we include in the deployment box.

  

To assist physicians and other medical providers in using SkinTE, we developed a web application called the PolarityTE 24-Hour Real-Time Assistant, or the RTA, which permits experienced and medically trained PolarityTE physicians and staff to provide real-time support through a customer’s computer or smart phone. The RTA permits HIPAA-compliant direct calling, video chat, text, emails, and data sharing. Through the RTA, our customers can also track their packages and submit forms. We also use the RTA to gain advanced visibility into daily manufacturing requirements and product flow.

Selling SkinTE

In 2018, we completed the first two stages of our SkinTE commercial roll-out strategy. The first was the limited market release phase, which focused on generating trial/ utilization with the goal of securing real-world clinical data and experience to prepare the organization and product for a broader commercial release. The second stage was the regional market release that began in late October 2018 with the additional build out of our commercial organization to establish SkinTE with major burn and trauma centers across the United States. Each hospital targeted requires an assessment by their Value Analysis Committee (VAC) prior to commencing commercial SkinTE deployment. This is a formal process that can take approximately 4-6 months to complete. After VAC approval, terms of the SkinTE purchase agreement are finalized and patient identification and treatment initiates, which can take several months.

Once purchase agreements are in place, our sales team and clinical operations staff maintain close contact with the facility to support the initial therapeutic applications of SkinTE. Due to the transformational nature of the product, this relationship helps to ensure the facility’s ability to effectively incorporate SkinTE into their existing burn or wound management protocols.

The selling process to achieve an initial sale averages between six and nine months. The sales process is affected by several factors, including the incidence and nature of burn and wound care cases at target accounts and the receptiveness of the health care providers to adopt a new therapeutic approach.

Once the first deployment of SkinTE has occurred, there is generally a delay before subsequent deployments at the same facility. The timeframe is typically between three and six months, as we have found physicians appear to pause until the clinical outcome of the first application can be fully appreciated. To help decrease theat this time between the first and second deployment, we are actively pursuing multiple randomized controlled clinical trials toput on hold further illustrate SkinTE clinical outcomes and overall value proposition. Furthermore, as SkinTE gainswork on other product development.

Manufacturing

PolarityTE maintains at its facility in utilization and acceptance by health care providers, the lead time to first sale should decrease as information on SkinTE and clinical results are more broadly disseminated in the medical community.

SkinTE is billed by the square centimeter size of the skin defect to be treated, as is standard for skin wound treatments. Because SkinTE is created from the patient’s own tissue, we can price below other treatment options like skin substitutes. Unlike other treatment options, SkinTE can deliver permanent, functional full-thickness skin replacement with only one application, compared to the multiple procedure regimens common for split-thickness skin grafts, full-thickness skin grafts, autograft, allograft, and alloplast therapies.

Payment and Reimbursement

Inpatient Setting. In the inpatient setting, facility reimbursement is dictated by the associated bundled Medicare Severity-Diagnosis Related Group (MS-DRG) payment for the entire episode of care under the Medicare Inpatient Prospective Payment System (IPPS). The bundled DRG facility payment is determined by the DRG code applied, which factors in the primary diagnosis and patient characteristics, such as co-morbidities present on admission. In this scenario, all products and supplies utilized during the episode of care are paid for with the bundled DRG facility payment, including products like SkinTE. In addition, physician services are billed and reimbursed outside of the bundled DRG facility payment, including any procedures performed during that admission, which are billed for and reimbursed utilizing Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes associated with the respective procedures. SkinTE has been used within the inpatient setting and reimbursed underneath the applicable DRG bundled facility payments, and to our knowledge all associated procedures billed for outside the DRG as physician services with CPT codes have been reimbursed, as well.

Hospital Outpatient Department (HOPD) and Ambulatory Surgical Center (ASC) Setting. Like the inpatient setting, bundled Ambulatory Classification Payment (APC) facility payments are received under the Medicare Outpatient Prospective Payment System (OPPS) for services and supplies utilized during episodes of care within Hospital Outpatient Departments (HOPDs) and Ambulatory Surgical Centers (ASCs). In these settings, bundled APC facility payments are dictated by the procedure(s) performed and billed for through the appropriate CPT codes. SkinTE has been used in these settings and covered with the associated bundled APC facility payments and physician services have been paid for outside of the APC payment utilizing CPT codes to bill for the associated procedures. In addition, we are working towards applying for pass-through status, which would allow SkinTE to be billed for outside of the bundled APC facility payment.

Office or Clinic Setting. In contrast to the inpatient, HOPD, and ASC settings, care provided in a physician office or clinic is reimbursed based on individual Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System (HCPCS) and CPT codes, facilitating reimbursement for the specific products utilized and procedures performed during the clinic visit. The CPT codes used in the setting are the same or similar to the CPT codes used to bill for physician services in the other settings of care. In 2018, providers utilized HCPCS Q code 4100 (skin substitute not otherwise specified) to bill for the use of SkinTE in the office. Of the providers that used SkinTE in the office or clinic setting throughout 2018, to our knowledge all were reimbursed utilizing Q4100. Early in 2018 we filed an application with The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (“CMS”) for a unique HCPCS SkinTE Q code. We were successful and received Q code 4200, which was effective January 1, 2019. Therefore, beginning January 1, 2019, providers using SkinTE in the office or clinic setting can use Q4200, the unique SkinTE specific Q code, when billing for the product. Reimbursement rates in the Medicare Hospital Outpatient Payment System (HOPPS) vary based on whether the product is designated a low-cost product or high cost product. Assignment is based on average selling Price (ASP) as reported to CMS. New Q codes with limited ASP on file with CMS are automatically assigned to the low-cost product category. We reported our first ASP in October 2018, so SkinTE’s Q code will initially be designated a low-cost product limiting the reimbursement to $483 for a single application in a clinic setting. We will continue to report ASP and work with CMS on this process because we believe that SkinTE can qualify as a high-cost product reimbursable at $1,548 for a single application in a clinic setting.

Clinical Studies

We initiated a head-to-head trial comparing SkinTE to the split-thickness skin graft, the clinical standard of care, in the first quarter of 2018. Enrollment is in progress and we expect it will be completed in 2019. In parallel with this clinical trial, we have been accumulating clinical results on non-trial patients from our market release for application of SkinTE for various indications, including acute burn, burn reconstruction, surgical reconstruction, scar revision, and chronic wounds, such as diabetic foot ulcers and venous stasis ulcers. Some of these cases have been presented independently by, or in collaboration with, providers at national conferences including the 2018 American Professional Wound Care Association Conference, the 2018 Diabetic Foot Global Conference; 2018 American Society of Plastic Surgery - The Meeting; 2018 Symposium on Advanced Wound Care; and, the 2018 Innovations in Wound Healing. We believe peer-reviewed publication of these results will occur in 2019. Following very encouraging pilot results, preparations are underway to list on clinicaltrials.gov and enroll patients in two separate randomized controlled trials in diabetic foot ulcers and venous stasis ulcers, which constitute the most common causes of chronic lower extremity wounds that affect over a million Americans. These trials will each treat over 100 patients, compare SkinTE to the standard of care, and evaluate the efficacy and cost benefit of a single application of SkinTE providing important reimbursement information for the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services and outpatient applications. These will be multi-center trials that will enroll throughout 2019.

OsteoTE

We applied our platform technology to develop OsteoTE, our autologous, homologous bone regeneration product. OsteoTE is designed to utilize the patient’s own bone to target applications for bone repair, reconstruction, replacement, supplementation, and regeneration, including in the long bone (hard, dense bones that provide structure, strength and mobility such as the femur or humerus), craniomaxillofacial, spine, dental, hand, and foot/ankle markets. As with skin, we believe existing treatments for the repair of bone with autologous grafts suffer from significant limitations that we can address with OsteoTE. We have conducted several preclinical large animal studies using established bone treatment models, including critical-sized cranial bone defects and spinal fusion models. The preclinical results for OsteoTE are very encouraging and parallel the results seen with SkinTE – the ability to regenerate complex tissues recapitulating the structure and function of the native tissue from which it was created. Below are preliminary images of OsteoTE bone regeneration in a preclinical model of a cranial defect.

Comparative Imaging of OsteoTE in Critical Sized Cranial Defect Model System. (a.) Three-dimensional (3-D) micro computed tomography (micro-CT) native cranial bone displaying pre-defect left parietal and right parietal bones ofin vivomodel system at timepoint TPDN. (b.) Gross image of surgically-created, complete, bi-parietal critical sized defects of both the left and right parietal bones within thein vivomodel system at timepoint T0. (c.) 3-D micro-CT of surgically-created, complete (full-thickness), bi-parietal critical sized defects of both the left and right parietal bones within thein vivomodel system. ① Indicates the right parietal bone region with 8 mm diameter defect at timepoint T0 which was un-treated and maintained as the defect control throughout study. ② Indicates the left parietal bone region with 8 mm defect which was treated with OsteoTE and maintained as the defect-treated control throughout the study. (d.) 3-D micro-CT of surgically-created, complete, bi-parietal critical sized defects of both the left and right parietal bones within thein vivomodel system at 4 weeks post-procedure and intervention (timepoint TPPI-4WK). ❶Indicates the un-treated right parietal bone region (defect control) at 4 weeks. ❷ Indicates the treated left parietal bone region (OsteoTE) at 4 weeks. (e.) Depicts the relative margins of the primary bi-parietal defects (dotted circles) at time point T0; ROI (broken line box) indicates zoomed comparison of 4 weeks post-treatment defects of 3-D micro-CT and correlative 3-D thermal spectrum colored surface plot indicating relative surface depth and volumetric contour. Abbreviations: Pre-defect Native Timepoint (TPDN): timepoint at which native skull was imaged prior to creation of defect; Defect Native Timepoint (T0): timepoint at which complete (full-thickness) 8 mm critically sized defects were created in parietal skull regions; Post-procedure and intervention at 4 weeks timepoint (TPPI-4WK): timepoint at which 4 weeks have passed since the defects were created +/- treated with intervention.

Based on our internal analysis of the Truven Health Analytics Market Scan Research Database, there were approximately 1.9 million addressable orthopedic cases in the United States, including patients suffering from pathology of the femur, radius, ulna, tibia, fibula, or humerus. We believe OsteoTE can be deployed in numerous indications in the Craniomaxillofacial, Foot and Ankle, Hand and Wrist, Hip and Pelvis, Spine, Long Bone and Dental markets. Each of these markets presents a potential multi-billion dollar market opportunity for OsteoTE. According to a report issued by the research firm MarketsandMarkets, the global spinal fusion and implant market is expected to reach $17.3 billion by 2021, the global craniomaxillofacial implants market is expected to reach $2.5 billion by 2021, and the dental market is expected to reach $35.4 billion by 2021. We registered OsteoTE with the FDA as a 361 HCT/P tissue-based product in December 2018, and our goal is to commercialize OsteoTE through a phased release starting in early 2019.

CartTE

With our CartTE product candidate, we are aiming to deliver on a long-imagined product—one that can tackle the highly prevalent and debilitating process of osteoarthritis to delay or prevent the need for more invasive procedures, such as prosthetic joint replacement and reconstruction. Furthermore, we believe the autologous cartilage construct delivered with CartTE can be utilized in a variety of other applications, including facial reconstruction, facial aesthetics, hand reconstruction, as well as wrist reconstruction. We have initiated the preclinical studies needed to evaluate cartilage replacement in critical-sized defects and will continue to evaluate CartTE’s potential in various cartilage replacement indications.

Osteoarthritis of the hip or knee is estimated to affect 9% of the US population greater than 30 years of age, with costs of treatment totaling $28.6 billion in 2013, according to a review by Grande et al. Market projections by Krutz et al. in 2007 predict that the demand for primary (first-time) total hip and knee replacements will grow to 572,000 and 3.48 million procedures per year by 2030 in the US, respectively. In contrast to the staggering number of patients suffering from osteoarthritis and those pursuing joint replacement, the cartilage repair and regeneration market is only estimated to reach $6.7 billion by 2025, according to a Cartilage Repair/Regeneration Market Analysis report by Grand View Research. This lopsided market, in which cartilage repair and regeneration only captures a small fraction of the patient population that could benefit from articular cartilage regeneration, demonstrates a significant opportunity for our autologous cartilage regeneration product, CartTE, to displace the current trends and standards of care, delivering the regenerative medicine product that has remained elusive until now.

Additional Core TE Product Candidates

In addition, we intend to continue developing:

AdipoTE to optimize the delivery of autologous fat beyond the capabilities of current fat transfer techniques utilized in procedures on, among others, the breast, buttocks, and face. In 2016, according to the American Society for Aesthetic Plastic Surgery, approximately 100,000 fat transfer procedures were performed when combining the breast, buttocks, and face, including a 41% increase in fat transfers to the breast (American Society for Aesthetic Plastic Surgery).
AngioTE to address vascular regeneration including microscopic capillary networks all the way up to great vessel replacement. Approximately 400,000 coronary bypass grafts are performed per year in the US according to the CDC. In addition, 650,000 patients per year in the US and 2 million patients per year worldwide are affected by end stage renal disease (ESRD), who may benefit from placement of hemodialysis access, including arteriovenous fistula creation.
NeuralTE for peripheral nerve injuries of the extremities, as well as for patients with neuromas or chronic compression due to joint replacements, migraines, craniofacial injuries, carpal tunnel syndrome, and those who have undergone hernia or abdominal-based procedures;
UroTE targeting the delivery of autologous urogenital epithelium and submucosa across a spectrum of diseases and processes, including urethral strictures, urethral creation, bladder reconstruction, and ureter reconstruction;
LiverTE to address numerous causes of liver failure, including NASH, fibrosis/cirrhosis, surgical resection of the liver. According to the CDC, 1.6% of US adults are diagnosed with liver disease, which fails to recognize the portion that are at risk of liver disease, or those with distant metastases within their liver that may undergo resection of a significant portion of the organ.
BowelTE to deliver an optimized autologous construct to aid in the regeneration of bowel tissue. According to the CDC, approximately 10 million outpatient procedures and 6 million inpatient procedures were performed on the digestive system in 2010. Anyone undergoing surgical repair or anastomosis of the bowel could potentially benefit from a product delivering bowel regeneration.

We believe a number of the product candidates described above will be suitable for marketing via the 361 HCT/P regulatory pathway. If we successfully register and list a product with the FDA using the 361 HCT/P pathway, we plan to deploy a commercialization strategy that is like that for SkinTE. Any products not suitable for the 361 HCT/P regulatory pathway will need to go through the FDA pre-market approval process, which usually involves the filing, as applicable, of an Investigational New Drug Application or Biologics License Application that will require further preclinical and clinical testing and substantially extend the time of bringing the product to market.

Manufacturing

We do not separately engineer individual manufacturing processes around each individual tissue product. Rather, we design, develop, and adapt our core “TE” products and product candidates to a common manufacturing process that allows us to establish fast, effective, and cost-efficient systems. Adopting a common manufacturing process enhances our production capacity and expansion strategy, and at the same time potentially reduces our cost of goods sold.

We have designed and developedSalt Lake City, Utah, manufacturing processes and quality systems that allow usit to receive a skin specimen, qualify the incoming tissue, process and manufacture the cell/SkinTE tissue product, and perform outgoing quality control and quality assurance work prior to shipping. We believe that our ultra-clean dual-barrier system, which involves clean room structures containing fully-isolated and air-locked internal ISO 4 containment systems, allows us to move specimen and product in an efficient manner, while maintaining protective quality systems.

We have designed our scalablePolarityTE validated its manufacturing process as being aseptic. All SkinTE is manufactured within an ISO 5 isolator located within an ISO 7 cleanroom. PolarityTE’s processes are designed and validated to allow usprevent the spread of communicable disease, and to be flexibleprevent cross-contamination between samples, and agile in real-time, while allowing us to shift resources daily to meet acute production needsits quality systems comply with current Good Tissue Practices (“cGTP”) under 21 C.F.R. Part 1271.

10

PolarityTE is modifying its manufacturing practices and facility so that it complies with cGMP under requirements of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, as well as respondunder 21 C.F.R. Parts 210 and 211, and other applicable regulations, which are in addition to larger factors, including market forces, multi-facility buildouts, and changes in rapidly evolving technology platforms. In designing our products and systems, we focused both on being able to meet market demand and to scale manufacturing. We believe that we have designed our manufacturing clean dual-barrier system to be efficient in flow processes, column production, and scalability. In compliance with ISO standards and cGTP our repeating clean manufacturing column systems and fully-isolated and air-locked internal ISO 4 containment units are engineered and designed with scalable production in mind.referenced above.

We currently operate a facility in Salt Lake City, Utah, consisting of approximately 178,528 square feet. We use this facility for product manufacturing and research and development work. We intend to establish over time remote manufacturing facilities we call “nodes” at locations close to health care providers we believe will be significant purchasers of our products. One of the significant benefits of nodes is the creation of manufacturing redundancy, so that production can be sustained if one of our manufacturing facilities is unable to produce due to natural disaster or other cause. We also believe nodes have the potential to lower shipping costs, which would improve our gross margin on products sold in the areas where the nodes are located.Suppliers

Suppliers

As part of ourPolarityTE’s strategy of ensuring timely delivery of ourits products, we haveit has avoided relying on any third-party supplier as a sole source vendor for any element of ourits production process. In the past year, we have signed agreements with major suppliers to reduce costs, ensure faster fulfillment, and increase our bulk purchasing capability. We havePolarityTE has identified alternate suppliers and, where appropriate, supply alternatives for any sourcing challenges.need.

Intellectual Property

As we advance our platform technology, our RTA,technologies, product, and our RTDs,pipeline developments, we seek to apply a multilayered approach for protecting intellectual property relating to our innovation with patents (utility and design), copyrights, trademarks, as well as know-how and trade secret protection.

We do not currently own any granted patents, butare actively seeking U.S. and foreign patent protection in selected jurisdictions for a variety of technologies, including our MPFU technology, our Complex Living Interface Coordinated Self-Assembling Materials (“CLICSAM”) technology, our Composite-Interfacing, Biomaterial Accelerant Substrate (“CIBAS”) technology, as well as Biological Sample Harvest and Deployment Kits. We have a number of patentpatents issued and pending applications pending in the U.S. and around the world. We have four pending U.S. non-provisional utility patent applications relating to MPFUs – U.S. Serial Nos. 14/954,335; 15/650,656; 15/650,659; and 16/165,169. Each of these applications claims priority to a U.S. provisional application filed on December 2, 2014. We have one Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) International Patent Application (PCT International Publication No. WO 2016/089825) and national phase applications have been entered in OAIP, ARIPO, Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, Colombia, Costa Rica, Eurasia, Europe, Great Britain, Hong Kong, Israel, India, Indonesia, Japan, South Korea, Mexico, Malaysia, New Zealand, Philippines, Singapore, South Africa, Thailand, United Arab Emirates, Ukraine, Vietnam. These applications, as well as our pending non-public applications (which will only be identified after publication), are proceeding along the normal timeline of patent office examination in each respective country. The receipt of office actions from patent offices is part of the examination process, as is our response to such office actions. To date, no application has been abandoned or lapsed. Nor has any application been rejected in a manner that forecloses the possibility of receiving a granted patent from that same application. All our patent applications are currently alive and actively being pursued. We cannot predict when or where the first set of patent claims might be granted, nor can we speculate on the scope of claims in such a future patent.

We seek to complement the protection of our innovation with a portfolio of trademarks and service marksallowed in the United States and aroundabroad related to our MPFU technology, including U.S. Patent No. 10,926,001 issued on February 23, 2021; U.S. Patent No. 11,000,629 issued on May 11, 2021; U.S. Patent No. 11,266,765 issued on March 8, 2022; and U.S. Application No. 17/326,734 filed on May 21, 2021. Each of U.S. Patent Nos. 10,926,001; 11,000,629; and 11,266,765 have an estimated expiration date of November 30, 2035.

Patent terms extend for varying periods of time according to the world.date of patent filing or grant and the pertinent law in the various countries where patent protection is obtained. The POLARITYTE trademarkactual protection afforded by a patent, which can vary from country to country, depends upon the type of patent, the scope of its coverage, and the availability of legal remedies in the country. Further, patent term extension may be available in certain countries to compensate for a regulatory delay in approval of certain products.

The U.S. healthcare legislation enacted in 2010 created an approval pathway for biosimilar versions of innovative biological products that did not previously exist. Prior to that time, innovative biologics had essentially unlimited regulatory exclusivity. Under the new regulatory mechanism, the FDA can approve products that are similar to (but not generic copies of) innovative biologics on the basis of less extensive data than is required by a full BLA. After an innovator has been registeredmarketed its product for four years, any manufacturer may file an application for approval of a “biosimilar” version of the innovator product. However, although an application for approval of a biosimilar may be filed four years after approval of the innovator product, qualified innovative biological products will receive 12 years of regulatory exclusivity, meaning that the FDA may not approve a biosimilar version until 12 years after the innovative biological product was first approved by the FDA. The law also provides a mechanism for innovators to enforce the patents that protect innovative biological products and for biosimilar applicants to challenge the patents. Such patent litigation may begin as early as four years after the innovative biological product is first approved by the FDA.

In the United States, the increased likelihood of generic and biosimilar challenges to innovators’ intellectual property has increased the risk of loss of innovators’ market exclusivity. First, generic companies have increasingly sought to challenge innovators’ basic patents covering major pharmaceutical products. Second, statutory and regulatory provisions in the United States Australia, Brazil, China,limit the European Union, Iceland, India, Israel, Japan, South Korea, Malaysia, Mexico, Norway,ability of an innovator company to prevent generic and biosimilar drugs from being approved and launched while patent litigation is ongoing. As a result of all of these developments, it is not possible to predict the Russian Federation, Singapore, Switzerland, Taiwan, and Turkey. Additional registered trademarks inlength of market exclusivity for a particular product with certainty based solely on the United States include our logo, WELCOME TO THE SHIFT, and WHERE SELF REGENERATES SELF.expiration of the relevant patent(s) or the current forms of regulatory exclusivity.

In striving to protect and enhancethe proprietary technology, inventions, and improvements that are commercially important to the development of our business, we also rely heavily on trade secrets relating to our proprietary technology and on know-how. We enter into confidentiality agreements with our employees, consultants, scientific advisors, and contractors. We also seek to preserve the integrity and confidentiality of our data and trade secrets by maintaining physical security of our premises and physical and electronic security of our information technology systems.

11

CompetitionWe seek to complement the protection of our innovation with a portfolio of trademarks and service marks in the United States and around the world. The POLARITYTE trademark has been registered in the United States and in other countries throughout the world. Additional registered trademarks in the United States include our logo, WELCOME TO THE SHIFT, WHERE SELF REGENERATES SELF, and SKINTE.

Competition

The regenerative medicine industry is characterized by rapidly advancing technologies, intense competition, and a strong emphasis on intellectual property. We face substantial competition from companies developing and selling regenerative medicine products, as well as academic research institutions, and governmental agencies, and public and private research institutions.

Many of our current or potential competitors, either alone or with their collaboration partners, have significantly greater financial resources and expertise in research and development, manufacturing, preclinical testing, conducting clinical trials, and marketing approved products than we do. Smaller or early-stage companies may also prove to be significant competitors, particularly through collaborative arrangements with large and established companies. These competitors also compete with us in recruiting and retaining qualified scientific and management personnel and establishing clinical trial sites and patient registration for clinical trials, as well as in acquiring technologies complementary to, or necessary for, our programs.

Our commercial opportunity could be reduced or eliminated if our competitors develop and commercialize products that are safer, more effective, have fewer or less severe side effects, are more convenient, or are less expensive than any products that we may develop. Our competitors also may obtain FDA or other regulatory approval for their products more rapidly than we may obtain approval for ours, (if required), which could result in our competitors establishing a strong market position before we are able to enter the market. The key competitive factors affecting the success of our programs are likely to be their efficacy, safety, convenience, price, and the availability of reimbursement from government and other third-party payers.

RTD and ARC

We believe our TE platform technology is a revolutionary approach to regenerative medicine in and of itself, but we also find that it suggests new areas of inquiry and potential innovation. To this end, we have active research we are pursuing through our Related Technology Derivatives (RTD) and Advanced Research Center (ARC) programs. RTDs can be designed to augment the application and regenerative outcomes of our pipeline products or be used as standalone products. ARC programs focus on the improvement of RTDs as well as augmentation of our pipeline products. We are excited about the recent advancements in the field of gene therapy and are interested in the possibility of genetically altering our products, including SkinTE, to better treat and possibly cure rare diseases, such as Epidermolysis Bullosa, a genetic condition that causes the skin to be very fragile and to blister easily.

Contract Research Services

In May 2018, we purchased the assets of a preclinical research sciences business and related real estate from Ibex Group, L.L.C., a Utah limited liability company, and Ibex Preclinical Research, Inc., a Utah corporation. We acquired these assets to accelerate research and development of our TE product candidates and now operate theprovide preclinical research services to third parties. In 2021 all of IBEX’ business as IBEX to advance our product development and deliver preclinical researchactivity was providing services to third parties. The business consists of a “good laboratory practices” (GLP) compliant preclinical research facility that complies with Good Laboratory Practices and is USDA registered, and includes a vivarium, operating rooms, preparation rooms, storage facilities, and surgical and imaging equipment. The real property includes two parcels in Logan, Utah, consisting of approximately 1.75 combined gross acres of land, together with the buildings, structures, fixtures, and personal property located on the real property. In March 2022, we reached a non-binding understanding with an unrelated third party that contemplates the sale of IBEX and the real property used in the operation of IBEX. The potential sale is subject to a number of contingencies. Even though the proposed sale may not materialize, we are exploring our options with respect to IBEX, which is likely to result in some other disposition or winding up of the business in 2022.

PolarityTE RD offersHistorically, Arches offered a complimentary array of research services to those offered through IBEX, providing access to experimental planning, histology, and in vivo and in vitro imaging, including micro-ct. The PolarityTE RD arm is well equipped with state of the art equipment and sophisticated research staff that provideThere was a range of services including veterinary and preclinical services, advanced imaging, biomedical engineering and validation, molecular biology assays and proteomics analyses.

Government Regulation

Government authorities or laws and regulationssubstantial surge in COVID-19 testing throughout the United States as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, which began in the spring of 2020. In 2020 and other countries regulate2021, Arches had equipment and staff capable of performing polymerase chain reaction testing for COVID-19. Arches had the manufacturing, approval, labeling, packaging, storage, record-keeping,opportunity to use its research facilities to offer laboratory testing services for COVID-19, and promotionto that end registered under the Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments (“CLIA”) in May 2020, and it began providing COVID-19 testing services on May 27, 2020.

Arches’ primary customer for testing services was an organization controlling multiple long-term care and laboratory facilities in New York State and surrounding areas. Beginning in April 2021 there was a significant loss of products such as thoseCOVID-19 testing revenues due to the loss of Arches’ major testing customer in the first quarter of 2021. Subsequent efforts to find new business to replace the lost testing business were not successful and we have developed and are developing. Any product we are developing must comply withmade the standards required for the product category under which the product is classified by such government authorities or laws.decision to cease COVID-19 testing in August 2021.

12

Government Regulation

FDA Regulation of Tissue-Based Productsand Marketing Approval

The FDA has specific regulations governing human cells, tissues and cellular and tissue-based products, or HCT/Ps. An HCT/P is a product containing or consisting of human cells or tissue intended for transplantation into a human patient. In the United States, HCT/Ps are subject to varying degrees of regulation byU.S., the FDA depending on if they fall solely withinregulates biological products under the scope of Section 361 ofFederal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (“FDCA”), the Public Health Service Act, (the “PHS Act”) (42 U.S.C. § 264)and various federal regulations. These FDA-regulated products are also subject to state and local statutes and regulations, as well as applicable laws or if theyregulations in foreign countries. The FDA, and comparable regulatory agencies in state and local jurisdictions and in foreign countries, impose substantial requirements on the research, development, testing, manufacture, quality control, labeling, packaging, storage, distribution, record-keeping, approval, post-approval monitoring, advertising, promotion, marketing, sampling, and import and export of FDA-regulated products. Failure to comply with the applicable requirements at any time during the development process, approval process, or after approval may subject an applicant to administrative or judicial sanctions, suspension of development or marketing, or non-approval of product candidates. These sanctions could include a clinical hold on clinical trials, FDA’s refusal to approve pending applications or related supplements, withdrawal of or restrictions on an existing approval or licensure, untitled or warning letters, product recalls, product seizures, import detentions or export restrictions, total or partial suspension of production or distribution, injunctions, fines, restitution, disgorgement, civil penalties, or criminal prosecution. Such actions by government agencies could also require us to expend a large number of resources to respond to the actions. Any agency or judicial enforcement action could have a material adverse effect on us. We are regulated as drugs, devices,not sure whether legislative changes will be enacted, or biological products under Section 351whether the FDA regulations, guidance, or interpretations will be changed, or what the impact of any such changes may be on the PHS Act (42 U.S.C. § 262)marketing approvals or licensures, or the FD&C Act.prospects thereof, for our products.

If an HCT/P meets the criteria for regulation solely under Section 361IND and Clinical Trials of the Public Health Service Act (so-called “361 HCT/Ps”), no premarket FDA review for safetyDrug and effectiveness underBiological Products

Prior to commencing a human clinical trial of a drug device, or biological product, marketingan IND application, which contains the results of preclinical studies and relevant clinical studies or other human experience along with other information, such as information about product chemistry, manufacturing, and controls and a proposed protocol, must be submitted to the FDA. An IND is required. However,a request for authorization from the processorFDA to administer an investigational drug or biological product to humans. The IND automatically becomes effective 30 days after receipt by the FDA, unless the FDA within the 30-day time period raises concerns or questions about the conduct of the tissueclinical trial. In such a case, the IND sponsor must resolve any outstanding concerns with the FDA before the clinical trial may begin. A separate submission to the existing IND must be made for each successive clinical trial to be conducted during development of the drug or biologic.

An independent Institutional Review Board (“IRB”) must review and approve the investigational plan for the trial before it commences at each site. Informed written consent must be obtained from each trial subject.

Human clinical trials for drug and biological products typically are conducted in sequential phases that may overlap:

Phase 1 - the investigational drug/biologic is given initially to healthy human subjects with the target disease or condition in order to determine metabolism and pharmacologic actions of the drug in humans, side effects and, if possible, to gain early evidence on effectiveness. During Phase 1 clinical trials, sufficient information about the investigational drug/biologic’s pharmacokinetics and pharmacologic effects may be obtained to permit the design of well-controlled and scientifically valid Phase 2 clinical trials.
Phase 2 - clinical trials are conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of the drug/biologic for a particular indication or in a limited number of trial subjects in the target population to identify possible adverse effects and safety risks, to determine the efficacy of the drug/biologic for specific targeted diseases and to determine dosage tolerance and optimal dosage. Multiple Phase 2 clinical trials may be conducted by the sponsor to obtain information prior to beginning larger and more expensive Phase 3 clinical trials.
Phase 3 - clinical trials are conducted in an expanded trial subject population to further evaluate dosage, effectiveness and safety, to establish the overall benefit-risk relationship of the investigational drug/biologic, and to provide an adequate basis for product labeling and approval by the FDA. In most cases, the FDA requires two adequate and well-controlled Phase 3 clinical trials to demonstrate the efficacy of the drug or biologic in an expanded trial subject population at multiple clinical trial sites.

13

All clinical trials must be conducted in accordance with FDA regulations, including good clinical practice (“GCP”) requirements, which are intended to protect the rights, safety, and well-being of trial participants, define the roles of clinical trial sponsors, investigators, administrators, and monitors, and ensure clinical trial data integrity and reliability. Regulatory authorities, including the FDA, an IRB, a data safety monitoring board, or the sponsor, may suspend or terminate a clinical trial at any time on various grounds, including, among other reasons, a finding that the participants are being exposed to an unacceptable health risk or that the clinical trial is not being conducted in accordance with FDA requirements.

During the development of a new drug or biologic, sponsors are given opportunities to meet with the FDA at certain points. These points may be prior to submission of an IND, at the end of Phase 2 clinical trials, and before a New Drug Application (“NDA”) or Biologics License Application (“BLA”) is submitted. Meetings at other times may be requested. These meetings can provide an opportunity for the sponsor to share information about the data gathered to date, for the FDA to provide advice, and for the sponsor and the FDA to reach agreement on the next phase of development. Sponsors typically use the end-of-Phase 2 clinical trials meetings to discuss their Phase 2 clinical trials results and present their plans for the pivotal Phase 3 registration trial that they believe will support approval of the new drug/biologic.

Disclosure of Clinical Trial Information

Sponsors of certain clinical trials of FDA-regulated products, including drugs, biologics, and devices, are required to register and list its productsdisclose certain clinical trial information on clinicaltrials.gov. Information related to the product, trial subject population, phase of investigation, study sites and investigators, and other aspects of the clinical trial, is made public as part of the registration. Sponsors also are obligated to disclose the results of their clinical trials, including the study protocol and statistical analysis plan, after completion. Disclosure of the clinical trial results can be delayed until the new product or new indication being studied has been approved, as long as approval occurs within a certain timeframe. Competitors may use this publicly available information to gain knowledge regarding our development programs.

The BLA Approval Process

SkinTE is an autologous product, meaning it is derived from the cells and tissues of the individual to be treated with the product. Based on the FDA’s feedback to the Company, SkinTE will not be marketed in the U.S. until it is licensed by the FDA comply with regulations regarding labeling, record keeping, donor eligibility and screening and testing,through the BLA approval process. The process required by the tissue in accordance with established current Good Tissue Practices (cGTP), and investigate and, in certain circumstances, report adverse events or deviations.FDA to obtain licensure generally involves the following:

To be a 361 HCT/P, a product generally must meet all four of the following criteria:

It must be minimally manipulated;completion of non-clinical laboratory tests, animal studies and formulation studies conducted according to good laboratory practice or other applicable regulations;
It must be intended for homologous use;submission of an IND application;
Its manufacture must not involve combinationperformance of adequate and well-controlled human clinical trials to establish the safety, purity, and potency of the proposed biologic for its intended use or uses conducted in accordance with another article, except for water, crystalloids or a sterilizing, preserving or storage agent, provided the addition of such article does not raise new clinical safety concerns; andGCP;
It must not havesubmission to the FDA of a systemic effectBLA after completion of all pivotal clinical trials;
FDA pre-license inspection of manufacturing facilities and must not be dependent upon the metabolic activityaudit of living cells for its primary function (unless the product is intended for reproductive use, autologous use, or use inclinical trial sites; and
FDA approval of a first- or second-degree blood relative).BLA.

We believeThe FDA has 60 days from its receipt of a BLA to determine whether the application will be accepted for filing based on the agency’s threshold determination that SkinTEit is sufficiently complete to permit substantive review. Once the submission is accepted for filing, the FDA begins an in- depth review. The FDA has agreed to certain performance goals in the review of BLAs. Most applications for standard review BLA products are reviewed within ten months of submission, and OsteoTE qualify as 361 HCT/P tissue-basedmost applications for priority review BLA products and believe that our core “TE” products in development (e.g., CartTE) will qualify as 361 HCT/Ps. Other products we are developing are being evaluated with respect to regulatory classification, and we will prepare for any pathway of manufacturing or regulation that is required.

All establishments that manufacture 361 HCT/Ps must register and list their HCT/Ps with the FDA’s Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (“CBER”) within five days after commencing operations. In addition, establishments are required to update their registration annually in December or within 30 days of certain changes, and submit changes in HCT/P listing at the time of orreviewed within six months of submission. The review process may be extended by the FDA for three additional months to consider certain late-submitted information, or information intended to clarify information already provided in the submission. Even if such change. Establishmentsadditional information is submitted, the FDA may ultimately decide that manufacture 361 HCT/Psthe BLA does not satisfy the criteria for approval.

The FDA may also refer applications for novel BLA products or products that present difficult questions of safety, purity, or potency, to an advisory committee, typically a panel that includes clinicians and other experts, for review, evaluation, and a recommendation as to whether the application should be approved. The FDA is not bound by the recommendation of an advisory committee, but it generally follows such recommendations.

14

Before approving a BLA, the FDA will know that they are registered intypically inspect one or more clinical sites to assure compliance with 21 C.F.R. § 1271.10(a)GCP. The FDA may also inspect preclinical study sites to verify compliance with Good Laboratory Practice (“GLP”) requirements prior to approval. Additionally, the FDA will inspect the facility or the facilities at which the BLA product is manufactured. The FDA will not approve the BLA unless compliance with cGMP requirements is satisfactory, and the BLA contains data that provide substantial evidence that the product is safe, pure, and potent for the indication studied.

After the FDA evaluates the BLA and the manufacturing facilities, it issues either an approval letter or a complete response letter. A complete response letter outlines the deficiencies in the submission and may require substantial additional testing, including additional large-scale clinical testing or other information in order for the FDA to reconsider the application. If, or when, theythose deficiencies have been addressed to the FDA’s satisfaction in a resubmission of the BLA, the FDA will issue an approval letter. The FDA has committed to reviewing such resubmissions in two or six months depending on the type of information included.

The cost of preparing and submitting a BLA is substantial. Furthermore, each BLA submission requires a user fee payment (approximately $3.1 million in fiscal year 2022), unless a waiver or exemption applies. Waiver of the fee may be sought on several grounds, including that the applicant is a small business submitting its first human drug application to the FDA for review, but there is no assurance we will qualify or receive a validated form with the registration number (“FEI#”) after submitting the Form FDA 3356 (registration form). Current Good Tissue Practice (“cGTP”) requirements govern, as may be applicable, the facilities, controls,waiver if and methods usedwhen we file a BLA in the manufacturefuture. The manufacturer or sponsor of HCT/Ps, including without limitation, recovery, donor screening, donor testing, processing, storage, labeling, packaging,an approved BLA is also subject to annual establishment fees.

An approval letter authorizes commercial marketing and distribution of 361 HCT/Ps.the licensed product with specific prescribing information for specific indications. As a condition of BLA approval, the FDA inspectionmay require substantial post-approval testing and enforcement with respectsurveillance to establishments described in 21 C.F.R. § 1271 includes inspections conducted, as deemed necessary, to determinemonitor the product’s safety, purity, and potency and may impose other conditions, including post-market studies, labeling restrictions, or other risk evaluation and mitigation strategies, which can materially affect the product’s potential market and profitability. Once granted, product approvals may be withdrawn if compliance with the applicable provisions and may include, butregulatory standards is not limitedmaintained, or problems or safety issues are identified following initial marketing.

Changes to an assessmentsome of the establishment’sconditions established in an approved application, including changes in indications, labeling, device components, or manufacturing processes or facilities, equipment, finishedrequire submission and unfinished materials, containers, processes, HCT/Ps,FDA approval of a new BLA or BLA supplement before the change can be implemented. A BLA supplement for a new indication typically requires clinical data similar to that in the original application, and the FDA uses the same procedures labeling, records, files, papers, and controls requiredactions in reviewing BLA supplements as it does in reviewing BLAs.

Biosimilar Exclusivity

The Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009 (BPCIA) creates an abbreviated approval pathway for biosimilar products. A biosimilar is a biological product that is highly similar to, and has no clinically meaningful differences from, an existing FDA-licensed reference product. Biosimilarity must be shown through analytical studies, animal studies, and at least one clinical study, absent a waiver. A biosimilar product may be deemed interchangeable with a prior licensed product if it is biosimilar and meets additional requirements under the BPCIA, including that it can be expected to produce the same clinical results as the reference product and, for products administered multiple times, the biologic and the reference biologic may be switched after one has been previously administered without increasing safety risks or risks of diminished efficacy relative to exclusive use of the reference biologic. Where permitted by state law, an interchangeable product may be substituted for the reference product without the involvement of the prescriber.

A reference biologic is granted twelve years of exclusivity from the time of first licensure of the reference product, and no application for a biosimilar may be submitted for four years from the date of licensure of the reference product. The first biologic product submitted under the abbreviated approval pathway that is determined to be maintained under 21 C.F.R. § 1271. Such inspections can occur at any timeinterchangeable with the reference product may obtain exclusivity against a finding of interchangeability for other biosimilars for the same condition or without written notice at such frequency asuse for the lesser of (i) one year after the first commercial marketing of the first interchangeable biosimilar; (ii) eighteen months after the first interchangeable biosimilar is determinedapproved if there is no patent challenge; (iii) eighteen months after resolution of a lawsuit over the patents of the reference biologic in favor of the first interchangeable biosimilar applicant; or (iv) 42 months after the first interchangeable biosimilar’s application has been approved if a patent lawsuit is ongoing within the 42-month period.

15

Post-Marketing Requirements for FDA Regulated Products

Following licensure of a new product, the company and the licensed products are subject to continuing regulation by the FDA, state, and foreign regulatory authorities including, among other things, monitoring and record-keeping activities, reporting adverse experiences to the applicable regulatory authorities, providing regulatory authorities with updated safety and efficacy information, manufacturing products in its sole discretion. Our Salt Lake City manufacturing site was inspectedaccordance with cGMP requirements, product sampling, and distribution requirements, and complying with promotion and advertising requirements, which include, among others, standards for direct-to-consumer advertising and restrictions on promoting products for uses or in July 2018 and we received certain inspectional observations on Form FDA 483 followingpatient populations that inspection. We responded to those observations and are continuing a productive dialognot consistent with the FDA.product’s approved labeling (known as “off-label use”), limitations on industry-sponsored scientific and educational activities, and requirements for promotional activities involving the internet, including social media. Although physicians may prescribe products for off-label uses, manufacturers may not market or promote such off-label uses. Modifications or enhancements to the product or its labeling or changes of the site of manufacture are often subject to the approval of the FDA and other regulators, who may or may not grant approval, or may engage in a lengthy review process.

If we failThe FDA, state, and foreign regulatory authorities have broad enforcement powers. Failure to comply with applicable regulatory requirements could result in enforcement action by the FDA, regulations and laws applicable to our operationstate, or tissue products,foreign regulatory authorities, which may include the FDA could take enforcement action, including, without limitation, pursuing any of the following sanctions, among others:following:

Untitleduntitled letters or warning letters, letters;
fines, injunctions, product seizures, anddisgorgement, restitution, or civil penalties;
Orders for product retention, recall,injunctions (e.g., total or destruction;partial suspension of production) or consent decrees;
Operatingproduct recalls, administrative detention, or seizure;
customer notifications or repair, replacement, or refunds;
operating restrictions or partial suspension or total shutdown of operations;production;
Refusing anydelays in or refusal to grant requests for future product clearancelicenses or approval;approvals or foreign regulatory approvals of new products, new intended uses, or modifications to existing products;
Withdrawingwithdrawals or suspending any applications for approvalsuspensions of FDA product licenses or marketing approvals already granted; or foreign regulatory approvals, resulting in prohibitions on product sales;
Criminalclinical holds on clinical trials;
FDA refusal to review pending or new applications in the event of issues concerning the integrity or reliability of supporting data;
FDA refusal to issue certificates to foreign governments needed to export products for sale in other countries; and
criminal prosecution.

For more informationAny of these sanctions could result in higher than anticipated costs or lower than anticipated sales and have a material adverse effect on this regulatory risk, please see the discussion below, “Risk Factors,” including but not limitedour reputation, business, financial condition, and results of operations. Such actions by government agencies could also require us to expend a large amount of managerial and financial resources to respond to the information underactions. Any agency or judicial enforcement action could have a material adverse effect on us.

In the heading, “Risks RelatedU.S., after a product is approved, its manufacture is subject to Registrationcomprehensive and continuing regulation by the FDA. The FDA regulations require that products be manufactured in registered facilities and in accordance with cGMP. We have a facility for the production of clinical and commercial quantities of SkinTE that is being modified to operate in accordance with cGMP regulations. cGMP regulations require, among other things, quality control and quality assurance as well as the corresponding maintenance of records and documentation and the obligation to investigate and correct deviations from cGMP. For human cellular or Regulatory Approvaltissue-based products like ours, cGMP also includes current good tissue practices to prevent the transmission of Our Product Candidatescommunicable diseases. These regulations also impose certain organizational, procedural, and Other Government Regulations.”documentation requirements with respect to manufacturing and quality assurance activities. Manufacturers and other entities involved in the manufacture and distribution of approved drugs, biologics, and medical devices are required to register their establishments with the FDA and certain state agencies and are subject to periodic unannounced inspections by the FDA and state agencies for compliance with cGMP and other laws. Accordingly, as a manufacturer we must continue to expend time, money, and effort in the area of production and quality control to maintain cGMP compliance.

16

If in the future we elect to use a contract manufacturer, we will be responsible for the selection and monitoring of qualified firms and, in certain circumstances, suppliers to these firms. These firms and, where applicable, their suppliers are subject to inspections by the FDA at any time, and the discovery of violative conditions, including failure to conform to cGMP, could result in enforcement actions that can interrupt the operation of any such firm or result in restrictions on product supply, including, among other things, recall or withdrawal of the product from the market.

Newly discovered or developed data on safety, purity, or potency may require changes to a product’s approved labeling, including the addition of new warnings and contraindications, and also may require the implementation of other risk management measures.

Fraud, AbuseReimbursement, Anti-Kickback and False Claims Laws, and Other Regulatory Matters

WeIn the U.S., the research, manufacturing, distribution, sale, and promotion of drug and biological products are directly and indirectlypotentially subject to regulation by various federal, state, and state laws governing relationships with healthcare providers andlocal authorities in addition to the FDA, including the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (“CMS”), other potential referral sources for our products pertaining to healthcare fraud and abuse, including anti-kickback, false claims, and similar laws. In addition, federal and state laws are also sometimes open to interpretation. The Company could potentially face legal risks if our interpretation differs from those of enforcement authorities. Further, from time to time the Company may find itself at a competitive disadvantage if the Company’s interpretation differs from that of its competitors.

In particular, the federal healthcare program Anti-Kickback Statute prohibits persons from knowingly and willfully soliciting, offering, receiving or providing remuneration (in cash or in kind), directly or indirectly, in exchange for or to induce either the referral of an individual, or the furnishing, arranging for, or recommending of, a good or service for which payment may be made in whole or part under federal healthcare programs, such as the Medicare and Medicaid programs. Penalties for violations include criminal penalties and civil sanctions such as fines, imprisonment and possible exclusion from Medicare, Medicaid and other federal healthcare programs. The Anti-Kickback Statute is broad and prohibits many arrangements and practices that are lawful in businesses outside of the healthcare industry. In implementing the statute, the Office of Inspector Generaldivisions of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (e.g., the Office of Inspector General), the Drug Enforcement Administration, the Consumer Product Safety Commission, the Federal Trade Commission, the Occupational Safety & Health Administration, the Environmental Protection Agency, state Attorneys General, and other state and local government agencies. For example, sales, marketing, and scientific/educational grant programs must comply when applicable with the federal Anti-Kickback Statute, the federal False Claims Act, the privacy regulations promulgated under HIPAA, and similar state laws. Pricing and rebate programs must comply with the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program requirements of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990, as amended, and the Veterans Health Care Act of 1992, as amended. If products are made available to authorized users of the Federal Supply Schedule of the General Services Administration, additional laws and requirements apply. All of these activities are also potentially subject to federal and state consumer protection and unfair competition laws.

The Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003 (“OIG”MMA”) has issuedestablished the Medicare Part D program to provide a seriesvoluntary prescription drug benefit to Medicare beneficiaries. Under Part D, Medicare beneficiaries may enroll in prescription drug plans offered by private entities that will provide coverage of regulations, known as the “safe harbors.” These safe harbors set forth provisionsoutpatient prescription drugs. Unlike Medicare Part A and B, Part D coverage is not standardized. Part D prescription drug plan sponsors are not required to pay for all covered Part D drugs, and each drug plan can develop its own drug formulary that if all their applicable requirements are met, except certain remunerationidentifies which drugs it will cover and remunerative arrangements from violating the Anti-Kickback Statute. The failureat what tier or level. However, Part D prescription drug formularies must include drugs within each therapeutic category and class of a transaction or arrangement to fit precisely within one or more safe harbors doescovered Part D drugs, though not necessarily meanall the drugs in each category or class. Any formulary used by a Part D prescription drug plan must be developed and reviewed by a pharmacy and therapeutic committee. Government payment for some of the costs of prescription drugs may increase demand for products for which we receive regulatory approval. However, any negotiated prices for our products covered by a Part D prescription drug plan will likely be lower than the prices we might otherwise obtain. Moreover, while the MMA applies only to drug benefits for Medicare beneficiaries, private payors often follow Medicare coverage policy and payment limitations in setting their own payment rates. Any reduction in payment that it is illegal or that prosecution will be pursued. However, conduct and business arrangements that do not fully satisfy each applicable element of a safe harborresults from the MMA may result in increased scrutiny by Government enforcement authorities, such as the OIG. Many states have lawsa similar to the federal law.reduction in payments from non-government payors.

Also, the federal civil False ClaimsThe American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (“FCA”) imposes civil liability on any person or entity that submits, or causes the submission of a false or fraudulent claim to the U.S. government. Damages under the FCA can be significant, and consist of the imposition of fines and penalties. The FCA also allows a private individual or entity (i.e., a whistleblower) with knowledge of past or present fraud against2009 provides funding for the federal government to suecompare the effectiveness of different treatments for the same illness. A plan for the research will be developed by the Department of Health and Human Services, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and the National Institutes for Health, and periodic reports on behalfthe status of the governmentresearch and related expenditures will be made to Congress. Although the results of the comparative effectiveness studies are not intended to mandate coverage policies for public or private payors, it is not clear what effect, if any, the research will have on the sale of SkinTE in the future. It is also possible that comparative effectiveness research demonstrating benefits in a competitor’s product could adversely affect the sale of our product. If third-party payors do not consider SkinTE to be cost-effective compared to other available therapies, they may not cover our product after approval as a benefit under their plans or, if they do, the level of payment may not be sufficient to allow us to sell our product on a profitable basis.

In addition, in some foreign countries, the proposed pricing for a drug must be approved before it may be lawfully marketed. The requirements governing drug and biologics pricing vary widely from country to country. For example, the European Union provides options for its member states to restrict the range of medicinal products for which their national health insurance systems provide reimbursement and to be paidcontrol the prices of medicinal products for human use. A member state may approve a portionspecific price for the medicinal product, or it may instead adopt a system of direct or indirect controls on the profitability of the government’s recovery, whichcompany placing the medicinal product on the market. There can include both civil penaltiesbe no assurance that any country that has price controls or reimbursement limitations for pharmaceutical products will allow favorable reimbursement and up to three timespricing arrangements for our product. Historically, products launched in the amountEuropean Union do not follow price structures of the government’s damages (usuallyU.S. and generally tend to be priced significantly lower than in the amount reimbursed by federal healthcare programs). TheU.S.

17

In the U.S. Department of Justice takes the position that the marketing and promotional practices of life sciences product manufacturers, including the off-label promotion of products, the provision of inaccurate or misleading reimbursement guidance, or the payment of prohibited kickbacks, may cause the submission of improper claims to federal and state healthcare entitlement programs such as Medicare and Medicaid by health care providers that use the manufacturer’s products, which results in a violation of the FCA. In certain cases, manufacturers have entered into criminal and civil settlements with the federal government under which they entered into plea agreements, paid substantial monetary amounts and entered into corporate integrity agreements (“CIAs”) that require, among other things, substantial government oversight, as well as reporting and remedial actions going forward

If we fail to comply with these laws, we could bePolarityTE is subject to enforcement actions, including but not limited to:

Multi-year investigations by federalcomplex laws and regulations pertaining to healthcare “fraud and state governments;
Criminal and civil fines and penalties;
Obligations under settlement agreements, such as CIAs or Deferred Prosecution Agreements; or
Exclusion from participation in federal and state healthcare programs.

For more information on this fraud, abuse, and false claim risk, please see the discussion below, “Risk Factors,” including, but not limited to, the federal Anti-Kickback Statute, the federal False Claims Act, and other state and federal laws and regulations. The federal Anti-Kickback Statute makes it illegal for any person, or a party acting on its behalf, to knowingly and willfully solicit, receive, offer, or pay any remuneration that is intended to induce the referral of business, including the purchase, order, or prescription of a particular drug, or other good or service for which payment in whole or in part may be made under a federal healthcare program, such as Medicare or Medicaid. Violations of this law are punishable by up to five years in prison, criminal fines, administrative civil money penalties, and exclusion from participation in federal healthcare programs. In addition, many states have adopted laws similar to the federal Anti-Kickback Statute. Some of these state prohibitions apply to the referral of patients for healthcare services reimbursed by any insurer, not just federal healthcare programs such as Medicare and Medicaid. Due to the breadth of these federal and state anti-kickback laws, the absence of guidance in the form of regulations or court decisions and the potential for additional legal or regulatory change in this area, it is possible that PolarityTE’s future sales and marketing practices or its future relationships with medical professionals might be challenged under fraud and abuse laws, which could harm PolarityTE.

The federal False Claims Act prohibits anyone from knowingly presenting, or causing to be presented, for payment to federal programs (including Medicare and Medicaid) claims for items or services, including drugs and biologics, that are false or fraudulent, claims for items or services not provided as claimed, or claims for medically unnecessary items or services. Although we would not submit claims directly to payors, manufacturers can be held liable under these laws if they are deemed to “cause” the submission of false or fraudulent claims by, for example, providing inaccurate billing or coding information underto customers or promoting a product off-label. In addition, our future activities relating to the heading, “Wereporting of estimated prices for SkinTE, the reporting of prices used to calculate Medicaid rebate information, and other information affecting federal, state, and third-party reimbursement for our product, and the sale and marketing of SkinTE, are subject to numerousscrutiny under this law. Penalties for a federal False Claims Act violation include three times the actual damages sustained by the government, plus mandatory civil penalties of between $11,181 and $22,363 for each separate false claim, the potential for exclusion from participation in federal healthcare programs. Although the federal False Claims Act is a civil statute, conduct resulting in a federal False Claims Act violation may also implicate various federal criminal statutes. If the government were to allege that we were, or convict us of, violating these false claims laws, we could be subject to a substantial fine. In addition, private individuals have the ability to bring actions under the federal False Claims Act and certain states have enacted laws modeled after the federal False Claims Act.

There are also an increasing number of state healthcarelaws that require manufacturers to make reports to states on pricing and marketing information. Many of these laws contain ambiguities as to what is required to comply with the laws. In addition, as discussed below, a similar federal requirement requires manufacturers to track and report to the federal government certain payments made to physicians and teaching hospitals in the previous calendar year. These laws may affect our sales, marketing, and other promotional activities by imposing administrative and compliance burdens on us. In addition, given the lack of clarity with respect to these laws and regulations,their implementation, our reporting actions could be subject to the penalty provisions of the pertinent state, and asoon federal, authorities.

The failure to comply with such laws and regulations could have an adverse effectregulatory requirements exposes companies to possible legal or regulatory action. Depending on our business and our abilitythe circumstances, failure to compete in the marketplace.”

Environmental Matters

Our research, development and tissue preservation activities generate some chemical and biomedical wastes, consisting primarily of diluted alcohols and acids, and human and animal pathological and biological wastes, including human and animal tissue and body fluids removed during laboratory procedures. The chemical and biomedical wastes generated by our research, development and tissue processing operations are placed in appropriately constructed and labeled containers and are segregated from other wastes. We contract with third parties for transport, treatment, and disposal of waste. We strive to remain compliant withmeet applicable laws and regulations promulgated by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and similar state agencies.

Reimbursement

In the United States, demand for access to any medical product will depend in large part on both the availability and the amount of reimbursement from third-party payers, including government healthcare programs (including Medicare and Medicaid), and commercial healthcare insurers, including managed care organizations and other private health plans. Third-party payers have complex rules andregulatory requirements for coverage and reimbursement of healthcare products and services. Even the applications to such third-party payers to be eligible for reimbursement for product or services are complex and can be lengthy and time consuming. For new technologies coming to market, these payers are increasingly examining the clinical evidence supporting medical necessity and cost effectiveness decisions in addition to safety and efficacy, which can result in barrierscriminal prosecution, fines or other penalties, injunctions, recall or seizure of products, total or partial suspension of production, denial or withdrawal of product approvals, or refusal to early coverage reimbursement,allow a company to enter into supply contracts, including government contracts.

Changes in regulations, statutes, or denialthe interpretation of coverage and reimbursement altogether. Accordingly, significant uncertainty exists as toexisting regulations could impact our business in the availability of coverage and reimbursement statusfuture by requiring, for new medical products. If third-party payer reimbursement is unavailableexample: (i) changes to our customer hospitals, physicians, and providers,manufacturing facility; (ii) additions or modifications to product labeling; (iii) the recall or discontinuation of our sales may be limited and we may not be ableproduct; or (iv) additional record-keeping requirements. If any such changes were to realize an appropriate return on our investment in research and product development.

Payers often set payment rates depending on the site of service and many use the Medicare program as a benchmark for their own payment methodologies. In the hospital inpatient setting, Medicare payment generally is set at pre-determined rates for all products and services provided during a patient stay, and is based on such factors as the patient diagnosis, procedures performed, patient age, and complications. In the physician office or clinic setting, Medicare payment generally is based on a fee schedule, with payment rates set for each procedure performed and product used, although the schedule may in some instance bundle the product into the payment for the procedure. In some outpatient settings, such as in the case of the hospital outpatient clinic setting, Medicare payment rates generally are premised on classifications of services that have similar clinical characteristics and similar costs. To better track utilization, we filed an application with CMS for a unique HCPCS SkinTE Q code. We were successful and received Q code 4200, which was effective January 1, 2019.

Reimbursement policies depend in part on legislation designed to regulate the healthcare industry and federal and state governments continue to propose and pass new healthcare legislation and government agencies revise or change their regulations and policies from time to time. We cannot predict whether or how such reform measures and policy changes would affect reimbursement rates and demand for our products.

Patient Privacy

HIPAA, as amended by the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act, or HITECH, and their implementing regulations, including the final omnibus rule published on January 25, 2013, mandates, among other things, the adoption of uniform standards for the electronic exchange of information in common healthcare transactions, as well as standards relating to the privacy and security of individually identifiable health information, which require the adoption of administrative, physical and technical safeguards to protect such information. Among other things, HITECH makes HIPAA’s security standards directly applicable to business associates, defined as independent contractors or agents of covered entities that create, receive or obtain protected health information in connection with providing a service for or on behalf of a covered entity. Because our products use autologous tissue sources that are tracked and reapplied to the same individual patient from which the tissue was harvested, our business maintains substantial amounts of patient identifiable health information. HITECH also increased the civil and criminal penalties that may be imposed, against covered entitiesthey could adversely affect the operation of our business.

18

Patient Protection and business associates, and gave state attorneys general new authority to file civil actions for damages or injunctions in federal courts to enforceAffordable Care Act

In March 2010, the federal HIPAA laws and seek attorney’s fees and costs associated with pursuing federal civil actions. In addition, certain state laws govern the privacy and security of health information in certain circumstances, some of which are more stringent than HIPAA and many of which differ from each other in significant ways and may not have the same effect, thus complicating compliance efforts. Failure to comply with these laws, where applicable, can result in the imposition of significant civil or criminal penalties. Since we do not submit claims electronically to payers, we do not believe we are a covered entity under HIPAA.

Transparency Laws

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, imposes, among other things, annual reporting requirements for covered manufacturers for certain payments and other transfers of value provided to physicians and teaching hospitals, as well as certain ownership and investment interests held by physicians and their immediate family members. We do not believe that we are a covered manufacturer under the Sunshine Act because our products are neither regulated as pharmaceuticals, biologics, nor medical devicesamended by the FDA,Health Care and 361 HCT/P autologous tissue sourcesEducation Reconciliation Act of 2010, collectively the PPACA, was enacted, which includes measures that have or will significantly change the way healthcare is financed by both governmental and private insurers. Among the provisions of the PPACA of greatest importance to the drug industry are the following:

The Medicaid Drug Rebate Program requires pharmaceutical manufacturers to enter into and have in effect a national rebate agreement with the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services as a condition for states to receive federal matching funds for the manufacturer’s covered outpatient drugs furnished to Medicaid patients. Effective in 2010, the PPACA made several changes to the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program, including increasing pharmaceutical manufacturers’ rebate liability by raising the minimum basic Medicaid rebate on most branded prescription drugs and biologic agents to 23.1% of the Average Manufacturer Price (“AMP”) and adding a new rebate calculation for “line extensions” (i.e., new formulations, such as extended release formulations) of solid oral dosage forms of branded products, as well as potentially impacting their rebate liability by modifying the statutory definition of AMP. The PPACA also expanded the universe of Medicaid utilization subject to drug rebates by requiring pharmaceutical manufacturers to pay rebates on Medicaid managed care utilization and by expanding the population potentially eligible for Medicaid drug benefits. The CMS have proposed to expand Medicaid rebate liability to the territories of the U.S. as well. In addition, the PPACA provides for the public availability of retail survey prices and certain weighted average AMPs under the Medicaid program. The implementation of this requirement by the CMS may also provide for the public availability of pharmacy acquisition of cost data, which could negatively impact our sales.
In order for a pharmaceutical product to receive federal reimbursement under the Medicare Part B and Medicaid programs or to be sold directly to U.S. government agencies, the manufacturer must extend discounts to entities eligible to participate in the 340B drug pricing program. The required 340B discount on a given product is calculated based on the AMP and Medicaid rebate amounts reported by the manufacturer. The PPACA expanded the types of entities eligible to receive discounted 340B pricing, although, under the current state of the law, with the exception of children’s hospitals, these newly eligible entities will not be eligible to receive discounted 340B pricing on orphan drugs when used for the orphan indication. In addition, as 340B drug pricing is determined based on AMP and Medicaid rebate data, the revisions to the Medicaid rebate formula and AMP definition described above could cause the required 340B discount to increase.
The PPACA imposes a requirement on manufacturers of branded drugs and biologic agents to provide a 50% discount off the negotiated price of branded drugs dispensed to Medicare Part D patients in the coverage gap (i.e., “donut hole”).
The PPACA imposes an annual, nondeductible fee on any entity that manufactures or imports certain branded prescription drugs and biologic agents, apportioned among these entities according to their market share in certain government healthcare programs, although this fee would not apply to sales of certain products approved exclusively for orphan indications.
The PPACA requires pharmaceutical manufacturers to track certain financial arrangements with physicians and teaching hospitals, including any “transfer of value” made or distributed to such entities, as well as any investment interests held by physicians and their immediate family members. Manufacturers are required to track this information and were required to make their first reports in March 2014. The information reported is publicly available on a searchable website.
As of 2010, a new Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute was established pursuant to the PPACA to oversee, identify priorities in, and conduct comparative clinical effectiveness research, along with funding for such research. The research conducted by the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute may affect the market for certain pharmaceutical products.

There have been prior public announcements by members of the federal government regarding their plans to repeal and replace the PPACA and Medicare. For example, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 eliminated the individual mandate requiring most Americans (other than those who qualify for a hardship exemption) to carry a minimum level of health coverage, effective January 1, 2019. We are not expressly addressed by this law.sure whether additional legislative changes will be enacted and are unable to predict what impact changes in the law may have on the pricing and distribution of our product.

19

USDAEmployees

The CompanyWe have approximately 59 full-time employees and its subsidiaries conduct preclinical research and development, which is regulated by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Animal and Plant Health and Inspection Service (APHIS) and must be performed in compliance with the Animal Welfare Act, Animal Welfare Regulations, and Animal Care Policies. The Company and each of its subsidiaries that conduct preclinical research have in place Institutional Animal Care and Use Committees to oversee compliance with the animal care and use program and report accordingly to the USDA on an at least a semi-annual basis. All performance sites that maintain USDA-covered species are actively registered as USDA research facilities.

Employees

We had approximately 123 full-time10 part-time employees as of OctoberDecember 31, 2018,2021, all of whom are in the United States.U.S. None of our employees are represented by a labor union or covered by a collective bargaining agreement. We consider our relationship with our employees to be good.

Corporate History

Majesco Entertainment Company, a Delaware corporation (“Majesco DE”), was incorporated in the state of Delaware on May 8, 1998. On December 1, 2016, Majesco Acquisition Corp., a Nevada corporation and wholly-ownedwholly owned subsidiary of Majesco Entertainment Company, a Delaware corporation (“Majesco DE”)DE, entered into an Agreement and Plan of Reorganization with PolarityTE, Inc., a Nevada corporation (“PolarityTE NV”) and Dr. Denver Lough, the owner of 100% of the issued and outstanding shares of capital stocksole stockholder of PolarityTE NV. The asset acquisition was subject to shareholderstockholder approval, which was received on March 10, 2017, and the transaction closed on April 7, 2017. In January 2017, Majesco DE changed its name to “PolarityTE, Inc.” (“PolarityTE”). Majesco Acquisition Corp. was then merged with PolarityTE NV, which remains a subsidiary of PolarityTE. Majesco Acquisition Corp. II, formed in November 2016 under Majesco Entertainment Company, changed its name to “PolarityTE MD, Inc.,” and remains a wholly-owned subsidiary of PolarityTE.

Prior to the acquisition of PolarityTE NV, Majesco DE developed and published a wide range of video games on digital networks through its Midnight City label. On May 2, 2017, Majesco Entertainment Company, a Nevada corporation and wholly owned subsidiary of PolarityTE (“Majesco NV Sub”), was formed, into which all the assets and liabilities of this gaming business were placed. On June 23, 2017, PolarityTE sold the Majesco NV Sub to Zift Interactive LLC, a Nevada limited liability company, pursuant to a purchase agreement. Pursuant to the terms of the agreement, PolarityTE sold 100% of the issued and outstanding shares of common stock of Majesco NV Sub to Zift, including all the right, title, and interest in and to Majesco NV Sub’s business of developing, publishing, and distributing video game products.PolarityTE.

In May 2018 we acquired assets of a preclinical research and veterinary sciences business and related real estate, which we now operate through our subsidiary, Ibex Preclinical Research, Inc.IBEX. The aggregate purchase price was $3.8 million, of which $2.3 million was paid at closing and the balance satisfied by a promissory note payable to the Sellerseller with an initial fair value of $1.22 million and contingent consideration with an initial fair value of approximately $0.3 million. As a result, we have significant research facilities and a well-educated and skilled team of scientists and researchers that comprise the contract research segment of our business. These resources are highly beneficial to the work we are doing on our TE products and in RTD and ARC. We also offer research services to unrelated third parties on a contract basis, which we offer under the trademark POLARITYRD. Contract research services help us defray the costs of maintaining a first-rate research facility and allow us to meet companies pursuing new technologies that may be opportunities for collaborative or strategic relationships going forward.

Contact and Available Information

Our principal executive offices are located at 123 Wright Brothers Drive,1960 S. 4250 West, Salt Lake City, UT 8411684104, and our telephone number is (385) 237-2279. Our website address is www.polarityte.com.(800) 560-3983.

We file annual, quarterly, and current reports, as well as proxy statements, and other information with the Securities and Exchange Commission, which isSEC. Our SEC filings are available to the public at the SEC’s website at www.sec.gov. We also maintain a website located at www.polarityte.com, where these SEC filings and other information about the Company can be accessed, free of charge, overas soon as reasonably practicable after we electronically file the Internet at our website athttp://www.polarityte.com. In addition, any materials we fileinformation with, the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) are available on the SEC’s website as www.sec.gov free of charge.

Glossary– for ease of reference, the following provides simplified explanations for some of the terms used herein. This Glossary is not intended to define these terms as they may be used in other documents, authored by PolarityTE or otherwise

Allogeneic – relating to tissues or cells that are genetically dissimilar and hence immunologically incompatible, although from individuals of the same species.

Allogeneic tissue rejection – the rejection of foreign tissue after the body develops an immune response to it.

Allografts – tissue grafts derived from a donor of the same species as the recipient but not genetically identical, e.g. tissue grafts derived from cadavers.

Alloplast – an allogeneic material used to construct, reconstruct, or augment tissue.

Autologous tissue – tissue originating from one’s own body.

Bioreactor - a vessel in which a biological process is carried out that involves organisms or biochemically active substances derived from organisms.

Compartment Syndrome - a condition caused by pressure build up from internal bleeding or tissue swelling.

Dermis – the middle layer of skin, that contains connective tissue, hair follicles, and sweat glands.

Epidermis – the outermost layer of skin, responsible for providing a waterproof barrier and creating skin tone.

Epithelium - the tissue that covers a free surface or lines a tube or cavity of an animal body, such as the alimentary canal.

Fibroblasts - cells in connective tissue that produce collagen and other fibers.

Full-thickness skin graft (FTSG) - a skin graft that contains both the epidermis and the entire dermis.

Growth factor – a substance that is required for the stimulation of growth in living cells.

HCT/Ps - human cells, tissues and cellular and tissue-based products regulated by the FDA under 21 C.F.R. Parts 1270 and 1271.

Homologous – when used in relation to tissue, skin, or tissue product meansfurnish it is similar in position, structure, function, or characteristics to, the corresponding patient tissue.SEC.

Hypodermis – the deep subcutaneous layer of skin, below the dermis, that is made of fat and connective tissue.

Inosculate - to connect or join to become continuous.

Integument – the enveloping membrane of the body, including the epidermis, dermis, and all derivatives of the epidermis (hair, sebaceous glands, etc.).

Interface - a region of contact between living and/or organic material and other biomaterial or organic/inorganic material.

Interactome – the complete set of physical interactions between molecules within a cell that underlies most genotype-to-phenotype relationships and modulates nearly all complex biological pathways and cellular networks seen in living systems.

In Vitro - outside a living organism, for example laboratory vessel (e.g., a test tube) and under laboratory conditions.

In Vivo - in a living organism.

Ischemic damage - damage that causes a restriction in blood supply, thus causing diminished delivery of oxygen to the affected tissue.

MPFU - a minimally polarized functional unit.

Neovascularization - the formation of new vessels from pre-existing ones (angiogenesis) or from cellular precursors (vasculogenesis).

Osteoarthritis - a disease that occurs when the protective cartilage on the ends of bones wears down over time.

Parietal bone - a bone forming the central side and upper back part of each side of the skull.

Polarity – the asymmetric organization of cellular elements, which allows development of specialized tissue and downstream function.

Scaffold – a three dimensional material that has been engineered to cause desirable cellular interactions to contribute to the formation of new functional tissues.

Scar revision – minimizing a scar so that it is less conspicuous and blends in with the surrounding skin tone and texture.

SCIRM - self-complexing intelligent regenerative material.

Sebaceous glands – small glands in the skin that secrete lubricating oily matter (sebum) into the hair follicles to lubricate the skin and hair.

Skin graft - the transplantation of skin onto a damaged area of the body.

Split-thickness skin graft (STSG) – a skin graft that contains the epidermis and only part of the dermis.

Stem cell – an undifferentiated cell capable of renewing itself, and from which certain other kinds of cells arise by differentiation.

Stem cell niche - the microenvironment within a tissue that interacts with stem cells to signal cell growth, development, renewal, and differentiation.

Tissue engineering triad – the three components of tissue engineering, as historically taught, requiring the use of a scaffold, a signal such as a growth factor, and a cell component such as a stem cell.

Urethral stricture - the narrowing of the urethra caused by injury, infection etc.

Xenografts – a tissue graft or organ transplant from a donor of a different species from the recipient.

Item 1A. Risk Factors.

Our business and operations are subject to many risks and uncertainties as described below. However, the risks and uncertainties described below are not the only ones we face. Additional risks and uncertainties that we are unaware of, or that we may currently deem immaterial, may become important factors that could harm our business, financial condition, or results of operations. If any of the following risks occur, our financial condition or results of operations could suffer.

Risks Related to Our BusinessFinancial Condition

IfWe will need additional funding to pursue the clinical developmentregulatory process for SkinTE and commercialization of our lead product candidate, SkinTE, is not successful, our ability to financesustain our operations, may be adversely affected.

Our near-term prospects depend upon our ability to effectively market our lead product candidate, SkinTE, and to demonstrate its safety and effectiveness in humans, as well as its superiority over existing therapies and standards of care. Our ability to finance our company and to generate revenues will depend in part on our ability to obtain favorable results in the planned clinical evaluations of SkinTE and to successfully develop and commercialize SkinTE.

SkinTE could be unsuccessful if it:

does not demonstrate acceptable safety and efficacy in humans, or otherwise does not meet applicable regulatory standards;
does not offer sufficient, clinically meaningful therapeutic or other improvements over existing or future therapies used to treat burns or other defects of skin tissues/integument for which it is being tested and evaluated;
is not capable of being produced in commercial quantities at acceptable costs or acceptable timelines; or
is not accepted as safe, efficacious, cost-effective, less costly, and preferable to current therapies in the medical community and by third-party payers.

If we are not successful in developing and commercializing SkinTE or are significantly delayed in doing so, our financial condition and prospects may be adversely affected and we may experience difficulties in raising the substantial additionalbe unable to raise capital requiredwhen needed, which would force us to funddelay, reduce, eliminate, or abandon our business.product development program.

We arereported an early stage company. Our limited operating history makes it difficult to evaluate our current business and prospects, and our profitability in the future is uncertain.

Our limited operating history hinders an evaluation of our prospects, which should be considered in light of the risks, expenses, and difficulties frequently encountered in the establishment of a new business in an industry with many market participants and intense competition, and in the shift from development to commercialization of new product candidates based on innovative technologies.

We have a history of operating losses and may never achieve or sustain profitability.

We have incurred significant operating losses, and may continue to incur significant operating losses over the next several years. We incurred a net loss of $65.4$33.7 million for the year ended OctoberDecember 31, 2018. Our2021, and on that date we had had an accumulated deficit of $508.4 million. We believe our cash and cash equivalents at December 31, 2021, will fund our current business plan including related operating expenses and capital expenditure requirements through the end of the third calendar quarter of 2022. Accordingly, there is substantial doubt about our ability to achieve profitable operationscontinue as a going concern beyond that time unless we can raise additional capital from external sources.

We expect to incur significant operating costs in the near term as we pursue the regulatory process for SkinTE with the FDA, conduct clinical trials and studies, and pursue product research, all while operating our business and incurring continuing fixed costs related to the maintenance of our assets and business. We expect to incur significant losses in the future, will depend in large part upon the successful development and commercializationthose losses could be more severe as a result of our product candidatesunforeseen expenses, difficulties, complications, delays, and technologies. Factors impacting our ability to successfully develop and commercialize our product candidates include:other unknown events.

20
 approvals by or registrations with the FDA and other US and foreign government agencies;
our ability to educate and train physicians and hospitals on the benefits of our product candidates;
the rate at which providers adopt our technology and product candidates;
our ability to scale up our commercialization, including our selling and manufacturing activities;
our ability to complete the development of our product candidates in a timely manner;
our ability to obtain adequate reimbursement from third parties for our products and product candidates; and
other activities generally necessary to introduce and bring new products and medical technologies to market.

The likelihood of the long-term success of

If adequate funds are not available for our company must be considered in light of the expenses, difficulties, and delays frequently encounteredbusiness in the development and commercialization of new and innovative medical techniques and technologies, unknown and uncertain regulatory hurdles for a new and novel technology or technique, competitive factors and competition, as well as the uncertain nature of new business development and ongoing capital requirements.

Wefuture, we may have inadequate resources to complete the development and commercialization of our product candidates or to continue our development programs.

We are a development stage company, and thus we expect to continue to spend a significant amount of cash on research and development of our product candidates. Until we can successfully commercialize our product candidates and achieve significant revenue, if any, we will be required to raise additional capital to fund our ongoing operations. We may not be able to raise capital on acceptable terms,delay, reduce the scope of, or at all.

The cost and timing of completion of our preclinical and clinical development programs is uncertain.

We expect that a large percentage of our future research and development expenses will be incurred in support of current and future preclinical and clinical development programs. These expenditures are subject to numerous uncertainties in timing and cost of completion. We evaluate our objectives in preclinical models based upon our own development goals, but such evaluation may differ from requirements ofeliminate the plans for obtaining regulatory authorities. We may conduct early stage clinical trials, which may differ for each of our targeted marketslicensure or markets we may target in the future (i.e., presently, skin, bone, muscle, cartilage, fat, blood vessels, and nerves). As we obtain results from investigations, preclinical studies, or clinical trials, we may elect to discontinue or delay further evaluations for certain product candidates or programs to focus resources on more promising product candidates or programs. Completion of clinical trials may take several years and the length of time generally varies according to the type, complexity, novelty, and intended use of a product candidate. The cost of clinical trials is uncertain and may vary significantly over the life of a product or development project because of unanticipated differences, regulatory requirements, or other obligations, or challenges arising during clinical development.

Our product development programs are based on novel technologies. As a result, our product candidates are inherently risky.

We cannot guarantee that the results we see in clinical applications will be comparable to the preclinical results we have observed in animals for all our product candidates. We also cannot at this stage be certain of the safety of all product candidates that may be developed from our platform technology in humans.

We are subject to the risks of failure inherent in the development of product candidates based on new technologies. The novel nature of our products creates significant challenges regarding product development and optimization, manufacturing, government regulation, third-party reimbursement, and market acceptance. For example, if regulatory agencies have limited experience or concerns in approving cellular and tissue-based therapies for commercialization, the development and commercialization pathway for our therapies may be subject to increased uncertainty, as compared to the pathway for new conventional drugs.

Further, when manufacturing autologous cell and tissue-based therapies, the number and the composition of the cell population varies from patient to patient, in part due to the age of the patient, since the therapy is dependent on patient-specific physiology. Such variability in the number and composition of these cells could adversely affect our ability to manufacture autologous cell and tissue-based therapies in a cost-effective manner and meet acceptable product release specifications for use in a clinical trial or, if approved or registered, for commercial sale. Consequently, the development and regulatory approval or registration process for autologous cell and tissue-based product candidates could be delayed or may never be completed.

Our product candidates represent new classes of therapy that the marketplace may not understand or accept. Furthermore, the success of our product candidates is dependent on wider acceptance by the medical community.

The market may not understand or accept our product candidates. Our product candidates represent new treatments or therapies and compete with a number of more conventional products and therapies manufactured and marketed by others. The new nature of our product candidates creates significant challenges regarding product development and optimization, manufacturing, government regulation, and third-party reimbursement.

As a result, the development pathway for our product candidates and the commercialization of our potential products may be subject to increased scrutiny, as compared to the pathway(s) for more conventional products.

The degree of market acceptance of any of our potential products will depend on a number of factors, including:

The clinical safety and effectiveness of our products and their perceived advantage over alternative treatment methods;
Our ability to convince healthcare providers that the use of our products in a procedure is more beneficial than the standard of care or other available methods;
Our ability to explain clearly and educate others on the autologous use of patient-specific human cells and tissue-based products, and to avoid potential confusion with and differentiate ourselves from the ethical controversies associated with human fetal tissue and engineered human tissue;
Adverse reactions involving our products or the products or product candidates of others that are cell- or tissue-based; and
The cost of our products and the reimbursement policies of government and other third-party payers, including the amounts of reimbursement made for our products and the conditions for such reimbursement.

If patients or the medical community do not accept our potential products as safe and effective for any of the foregoing reasons, or for any other reason, it could affect our sales, having a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Our revenues from our regenerative medicine business will depend upon adequate reimbursement from public and private insurers and health systems.

Our success will depend on the extent to which reimbursement for the costs of our treatments will be available from third-party payers, such as public and private insurers and health systems, as well as the amounts that they will agree to reimburse. Government and other third-party payers attempt to contain healthcare costs by limiting both coverage and the level of reimbursement, and the amount of reimbursement for new treatments. Therefore, significant uncertainty usually exists as to the reimbursement status of new healthcare treatments. If we are not successful in obtaining adequate reimbursement for our treatments from these third-party payers, the market’s acceptance of our treatments could be adversely affected. Inadequate reimbursement levels also likely would create downward price pressure on our treatments. Even if we succeed in obtaining widespread reimbursement for our treatments at adequate pricing, future changes in reimbursement policies could have a negative impact on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Commercial third-party payers and government payers are increasingly attempting to contain healthcare costs by demanding price discounts, including by limiting coverage on which products they will pay for and the amounts that they will pay for new products, and by creating conditions to reimbursement, such as coverage eligibility requirements based upon clinical evidence development involving research studies and the collection of physician decision impact and patient outcomes data. Because of these cost-containment trends, commercial third-party payers and government payers that currently provide or in the future may provide reimbursement for one or more of our product candidates may reduce, suspend, revoke, or discontinue payments or coverage at any time, including those payers that designate one or more of our product candidates as experimental and investigational. Payers may also create conditions to coverage or contract with third-party vendors to manage laboratory benefit coverage, in both cases creating burdens for ordering by physicians and patients that may make our product candidates more difficult to sell. The percentage of submitted claims that are ultimately paid, the length of time to receive payment on claims, and the average reimbursement of those paid claims, is likely to vary from period to period. Finally, payers may demand discounts or offer reimbursement that minimizes our ability to sell our products profitably, or simply choose to not cover or reimburse our products at all.

As a result, there is significant uncertainty surrounding whether the use of products that incorporate new technology, such as our product candidates, will be eligible for coverage by commercial third-party payers and government payers or, if eligible for coverage, what the reimbursement rates will be for these product candidates. The fact that a product has been approved for reimbursement in the past, or has received FDA approval for any particular indicationSkinTE or in any particular jurisdiction, does not guarantee that such product will remain approved for reimbursement or that similar or additional products will be approved in the future. Reimbursement of our existing and future products by commercial third-party payers and government payers may depend on a number of factors, including a payer’s determination that our existing and future products are:

not experimental or investigational;
medically reasonable and necessary;
appropriate for the specific patient;
cost effective;
supported by peer-reviewed publications;
included in clinical practice guidelines and pathways; and
supported by clinical utility and health economic studies demonstrating improved outcomes and cost effectiveness.

Market acceptance, sales of products based upon our platform technology, and our profitability may depend on reimbursement policies and healthcare reform measures. Several entities conduct technology assessments and provide the results of their assessments for informational purposes to other parties. These assessments may be used by third-party payers and healthcare providers as grounds to deny coverage for a product. The levels at which government authorities and third-party payers, such as private health insurers and health maintenance organizations, may reimburse the price patients pay for such products could affect whether we are able to commercialize our product candidates. Our product candidates may receive negative assessments that may impact our ability to receive reimbursement of the test. Since each payer makes its own decision as to whether to establish a policy to reimburse our test, seeking these approvals may be a time-consuming and costly process. We cannot be sure that reimbursement in the United States or elsewhere will be available for any of our product candidates in the future. If reimbursement is not available or is limited, we may not be able to commercialize our product candidates.

The United States and foreign governments continue to propose and pass legislation designed to reduce the cost of healthcare. We expect that there will continue to be federal and state proposals to implement governmental controls or impose healthcare requirements. In addition, the Medicare program and increasing emphasis on managed or accountable care in the United States will continue to put pressure on product utilization and pricing. Utilization and cost control initiatives could decrease the volume of orders and payment that we would receive for any products in the future, which would limit our revenue and profitability. If we are unable to obtain reimbursement approval from commercial third-party payers and Medicare and Medicaid programs for our product candidates, or if the amount reimbursed is inadequate, our ability to generate revenues could be limited.

We are subject to numerous federal and state healthcare laws and regulations, and a failure to comply with such laws and regulations could have an adverse effect on our business and our ability to compete in the marketplace.

There are numerous laws and regulations that govern the means by which companies in the healthcare industry may market their treatments to healthcare professionals and may compete by discounting the prices of their treatments, including for example, the federal Anti-Kickback Statute, the federal False Claims Act (“FCA”), and state law equivalents to these federal laws that are meant to protect against fraud and abuse and analogous laws in foreign countries. Violations of these laws are punishable by criminal and civil sanctions, including, but not limited to, in some instances civil and criminal penalties, damages, fines, and exclusion from participation in federal and state healthcare programs, including Medicare and Medicaid. In addition, federal and state laws are also sometimes open to interpretation. Accordingly, we could potentially face legal risks if our interpretation differs from those of enforcement authorities. Further, from time to time we may find ourselves at a competitive disadvantage if our interpretation differs from that of our competitors.

Specifically, anti-kickback laws and regulations prohibit any knowing and willful offer, payment, solicitation or receipt of any form of remuneration (direct or indirect, in cash or in kind) in return for the referral, use, ordering, or recommending of the use of a product or service for which payment may be made by Medicare, Medicaid or other Government-sponsored healthcare programs. We have entered into consulting agreements, research agreements and product development agreements with physicians, including some who may order our products or make decisions to use them. In addition, some of these physicians own our stock, which they purchased in arm’s length transactions on terms identical to those offered to non-physicians, or received stock awards from us as consideration for services performed by them. While these transactions were structured with the intention of complying with all applicable laws, including state anti-referral laws and other applicable anti-kickback laws, it is possible that regulatory or enforcement agencies or courts may in the future view these transactions as prohibited arrangements that must be restructured or for which we would be subject to other significant civil or criminal penalties. There can be no assurance that regulatory or enforcement authorities will view these arrangements as following applicable laws or that one or more of our employees or agents will not disregard the rules we have established. Because our strategy relies on the involvement of physicians who consult with us on the design of our potential products, perform clinical research on our behalf, or educate the market about the efficacy and uses of our potential products, we could be materially impacted if regulatory or enforcement agencies or courts interpret our financial relationships with physicians who refer or order our potential products to be in violation of applicable laws and determine that we would be unable to achieve compliance with such applicable laws. This could harm our reputation and the reputationscontinue operations over a longer term, any of the physicians we engage to provide services on our behalf. In addition, the cost of noncompliance with these laws could be substantial since we could be subject to monetary fines and civil or criminal penalties, and we could also be excluded from federally-funded healthcare programs, including Medicare and Medicaid, for non-compliance. Further, even the costs of defending investigations of noncompliance could be substantial.

Also, the FCA imposes civil liability on any person or entity that submits, or causes the submission of, a false or fraudulent claim to the federal government. Damages under the FCA can be significant and consist of the imposition of fines and penalties. The FCA also allows a private individual or entity (i.e., a whistleblower) with knowledge of past or present fraud against the federal government to sue on behalf of the government and to be paid a portion of the government’s recovery, which can include both civil penalties and up to three times the amount of the government’s damages (usually the amount reimbursed by federal healthcare programs). The U.S. Department of Justice on behalf of the government takes the position that the marketing and promotional practices of life sciences product manufacturers, including the off-label promotion of products, the provision of inaccurate or misleading reimbursement guidance, or the payment of prohibited kickbacks to doctors or other referral sources may cause the submission of improper claims to federal and state healthcare entitlement programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, by health care providers that use the manufacturer’s products, which results in a violation of the FCA. In certain cases, manufacturers have entered into criminal and civil settlements with the federal government under which they entered into plea agreements, paid substantial monetary amounts, and entered into corporate integrity agreements that require, among other things, substantial reporting and remedial actions going forward.

In addition, there has been a recent trend of increased federal and state regulation of payments made to physicians and other health care providers. In addition to federal laws, some states, such as California, Massachusetts, and Vermont, mandate implementation of commercial compliance programs, along with the tracking and reporting of gifts, compensation, and other remuneration to physicians. The shifting commercial compliance environment and the need to build and maintain robust and expandable systems to comply with different compliance or reporting requirements in multiple jurisdictions increase the possibility that a healthcare company may run afoul of one or more of the requirements.

The scope and enforcement of all these laws is uncertain and subject to rapid change, especially considering the lack of applicable precedent and regulations. There can be no assurance that federal or state regulatory or enforcement authorities will not investigate or challenge our current or future activities under these laws. Any investigation or challenge couldwould have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, and results of operations. Any state or federal regulatory or enforcement review of us, regardless of the outcome, would be costly and time consuming. Additionally, we cannot predict the impact of any changes in these laws, whether these changes are retroactive or will have effect on a going-forward basis only.operation.

We operatediscontinued sales of SkinTE and COVID-19 testing, and may make a disposition of IBEX, so we will be entirely dependent on capital obtained from outside sources to fund our operations.

We discontinued sales of SkinTE as a 361 HCT/P product at the end of May 2021 and discontinued COVID-19 testing through Arches in August 2021, and it is likely there will be some disposition of IBEX in 2022. As a highly competitive and evolving field and face competitionresult of these developments, in the near term we may not be engaged in any revenue generating activity that would contribute to defraying our operating costs, which will make us entirely dependent on capital obtained from regenerative medicine, biotech, and pharmaceutical companies, tissue engineering entities, tissue processors and medical device manufacturers,external sources to fund our operations. The inability to obtain capital as well as new market entrants.

We operateneeded to fund our operations could result in a very competitive and continually evolving field. Competition from other regenerative medicine, biotech, and pharmaceutical companies, tissue engineering entities, tissue processors, medical device companies and from research and academic institutions is intense, expected to increase, subject to rapid change, and could be significantly affected by new product introductions. Our failure to compete effectivelyus curtailing or ceasing operations, which would have a material and adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operation, and the value of an investment in us.

Our wholly owned subsidiary accepted a loan under the CARES Act pursuant to the Paycheck Protection Program (“PPP”), and the loan may subject us to challenges, audits, or investigations regarding qualification for the loan, any of which could reduce our liquidity and have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, and results of operations.

On April 12, 2020, our subsidiary PolarityTE MD, Inc. (the “PTE-MD”) entered into a promissory note offered by a bank (the “Lender”) evidencing an unsecured loan in the amount of $3,576,145 made to PTE-MD under the PPP (the “Loan”). On October 15, 2020, PTE-MD applied to the Lender for forgiveness of the PPP Loan in its entirety (as provided for in the CARES Act) based on PTE-MD’s use of the PPP Loan for payroll costs, rent, and utilities. On October 26, 2020, PTE-MD was advised that the Lender approved the application, and that the Lender was submitting the application to the Small Business Administration (“SBA”) for a final decision. The SBA subsequently approved PTE-MD’s application for forgiveness of the PPP Loan, and the principal and interest of $3,612,376 was fully paid by the SBA on June 12, 2021.

Pursuant to the requirements under the CARES Act, in connection with the PPP Loan PTE-MD certified that current economic uncertainty made the Loan request necessary to support the ongoing operations of PTE-MD. We believe that certification was made in a manner consistent with SBA guidance that borrowers must make the certification in good faith, taking into account their current business activity and their ability to access other sources of liquidity sufficient to support their ongoing operations in a manner that is not significantly detrimental to the business. In connection with PTE-MD’s application for forgiveness of the PPP Loan, it provided information on the use of the PPP Loan proceeds for payroll costs, rent, and utilities, which are permitted uses to qualify for forgiveness of the loan.

Under the CARES Act, the SBA may review any PPP loan of any size at any time at its discretion. On September 17, 2021, PTE-MD received notice from the Lender that the SBA is continuing to review the PPP Loan. As part of this review, the SBA requested that PTE-MD provide documents that it is required to maintain but may not have been required to submit with its application for the PPP Loan. These documents included an affiliation worksheet showing the relationship between PolarityTE and PTE-MD and affiliated subsidiaries, documents showing the use of the PPP Loan proceeds, documents showing PTE-MD’s calculation of the loan amount it requested in its loan application, its federal tax returns, and documents showing employee compensation information. PTE-MD submitted the documents to the SBA through the Lender on September 28, 2021.

There is no assurance the SBA will conclude PTE-MD properly applied for, and used the proceeds of, the PPP Loan. If there is any adverse finding in the SBA review or if PTE-MD were alleged, or determined, not to qualify for the Loan or alleged, or found, to have made false certifications in connection with the PPP Loan and its forgiveness, PTE-MD could be required to return the full amount of the Loan, which would reduce its liquidity, and could subject it to fines and penalties, and exclusion from government contracts. In particular, PTE-MD may become subject to actions under the FCA, including its qui tam provisions, which, among other things, prohibits persons from knowingly filing, or knowingly causing to be filed, a false statement, or knowingly using a false statement, to obtain payment from the federal government. Violations of the FCA are subject to treble damages and penalties. In the case of an SBA loan, the government could allege that single damages are the amount of the loan and interest thereon (or more), which under the FCA could then be trebled. Substantial penalties must also be imposed for each submitted false statement when a defendant loses an FCA trial. FCA cases may be initiated by the U.S. Department of Justice or by private persons or entities, often called “whistleblowers,” who bring the action on behalf of the U.S. PTE-MD may also face enforcement arising under other federal statutes, including criminal laws, and administrative actions and investigations initiated by SBA or other governmental entities. Furthermore, if PTE-MD is identified as an entity that the media, government officials, or others seek to portray as a business that should not have availed itself of PPP funding, PTE-MD may face negative publicity, which could have a materially adverse impact on its business and operations and on PolarityTE’s business and operations as its parent. Generally, the cost of defending claims under the FCA, regardless of merit, could be substantial, even as much as the PPP loan proceeds.

21

Risks Related to our Research & Development, Clinical, and Commercialization Activities

Our product is subject to extensive regulation by the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities, which can be costly and time consuming, cause unanticipated delays or prevent the receipt of the required licensures and approvals to commercialize our product.

The preclinical and clinical development, manufacturing, labeling, storage, record-keeping, advertising, promotion, export, marketing, and distribution of SkinTE is subject to extensive regulation by the FDA and other U.S. regulatory agencies, or comparable authorities in foreign markets. In the U.S., we are not permitted, directly or through others, to market our product until the FDA approves a BLA for SkinTE and licenses the product. Similar approval is required in foreign jurisdictions. The process of obtaining these approvals is uncertain, dependent on future clinical trial results, expensive, often takes many years, and can vary substantially based upon the type, complexity, and novelty of the product candidate involved. Approval policies or regulations may change and may be influenced by the results of other similar or competitive products, making it more difficult for us to achieve such approval in a timely manner or at all. Any guidance that may result from FDA advisory committee discussions may make it more difficult or expensive to develop and commercialize SkinTE. In addition, as a company, we have not previously filed a BLA with the FDA or filed a similar application with other foreign regulatory agencies. This lack of experience may impede our ability to obtain FDA or other foreign regulatory agency licensure or approval in a timely manner, if at all, for our product.

Despite the time and expense invested, regulatory approval is never guaranteed. The FDA or comparable foreign authorities can delay, limit, or deny approval or licensure of a product candidate for many reasons, including:

a product candidate for a BLA may not be deemed safe, pure, and potent;
agency officials of the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may not find the data from non-clinical or preclinical studies and clinical trials generated during development to be sufficient;
the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may not approve manufacturing processes or may determine that the manufacturing facilities are not compliant with cGMP; or
the FDA or a comparable foreign regulatory authority may change its approval policies or adopt new regulations.

Our inability to obtain these approvals would prevent us from commercializing our product.

The FDA regulatory approval process is lengthy and time-consuming, and PolarityTE could experience significant delays or other challenges in the clinical development and regulatory licensures or approval of its product.

We may experience delays or other challenges in commencing and completing clinical trials for SkinTE that would be necessary for product licensure or approval. We do not know whether planned clinical trials will begin on time, need to be redesigned, enroll trial subjects on time or in sufficient numbers, or be completed on schedule, if at all. Any of our future clinical trials may be delayed or precluded for a variety of reasons, including issues related to:

the availability of financial resources for commencing and completing planned clinical trials;
reaching agreement on acceptable terms with prospective contract research organizations (“CROs”) and clinical trial sites, the terms of which can be subject to extensive negotiation and may vary significantly among different CROs and clinical trial sites;
obtaining and maintaining approval of each reviewing institutional review board (“IRB”);
obtaining and maintaining regulatory approval for clinical trials in each country;
recruiting sufficient numbers of suitable trial subjects to participate in clinical trials;

22

competing priorities at clinical trial sites or departures of study investigators or personnel;
having trial subjects complete a clinical trial or return for post-treatment follow-up;
clinical trial sites deviating from trial protocol or dropping out of a trial;
adding new clinical trial sites;
developing one or more new formulations or routes of administration; or
manufacturing sufficient quantities of our product candidate for use in clinical trials.

Trial subject enrollment, a significant factor in the timing and success of clinical trials, is affected by many factors including the size and nature of the trial subject population, the proximity of trial subjects to clinical sites, the eligibility criteria for the clinical trial, the potential impact of COVID-19 or other pandemic, the design of the clinical trial, competing clinical trials and clinicians, and trial subjects’ perceptions as to the potential advantages of the product candidate being studied in relation to other available therapies, including any therapies that may be approved for the indications we are investigating. In addition, significant numbers of trial subjects who enroll in our clinical trials may drop out during the clinical trials for various reasons. We endeavor to account for dropout rates in our trials when determining expected clinical trial timelines, but we cannot assure you that our assumptions are correct, or that trials will not experience higher numbers of dropouts than anticipated, which would result in the delay of completion of such trials beyond our expected timelines, if at all.

We could encounter delays if physicians encounter unresolved ethical issues associated with enrolling trial subjects in clinical trials of our product candidate in lieu of prescribing existing treatments that have established safety and efficacy profiles. Further, a clinical trial may be delayed, suspended, or terminated by us, any reviewing IRB, the institutions in which such trial is conducted, the data monitoring committee for such trial, or by the FDA or other regulatory authorities due to a number of factors, including inadequate protocols or other information supporting an IND, failure to conduct the clinical trial in accordance with regulatory requirements, GCP, or our clinical protocols, inspection of the clinical trial operations or trial site by the FDA or other regulatory authorities resulting in the imposition of a clinical hold, unforeseen safety issues or adverse side effects, failure to demonstrate a benefit from using a product candidate, changes in governmental regulations, or administrative actions or lack of adequate funding to continue the clinical trial. Furthermore, many of the factors that cause, or lead to, a termination or delay in the commencement or completion of clinical trials may also ultimately lead to the denial of regulatory licensure or approval of a product. In connection with clinical trials, we face additional risks that:

there may be slower than expected rates of trial subject recruitment and enrollment;
trial subjects may fail to complete the clinical trials;
there may be an inability or unwillingness of trial subjects or medical investigators to follow our clinical trial protocols;
there may be an inability to monitor trial subjects adequately during or after treatment;
conditions of trial subjects may deteriorate rapidly or unexpectedly, which may cause the trial subjects to become ineligible for a clinical trial or may prevent our product from demonstrating the regulatory standard of safety, purity, and potency;
trial subjects may die or suffer other adverse effects for reasons that may or may not be related to our product being tested;
we may not be able to sufficiently standardize certain of the tests and procedures that are part of our clinical trials because such tests and procedures are highly specialized and involve a high degree of expertise;
the clinical trials may not be able to commence, or to proceed, because of problems with compliance with cGMP at the manufacturing facilities;
a product candidate may not prove to be efficacious in all or some trial subject populations;
the results of the clinical trials may not confirm the results of earlier trials;
the results of the clinical trials may not meet the level of statistical significance required by the FDA or other regulatory agencies;
there may be data discrepancies or documentation issues in the clinical trials that raise questions about data integrity or reliability; and
a product candidate may not have a favorable risk/benefit assessment in the disease areas studied.

We cannot assure you that any future clinical trial for our product will be started or completed successfully, on schedule, or at all. If we experience suspension or termination of, or delays in the completion of, any clinical trial for our product, the commercial prospects for the product will be harmed, and our ability to generate product revenues will be delayed or diminished. In addition, any delays in initiating or completing our clinical trials will increase our costs, slow down our product development and approval process, and jeopardize our ability to commence product sales and generate revenues. Any of these occurrences may harm our business, prospects, financial condition, and results of operations significantly.

23

Changes in funding for the FDA and financial condition.other government agencies could hinder their ability to hire and retain key leadership and other personnel, or otherwise prevent new products and services from being developed or commercialized in a timely manner, which could negatively impact our business.

Specifically, we face significant competitionThe ability of the FDA to review and approve or license new products can be affected by a variety of factors, including (i) government budget and funding levels, as well as government shutdowns, (ii) the ability to hire and retain key personnel and accept the payment of user fees, and (iii) statutory, regulatory, and policy changes. Average review times at the agency have fluctuated in both the regenerative medicinerecent years as a result. In addition, government funding of other government agencies that fund research and wound care space from multiple products, including ReCell, Integra Bilayer Wound Matrix, EpiFix, Apligraf, Dermagraft, Grafix, Epicel, and others. The availability and price of our competitors’ products could limit the demand and the price we are able to charge for our product candidates. We may not be able to implement our business plan if the acceptance of our product candidates is inhibited by price competition or the reluctance of physicians to switch from existing methods of treatment to our product candidates, or if physicians switch to other new drug or biologic products, or choose to reserve our product candidates for use in limited circumstances.

Our access to sensitive patient informationdevelopment activities is subject to complex regulationsthe political process, which is inherently fluid and unpredictable.

Disruptions at multiple levels and we would be adversely affected if we fail to adequately protect this information.

We receive, maintain and utilize personal healththe FDA and other confidentialagencies may also slow the time necessary for new products to be reviewed or licensed or approved by necessary government agencies, which would adversely affect our business. For example, over the last several years, the U.S. government has shut down several times and sensitive data as part of the treatments we provide. We have developed a web and mobile application through which our customers can communicate with physicians and others, which may involve sharing patient identifiable health information. The use and disclosure of such information is regulated at the federal, state and international levels, and these laws, rules and regulations are subject to change and increased enforcement activity,certain regulatory agencies, such as the audit program implemented by HHS under HIPAA. International laws, rulesFDA, have had to furlough critical FDA employees and regulations governingstop critical activities. If a prolonged government shutdown occurs, it could significantly impact the useability of the FDA to timely review and disclosure of such information are generally more stringent than in the United States, and they vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. Noncompliance with any privacy or security laws or regulations, or any security breach, cyber-attack or cybersecurity breach, and any incident involving the theft, misappropriation, loss, or other unauthorized disclosure of, or access to, sensitive or confidential information, whether by us or by a third party, could require us to expend significant resources to remediate any damage, interruptprocess our operations, and damage our brand and reputation, and could also result in investigations, regulatory enforcement actions, material fines and penalties, loss of customers, litigation, or other actionssubmissions, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, brand, reputation, cash flows,business. Additionally, over the last several years, the COVID-19 pandemic has caused unexpected increases in the FDA’s workload and operating results.has degraded the timeliness of many agency activities, including pre-submission interactions, product reviews, and pre-license inspections.

Our business depends on providerEven if we obtain and patient willingness to entrust us with health relatedmaintain regulatory licensure or approval for our product in one jurisdiction, it may never obtain regulatory licensure or approval for the product in any other jurisdiction, which would limit our market opportunities and other sensitive personal information. Events that negatively affect that trust, including incorrect or incomplete disclosure of our uses of their information, or failing to keep our information technology systems and sensitive information secure from significant attack, theft, damage, loss, or unauthorized disclosure or access, whether as a result of our action or inaction or that of third parties, could adversely affect our brand, reputation,business.

Obtaining and revenues,maintaining regulatory licensure or approval for our product in one jurisdiction does not guarantee that we will be able to obtain or maintain regulatory licensure or approval in other jurisdictions. For example, even if the FDA grants marketing approval for SkinTE, comparable regulatory authorities in foreign countries must also approve the manufacturing, marketing, and promotion of the product in those countries. Approval procedures vary amongst jurisdictions and can involve requirements and administrative review periods different from, and greater than, those in the U.S., including additional preclinical studies or clinical trials. Obtaining foreign regulatory approvals and compliance with foreign regulatory requirements could result in significant delays, difficulties, and costs for us and could delay or prevent the introduction of our product in certain countries. In many countries outside the U.S., a product candidate must be approved for reimbursement before it can be approved for sale in that country. In some cases, the price that we intend to charge for our product is also expose ussubject to mandatory disclosureapproval. If we fail to comply with the media, litigation (including class action litigation),regulatory requirements in international markets or fail to receive applicable marketing approvals, our target market will be reduced and other enforcement proceedings, material fines, penalties or remediation costs, and compensatory, special, punitive, and statutory damages, consent orders, or injunctive relief, anyour ability to realize the full market potential of our product will be harmed, which couldwould adversely affect our business, prospects, financial condition, and results of operations.

Even if our product candidate receives regulatory licensure or approval, our product candidate may still face future development and regulatory difficulties.

If our product receives regulatory approval, the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may still impose significant restrictions on the indicated uses or marketing of the product or impose ongoing requirements for potentially costly post-approval studies and trials or other risk mitigation measures. In addition, regulatory agencies subject a product, its manufacturer, and the manufacturer’s facilities to continual review and periodic inspections. If a regulatory agency discovers previously unknown problems with a product, including adverse events of unanticipated nature, severity or frequency, or problems with the facility where the product is manufactured, stored, tested, or released, a regulatory agency may impose restrictions on that product or PolarityTE, including narrowing product indications, requiring labeled warnings, or requiring withdrawal of the product from the market. Our product candidate will also be subject to ongoing FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities’ requirements for labeling, packaging, storage, advertising, promotion, record-keeping, import, export, clinical trial registration and results disclosure for post-market as well as pre-market trials, and submission of safety and other post-market information. If our product fails to comply with applicable regulatory requirements, a regulatory agency may:

issue warning letters or other notices of possible violations;

24

impose civil or criminal penalties or fines or seek disgorgement of revenue or profits;
suspend or terminate any ongoing clinical trials;
refuse to approve pending applications or supplements to approved applications filed by us or our licensees;
withdraw any regulatory licensures or approvals;
impose restrictions on operations, including costly new manufacturing requirements, or shut down our manufacturing operations; or
seize or detain product or require a product recall.

The FDA and comparable foreign authorities actively enforce the laws and regulations prohibiting the promotion of off-label uses and other unlawful promotion.

The FDA and comparable foreign authorities strictly regulate the promotional claims that may be made about products, such as SkinTE, if licensed or approved. In particular, a product may not be promoted for uses that are not approved by the FDA or comparable foreign authorities as reflected in the product’s approved labeling and may not be promoted with claims that are false, misleading, or inadequately substantiated. If we receive marketing approval for our product for its proposed indications, physicians may nevertheless use our product for their patients in a manner that is inconsistent with the approved label, if the physicians believe in their professional medical judgment that our product could be used in such manner.

However, if we are found to have promoted our product for any off-label uses, or with claims that are false, misleading, or not adequately substantiated, the federal government could levy civil, criminal, or administrative penalties, and seek to impose fines on us. Such enforcement has become more common in the industry. The FDA or comparable foreign authorities could also request that we enter into a consent decree or a corporate integrity agreement or seek a permanent injunction against us under which specified promotional conduct is monitored, changed, or curtailed. If we cannot successfully manage the promotion of our product, if licensed or approved, we could become subject to significant liability, which would materially adversely affect our business, financial condition, and results of operations.

PolarityTE, and any contract manufacturer it may engage in the future, are subject to significant regulation with respect to manufacturing PolarityTE’s product. Even once cGMP compliance is initially achieved, the manufacturing facility on which PolarityTE relies may not continue to meet regulatory requirements.

Entities involved in the preparation of products subject to BLA approval for clinical trials or commercial sale, including us and any contract manufacturer we may engage in the future, are subject to extensive regulation. Products sold commercially after BLA approval or used in clinical trials must be manufactured in accordance with cGMP. cGMP laws and regulations govern manufacturing facilities, processes, and procedures and the implementation and operation of quality systems to control and assure the quality of investigational products and products approved for sale. Poor control of production processes or facilities can lead to the introduction of contaminants or to inadvertent changes in the properties or stability of our product candidate that may not be detectable in final product testing. We, or our contract manufacturers, must supply all necessary documentation on a timely basis in support of a BLA or a change in manufacturing site after a BLA is issued on a timely basis and must adhere to cGMP statutory requirements and regulations enforced by the FDA or comparable foreign authorities through their facilities inspection program. The facilities and quality systems of our facility where we will manufacture SkinTE must pass a pre-license inspection for compliance with the applicable statutory and regulatory requirements as a condition of regulatory licensure or approval of our product. In addition, the regulatory authorities may, at any time, with or without cause, audit, inspect, or conduct a remote review of records or information about a manufacturing facility involved with the preparation of our product or the associated quality systems for compliance with the statute or regulations applicable to the activities being conducted. If our facility does not pass a pre-license plant inspection, regulatory licensure or approval of our product may not be granted or may be substantially delayed until any deficiencies are corrected to the satisfaction of the regulatory authority, if ever. If we engage contract manufacturers in the future, we intend to oversee the contract manufacturers, but we cannot control the manufacturing process and will be completely dependent on our contract manufacturing partners for compliance with the regulatory requirements.

25

The regulatory authorities also may, at any time following approval of a product for sale, audit, inspect, or remotely review records regarding our facility or the manufacturing facilities of our third-party contractors. If any such inspection, audit, or review identifies a failure to comply with applicable statute or regulations or if a violation of our product specifications or applicable statute or regulations occurs independent of such an inspection, audit, or review, we or the relevant regulatory authority may require remedial measures that may be costly or time consuming for us or a third party to implement, and may include the temporary or permanent suspension of a clinical trial or commercial sales or the temporary or permanent closure of a facility. Any such remedial measures imposed upon us or third parties with whom we contract could materially harm our business, financial condition, and results of operations.

If we or any of our third-party manufacturers fail to maintain regulatory compliance, the FDA or comparable foreign authorities can impose regulatory sanctions including, among other things, refusal to approve a pending application for a product candidate, withdrawal of an approval, or suspension of production. As a result, our business, financial condition, and results of operations may be materially and adversely affected.

Additionally, if supply from our facility or the facility of a future contract manufacturer is interrupted, an alternative manufacturer would need to be qualified through a BLA supplement, or equivalent foreign regulatory filing, which could result in further delay. The regulatory agencies may also require additional studies or trials if a new manufacturer is relied upon for commercial production. Switching manufacturing facilities may involve substantial costs and is likely to result in a delay in our desired clinical and commercial timelines.

These factors could cause us to incur higher costs and could cause the delay or termination of clinical trials, regulatory submissions, required approvals, or commercialization of our product. Furthermore, if our facility or future contract manufacturers fail to meet production requirements and we is unable to secure one or more replacement manufacturing facilities capable of production at a substantially equivalent cost or at all, our clinical trials may be delayed, or we could lose potential revenue.

If we fail to obtain and sustain an adequate level of reimbursement for our product by third-party payors, potential future sales would be materially adversely affected.

There will be no viable commercial market for our product, if approved, without reimbursement from third-party payors. Reimbursement policies may be affected by future healthcare reform measures. We cannot be certain that reimbursement will be available for our product. Additionally, even if there is a viable commercial market, if the level of reimbursement is below our expectations, our anticipated revenue and gross margins will be adversely affected. Third-party payors, such as government or private healthcare insurers, carefully review and increasingly question and challenge the coverage of and the prices charged for drugs. Reimbursement rates from private health insurance companies vary depending on the company, the insurance plan, and other factors. Reimbursement rates may be based on reimbursement levels already set for lower cost drugs and may be incorporated into existing payments for other services. There is a current trend in the U.S. healthcare industry toward cost containment.

Large public and private payors, managed care organizations, group purchasing organizations, and similar organizations are exerting increasing influence on decisions regarding the use of, and reimbursement levels for, particular treatments. Such third-party payors, including Medicare, may question the coverage of, and challenge the prices charged for, medical products and services, and many third-party payors limit coverage of or reimbursement for newly approved healthcare products. In particular, third-party payors may limit the covered indications. Cost-control initiatives could decrease the price we might establish for products, which could result in product revenues being lower than anticipated. If we are unable to show a significant benefit relative to existing therapies, Medicare, Medicaid, and private payors may not be willing to provide reimbursement for our product, which would significantly reduce the likelihood of our product gaining market acceptance.

We expect that private insurers will consider the efficacy, cost-effectiveness, safety, and tolerability of our product in determining whether to approve reimbursement and at what level. Obtaining these approvals can be a time consuming and expensive process. Our business, financial condition, and results of operations would be materially adversely affected if we do not receive approval for reimbursement of our product from private insurers on a timely or satisfactory basis. Limitations on coverage could also be imposed at the local Medicare carrier level or by fiscal intermediaries. Medicare Part D, which provides a pharmacy benefit to Medicare patients as discussed below, does not require participating prescription drug plans to cover all drugs within a class of products. Our business, financial condition, and results of operations could be materially adversely affected if Part D prescription drug plans were to limit access to, or deny or limit reimbursement of, our product.

26

Reimbursement systems in international markets vary significantly by country and by region, and reimbursement approvals must be obtained on a country-by-country basis. In many countries, the product cannot be commercially launched until reimbursement is approved. In some foreign markets, prescription drug pricing remains subject to continuing governmental control even after initial approval is granted. The negotiation process in some countries can be very long. To obtain reimbursement or pricing approval in some countries, we may be required to conduct a clinical trial that compares the cost-effectiveness of our products to other available therapies.

If the prices for our product are reduced or if governmental and other third-party payors do not provide adequate coverage and reimbursement of our product, our future revenue, cash flows, operating results,and prospects for profitability will suffer.

Current and future legislation may increase the difficulty and cost of commercializing our product and may affect the prices we may obtain if our product is approved for commercialization.

In the U.S. and some foreign jurisdictions, there have been a number of adopted and proposed legislative and regulatory changes regarding the healthcare system that could prevent or financial position. There can be no assurance that any such failure will not occur,delay regulatory licensure or if any does occur, that we will detect it or that it can be sufficiently remediated.

Manyapproval of our competitors have substantially greater resources than we do,product, restrict or regulate post-marketing activities, and we expect that all our product candidates will face intense competition from existing or future products.

All our product candidates face intense competition from existing and future products marketed by large, well-established companies (including but not limited to Avita Medical, Integra LifeSciences, Wright Medical Group, MiMedx, Osiris, Organogenesis, Allosource, MTF Biologics and Vericel). These competitors may successfully market products that compete with our product candidates, successfully identify product candidates or develop products earlier than we do, or develop products that are more effective or cost less than our products. These competitive factors could require us to conduct additional new research and development activities to establish new competitive product targets, which would be costly and time consuming. These activities would adversely affect our ability to effectively commercializeprofitably sell our product.

In the U.S., the Medicare Modernization Act of 2003 (“MMA”) changed the way Medicare covers and pays for pharmaceutical products. Cost reduction initiatives and other provisions of this legislation could limit the coverage and reimbursement rate that we receive for our product. While the MMA only applies to drug benefits for Medicare beneficiaries, private payors often follow Medicare coverage policy and payment limitations in setting their own reimbursement rates. Therefore, any reduction in reimbursement that results from the MMA may result in a similar reduction in payments from private payors.

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (“PPACA”) was intended to broaden access to health insurance, reduce or constrain the growth of healthcare spending, enhance remedies against healthcare fraud and abuse, add new transparency requirements for healthcare and health insurance industries, impose new taxes and fees on the health industry, and impose additional health policy reforms. The PPACA increased manufacturers’ rebate liability under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program by increasing the minimum rebate amount for both branded and generic drugs and revised the definition of Average Manufacturer Price, which may also increase the amount of Medicaid drug rebates manufacturers are required to pay to states. The legislation also expanded Medicaid drug rebates and created an alternative rebate formula for certain new formulations of certain existing products that is intended to increase the rebates due on those drugs. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, which administer the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program, also proposed to expand Medicaid rebates to the utilization that occurs in the territories of the U.S., such as Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands. Further, beginning in 2011, the PPACA imposed a significant annual fee on companies that manufacture or import branded prescription drug products and achieve revenuerequired manufacturers to provide a 50% discount off the negotiated price of prescriptions filled by beneficiaries in the Medicare Part D coverage gap, referred to as the “donut hole.” Legislative and profits.regulatory proposals have been introduced at both the state and federal level to expand post-approval requirements and restrict sales and promotional activities for pharmaceutical products.

There have been prior public announcements by members of the federal government regarding their plans to repeal and replace the PPACA and Medicare. For example, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 eliminated the individual mandate requiring most Americans (other than those who qualify for a hardship exemption) to carry a minimum level of health coverage, effective January 1, 2019. We are not sure whether additional legislative changes will be enacted, or whether the FDA regulations, guidance, or interpretations will be changed, or what the impact of such changes on the marketing approvals of our product may be. In addition, increased scrutiny by the U.S. Congress of the FDA’s approval process may significantly delay or prevent marketing approval, as well as subject us to more stringent product labeling and post-marketing approval testing and other requirements.

We depend heavily on our senior managementare subject to “fraud and we may be unableabuse” and similar laws and regulations, and a failure to replace key executives if they leave.

The loss of the services of onecomply with such regulations or more members of our senior management teamprevail in any adverse claim or our inabilityproceeding related to attract, retain and maintain additional senior management personnelnoncompliance could harm our business, financial condition, and results of operations.

In the U.S., we are subject to various federal and state healthcare “fraud and abuse” laws, including anti-kickback laws, false claims laws, and other laws intended, among other things, to reduce fraud and abuse in federal and state healthcare programs. The federal Anti-Kickback Statute makes it illegal for any person, including a drug or biologics manufacturer, or a party acting on its behalf, to knowingly and willfully solicit, receive, offer, or pay any remuneration that is intended to induce the referral of business, including the purchase, order, or prescription of a particular drug or biologic, or other good or service, for which payment in whole or in part may be made under a federal healthcare program, such as Medicare or Medicaid. Although we seek to structure our business arrangements in compliance with all applicable requirements, these laws are broadly written, and it is often difficult to determine precisely how the law will be applied in specific circumstances. Accordingly, it is possible that our practices may be challenged under the federal Anti-Kickback Statute.

27

The federal False Claims Act prohibits anyone from, among other things, knowingly presenting or causing to be presented for payment to the government, including the federal healthcare programs, claims for reimbursed drugs or services that are false or fraudulent, claims for items or services that were not provided as claimed, or claims for medically unnecessary items or services. Under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, we are prohibited from knowingly and willfully executing a scheme to defraud any healthcare benefit program, including private payors, or knowingly and willfully falsifying, concealing or covering up a material fact, or making any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement in connection with the delivery of or payment for healthcare benefits, items, or services to obtain money or property of any healthcare benefit program. Violations of fraud and abuse laws may be punishable by criminal or civil sanctions, including penalties, fines, or exclusion or suspension from federal and state healthcare programs such as Medicare and Medicaid, and debarment from contracting with the U.S. government. In addition, private individuals have the ability to bring actions on behalf of the government under the federal False Claims Act as well as under the false claims laws of several states.

Many states have adopted laws similar to the federal Anti-Kickback Statute, some of which apply to the referral of patients for healthcare services reimbursed by any source, not just governmental payors. In addition, some states have passed laws that require pharmaceutical companies to comply with the April 2003 Office of Inspector General Compliance Program Guidance for Pharmaceutical Manufacturers or the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America’s Code on Interactions with Healthcare Professionals. Several states also impose other marketing restrictions or require pharmaceutical companies to make marketing or price disclosures to the state. There are ambiguities as to what is required to comply with these state requirements and if we fail to comply with an applicable state law requirement, we could be subject to penalties.

Law enforcement authorities are increasingly focused on enforcing these laws, and it is possible that as we pursue our business we may be challenged under these laws. Efforts to ensure that our business arrangements with third parties will comply with applicable healthcare laws and regulations will involve substantial costs. If we are found in violation of one of these laws, we could be subject to significant civil, criminal, and administrative penalties, damages, fines, exclusion from governmental funded federal or state healthcare programs, and the curtailment or restructuring of our operations. If this occurs, our business, financial condition, and results of operations may be materially adversely affected.

If we face allegations of noncompliance with the law and prospects. Our operationsencounter sanctions, our reputation, revenues, and prospects depend in large part on the performance ofliquidity may suffer, and our senior management team, particularly Dr. Denver Lough, our Chief Executive Officer and Chief R&D Officer. In addition, we may notproduct, if approved for commercialization, could be able to find qualified replacements if his services are no longer available. We do not presently maintain “key-man” life insurance on any of our executives or key employees.

Many executive officers and employees in the regenerative medicine business are subject to strict non-competerestrictions or confidentiality agreementswithdrawal from the market.

Any government investigation of alleged violations of law could require us to expend significant time and resources in response and could generate negative publicity. Any failure to comply with their employers, which would limitongoing regulatory requirements may significantly and adversely affect our ability to recruit them to join our company. In addition, some of our existing and future employees are or may be subject to confidentiality agreements with previous employers. Our competitors may allege breaches of and seek to enforce such non-compete agreements or initiate litigation based on such confidentiality agreements. Such litigation, whether or not meritorious, may impede our ability to hire executive officers and other key employees who have been employed by our competitors and may result in intellectual property claims against us.

If serious adverse or inappropriate side effects are identified during the development or use ofgenerate revenues from our product, candidatesif approved. If regulatory sanctions are applied or with any procedures with which our product candidates are used, we may need to abandon or limit our development of those product candidates.

If our product candidates are associated with undesirable side effects or have characteristics that are unexpected, we may need to abandon their use or development or limit them to certain uses or subpopulations in which the undesirable side effects or other characteristics are less prevalent, less severe or more acceptable from a risk-benefit perspective. In addition, if any of the procedures with which our product candidates are used is determined to be unsafe, we may be required to delay, alter, or abandon our product development or commercialization.

We intend to, but may not be successful in, establishing and maintaining strategic partnerships.

We intend to enter into strategic partnerships in the future to enhance and accelerate the development and commercialization of our proposed products. We may rely on such partnerships to assist in launching, marketing, and developing our product candidates. However, we may face significant competition in seeking appropriate strategic partners and the negotiation process is time-consuming and complex. Moreover, we may not be successful in our efforts to establish a strategic partnership or other alternative arrangements for any future proposed products and programs because our research and development pipeline may be insufficient, our proposed products and programs may be deemed to be at too early of a stage of development for collaborative effort, or third parties may not view our product candidates and programs as having the requisite potential to demonstrate safety and efficacy or other requirements or goals that potential strategic partners may seek. Even if we are successful in our efforts to establish strategic partnerships, the terms that we agree upon may not be favorable to us, and we may not be able to maintain such strategic partnerships if, for example, developmentregulatory licensure or approval of a product candidate is delayednot granted or sales of an approved or registered product are disappointing.

Rapid technological change could causeis withdrawn, our business, to become obsolete.

The technologies underlying our product candidates are subject to rapidfinancial condition, and profound technological change. Competition intensifies as technical advances in each field are made and become more widely known. There is no assurance that others will not develop services, products, or processes with significant advantages over the products, services, and processes that we offer or are seeking to develop. Any such occurrence could have a material and adverse effect on our business, results of operations, and financial condition.

The success of any of our product candidates or enhancements to an existing product will depend on numerous factors, including our ability to:

properly identify and anticipate physician and patient needs;
develop and introduce enhancements in a timely manner;
adequately protect our intellectual property and avoid infringing upon the intellectual property rights of third parties;
demonstrate safety and efficacy in humans; and
obtain the necessary regulatory clearances, registrations, or approvals.

If we do not develop and, when necessary, obtain regulatory clearance, registration, or approval for product candidates or product enhancements in time to meet market demand, or if there is insufficient demand for these products or enhancements, our results of operations will suffer. Our research and development efforts may require a substantial investment of time and resources before we are able to determine the commercial viability of a new product, technology, material, or other innovation. In addition, evenbe adversely affected. Additionally, if we can successfully develop enhancements or new generations of our product candidates, these enhancements or new generations of product candidates may not produce sales more than the costs of development, and they may be quickly rendered obsolete by changing customer preferences or the introduction by our competitors of product candidates embodying new technologies or features.

To be commercially successful, we must convince physicians that our treatments are safe and effective alternatives to existing treatments and that our treatments should be accepted and used.

We believe physicians will only adopt our treatment if they determine, based on experience, clinical data and published peer reviewed journal articles, that the use of our treatment is a favorable alternative to existing and conventional methods, such as adopting the use of SkinTE as a substitute for skin grafting. Physicians may be slow to change their medical treatment practices for the following reasons, among others:

lack of evidence supporting additional patient benefits from our treatments over existing and conventional methods;
perceived liability risks generally associated with the use of new procedures and general resistance to change; or
limited availability or amounts of reimbursement from third-party payers.

In addition, while acceptance by the medical community may be fostered by broad evaluation via peer-reviewed literature, we may not have the resources to facilitate sufficient publication. We also believe that recommendations for, and support of our treatments by, influential physicians are essential for market acceptance and adoption. If we do not obtain this support or are unable to demonstrate favorable long-term clinical data, physicians and hospitals may not use our treatments, which would have a material and adverse effect on our result of operations and prospects.

If we are unable to establishgenerate revenues from product sales, and marketing capabilities or enter into agreements with third parties to sell and market our product candidates, we may notpotential for achieving profitability will be successful in commercializing them.

We recently formed a sales and marketing team for SkinTE, which we intend to further develop. Nevertheless, our experience in the sale and marketing of SkinTE and other potential products is very limited, and we cannot predict whether or to what extent our internal sales effort may be successful. To achieve commercial success for any product candidate, we must either develop an effective internal sales and marketing team or outsource these functions to third parties.

There are risks involved both with establishing our own sales and marketing capabilities and entering into arrangements with third parties to perform these services. For example, recruiting and training a sales force is expensive and time consuming and could delay any product launch. If the commercial launch of SkinTE, OsteoTE, or another product candidate for which we recruit a sales force and establish marketing capabilities is delayed or does not occur for any reason, we would have prematurely or unnecessarily incurred these commercialization expenses. This may be costly,diminished and our investment would be lost if we cannot retain or repositionneed to raise capital to fund our sales and marketing personnel.operations will increase.

If we enter into arrangements with third parties to perform sales, marketing and distribution services, our product revenues or the profitability of these product revenues to us are likely to be lower than if we were to market and sell any products ourselves. In addition, we may not be successful in entering into arrangements with third parties to sell and market our potential products or may be unable to do so on terms that are favorable to us. We likely will have limited control over such third parties, and any of them may fail to devote the necessary resources and attention to sell and market our potential products effectively and in compliance with applicable laws.

Significant disruptions of information technology systems or breaches of information security could adversely affect our business.

We rely to a large extent upon information technology systems to protect our intellectual property and to operate our business. In the ordinary course of business, we collect, store, and transmit large amounts of confidential information, including, but not limited to, our trade secrets and data, personal information, and intellectual property. The size and complexity of our information technology and information security systems make such systems potentially vulnerable to service interruptions or to security breaches from inadvertent or intentional actions by our employees or vendors, or from malicious attacks by third parties. Such attacks are of ever-increasing levels of sophistication and are made by groups and individuals with a wide range of motives (including, but not limited to, industrial espionage and market manipulation) and expertise. There can be no assurance that our efforts to protect our data and related information technology and intellectual property will prevent service interruptions or security breaches. Any interruption or breach in our systems could adversely affect our business operations or result in the loss of critical or sensitive confidential information or intellectual property, and could result in financial, legal, business, and reputational harm to us or allow third parties to gain material, inside information that they use to trade in our securities.

We face the risk of product liability claims and may not be able to obtain or maintain adequate product liability insurance.

Our business exposes us to the risk of product liability claims that are inherent in the manufacturing, processing, and marketing of human cellular and tissue-based products. We may be subject to such claims if our product candidates cause, or appear to have caused, an injury during clinical trials or after commercialization. Claims may be made by patients, healthcare providers, or others selling our product candidates. Defending a lawsuit, regardless of merit, could be costly, divert management attention, and result in adverse publicity, which could result in the withdrawal of, or reduced acceptance of, our product candidates in the market.

Although we have obtained product liability insurance, such insurance is subject to deductibles and coverage limitations and we may not be able to maintain this insurance. Also, it is possible that claims could exceed the limits of our coverage. If we are unable to obtain or maintain product liability insurance at an acceptable cost or on acceptable terms with adequate coverage, or otherwise protect ourselves against potential product liability claims or we underestimate the amount of insurance we need, we could be exposed to significant liabilities, which may harm our business. A product liability claim or other claim with respect to uninsured liabilities or for amounts in excess of insured liabilities could result in significant costs and significant harm to our business.

We may implement a product recall or voluntary market withdrawal, which could significantly increase our costs, damage our reputation and disrupt our business.

The manufacturing, marketing, and processing of our product candidates involves an inherent risk that our tissue products or processes do not meet applicable quality standards and requirements. In that event, we may voluntarily implement a recall or market withdrawal or may be required to do so by a regulatory authority. A recall or market withdrawal of one of our product candidates would be costly and would divert management resources. A recall or withdrawal of one of our product candidates, or a similar product processed by another entity, also could impair sales of our product candidates because of confusion concerning the scope of the recall or withdrawal, or because of the damage to our reputation for quality and safety.

We may not be able to effectively control and manage our growth.

Our strategy envisions a period of rapid growth. Our expected growth may impose a significant burden on our future planned administrative and operational resources. The growth of our business may require significant investments of capital and increased demands on our management, workforce, and facilities. We will be required to substantially expand our administrative and operational resources and attract, train, manage, and retain qualified management and other personnel. Failure to do so or to satisfy such increased demands would interrupt or would have a material adverse effect on our business and results of operations.

We may increasingly become a target for public scrutiny, including complaints to regulatory agencies, negative media coverage, including social media and malicious reports, all of which could severely damage our reputation and materially and adversely affect our business and prospects.

We focus on the research and development (including through preclinical, animal testing) of therapies used in the regenerative medicine and wound care space, and such therapies may be the subject of regulatory, watchdog, and media scrutiny and coverage, which also raise the possibility of heightened attention from the public, the media and other stakeholders. From time to time, these objections or allegations, regardless of their veracity, may result in public protests or negative publicity, which could result in government inquiry or harm our reputation. Corporate transactions we or related parties undertake may also subject us to increased media exposure and public scrutiny. There is no assurance that we would not become a target for public scrutiny in the future or such scrutiny and public exposure would not severely damage our reputation as well as our business and prospects.

Risks Related to Our Intellectual Property

We do not currently own any issued patents and ourOur ability to protect our intellectual property and proprietary technology through patents and other means is uncertain and may be inadequate, which could have a material and adverse effect on us.

Our success depends significantly on our ability to protect our proprietary rights in technologies that presently consist of trade secrets, patents, and patent applications. We currently have nothree issued patents and one allowed patent application in the U.S. relating to any of our product candidates.minimally polarized functional unit (“MPFU”) technology. We intend to expandcontinue our patenting activities and rely on patent protection, as well as a combination of copyright, trade secret, and trademark laws and nondisclosure, confidentiality, and other contractual restrictions to protect our proprietary technology, and there can be no assurance these methods of protection will be effective. These legal means afford only limited protection and may not adequately protect our rights or permit us to gain or keep any competitive advantage. In addition, our presently pending patent applications include claims to material aspects of our activities that are not currently protected by issued patents.benefit. The patent application process can be time consuming and expensive. We cannot ensure that any of the pending patent applications we acquire, havealready filed or that may be filed or acquired or may file will result in issued patents. Competitors may be able to design around our patents or develop procedures that provide outcomes that are comparable or even superior to ours. There is no assurance that the inventors of the patents and applications that we expect to own or license were the first-to-invent or the first-inventor-to-file on the inventions, or that a third party will not claim ownership in one of our patents or patent applications. We cannot assure you that a third party does not have or will not obtain patents that could preclude us from practicing the patents we own or license now or in the future.

28

The failure to obtain and maintain patents or protect our intellectual property rights could have a material and adverse effect on our business, results of operations, and financial condition. We cannot be certain that, if challenged, any patents we have obtained or ultimately obtain would be upheld because a determination of the validity and enforceability of a patent involves complex issues of fact and law. If one or more of any patents we have obtained or ultimately obtain is invalidated or held unenforceable, such an outcome could reduce or eliminate any competitive advantagebenefit we might otherwise have had.

In the event a competitor infringes upon any patent we have obtained or ultimately obtain, or a third party including but not limited to a university or other research institution, makes a claim of ownership over our patents or other intellectual property rights, confirming, defending, or enforcing those rights may be costly, uncertain, difficult, and time consuming.

There can be no assurance that a third party, including, but not limited to, a university or other research institution that our founders were associated with in the past, will not make claims to ownership or other claims related to our technology.

There can be no assurance that a third party, including but not limited to, a university or other research institution that our founders were associated with in the past, will not make claims to ownership or other claims related to our technology. We believe we have developed our technology outside of any institutions, but we cannot guarantee such institutions would not assert a claim to the contrary. Even if successful, litigation to enforce or defend our intellectual property rights could be expensive and time consuming and could divert our management’s attention. Further, bringing litigation to enforce our future patent(s)for patent enforcement subjects us to the potential for counterclaims. If one or more of our current or future patents is challenged in U.S. or foreign courts or the United StatesU.S. Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) or foreign patent offices, the patent(s) may be found invalid or unenforceable, which could harm our competitive position. If any court or any patent office ultimately cancels or narrows the claims in any of our future patents through any pre- or post-grant patent proceedings, such an outcome could prevent or hinder us from being able to enforce the patent against competitors. Such adverse decisions could negatively affect our future revenue and results of operations.

We may be subject to claims that our employees have wrongfully appropriated, used, or disclosed intellectual property of their former employers.

We employ individuals who were previously employed by other companies, universities, or academic institutions. We may be subject to claims that we or our employees have inadvertently or otherwise used or disclosed intellectual property, including trade secrets or other proprietary information, of a prior employer. Litigation may be necessary to defend against these claims. If we fail in defending any such claims, in addition to paying monetary damages, we may lose valuable intellectual property rights or personnel, which could adversely impact our business. Even if we are successful in defending against such claims, litigation could result in substantial costs and be a distraction to management and other employees. Any of the foregoing could have an adverse impact on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and cash flows.

We may be subject to claims that former or current employees, collaborators, or other third parties have an interest in our patents, patent applications, or other intellectual property as an inventor or co-inventor. Litigation may be necessary to defend against any claims challenging inventorship. If we fail in defending any such claims, in addition to paying monetary damages, we may lose valuable intellectual property rights, such as exclusive ownership of, or right to use, valuable intellectual property. Such an outcome could have a material adverse effect on our business. Even if we are successful in defending against such claims, litigation could result in substantial costs and be a distraction to management and other employees.

29

If we are unable to protect the confidentiality of our proprietary information and know-how related to SkinTE or any of our product candidates, our competitive position would be impaired and our business, financial condition, and results of operations could be adversely affected.

Some of our technology, including our knowledge regarding certain aspects of the processingmanufacture of ourSkinTE and potential product candidates, is unpatented and is maintained by us as trade secrets. To protect these trade secrets, the information is restricted to our employees, consultants, collaborators, and advisors on a need-to-know basis. In addition, we require our employees, consultants, collaborators, and advisors to execute confidentiality agreements upon the commencement of their relationships with us. These agreements require that all confidential information developed by the individual or made known to the individual by us during the individual’s relationship with us be kept confidential and not disclosed to third parties. These agreements, however, do not ensure protection against improper use or disclosure of confidential information, and these agreements may be breached. A breach of confidentiality could affect our competitive position. In addition, in some situations, these agreements and other obligations of our employees to assign intellectual property to the Companyus may conflict with, or be subject to, the rights of third parties with whom our employees, consultants, collaborators, or advisors have previous employment or consulting relationships. Also, others may independently develop substantially equivalent proprietary information and techniques or otherwise gain access to our trade secrets.

Adequate remedies may not exist in the event of unauthorized use or disclosure of our confidential information. The disclosure of our trade secrets could impair our competitive position and have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, and results of operations.

We may become subject to claims of infringement of the intellectual property rights of others, which could prohibit us from developing our treatment,product, require us to obtain licenses from third parties, orrequire us to develop non-infringing alternatives, andor subject us to substantial monetary damages. We have not obtained and do not intend to obtain any legal opinion regarding our freedom to practice our technology.

Third parties could assert that our processes, SkinTE, product candidates, or technology infringe their patents or other intellectual property rights. Whether a process, product, or technology infringes a patent or other intellectual property involves complex legal and factual issues, the determination of which is often uncertain. We cannot be certain that we will not be found to have infringed the intellectual property rights of others. Because patent applications may remain unpublished for certain periods of time and may take years to be issued as patents, there may be applications now pending of which we are unaware or that do not currently contain claims of concern that may later result in issued patents that SkinTE, our product candidates, procedures, or processes will infringe. There may be existing patents that SkinTE, our product candidates, procedures, or processes infringe, of which infringement we are not aware. Third parties could also assert ownership over our intellectual property. Such an ownership claim could cause us to incur significant costs to litigate the ownership issues. If an ownership claim by a third party were upheld as valid, we may be unable to obtain a license from the third party on acceptable terms to continue to make, use, or sell technology free from claims by that third party of infringement of the third party’s intellectual property. We have not obtained, and do not have a present intention to obtain, any legal opinion regarding our freedom to practice our technology.

If we are unsuccessful in actions we bring against the patents of other parties, and it is determined that we infringe upon the patents of third parties, we may be subject to injunctions, or otherwise prevented from commercializing potential products or services in the relevant jurisdiction or may be required to obtain licenses to those patents or develop or obtain alternative technologies, any of which could harm our business. Furthermore, if such challenges to our patent rights are not resolved in our favor, we could be delayed or prevented from entering into new collaborations or from commercializing certain product candidates, or services, which could adversely affect our business and results of operations.

If we are successful in obtaining patent protection, we may not be able to enforce those patent rights against third parties.

Successful challenge of any future patents such as through opposition, reexamination,inter partes review, interference, or derivation proceedings could result in a loss of patent rights in the relevant jurisdiction. Furthermore, because of the substantial amount of discovery required relating to intellectual property litigation, there is a risk that some of our confidential or sensitive information could be compromised by disclosure in the event of litigation. In addition, during litigation there could be public announcements of the results of hearings, motions, or other interim proceedings or developments. If securities analysts or investors perceive these results to be negative, it could have a substantial adverse effect on the price of our common stock.

We may not be able to protect our intellectual property in countries outside of the United States.U.S.

Intellectual property law outside the United StatesU.S. is uncertain and, in many countries, is currently undergoing review and revisions. The laws of some countries do not protect patent and other intellectual property rights to the same extent as United StatesU.S. laws. Third parties may challenge our patents or applications in foreign countries by initiating pre- and post-grant oppositions or invalidation proceedings. Developments during opposition or invalidation proceedings in one country may directly or indirectly affect a corresponding patent or patent application in another country in an adverse manner. It may be necessary or useful for us to participate in proceedings to determine the validity of our patents or our competitors’ patents that have been issued in countries other than the United States.U.S. This could result in substantial costs, divert our efforts and attention from other aspects of our business, and could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition.

30

General Risks Related to Registration or Regulatory Approval

We have one facility for the production of Our Product Candidates and Other Government Regulations

Our business is subject to continuing regulatory oversight by the FDA and other authorities, whose requirements are costly to comply with, andSkinTE for our failure to comply could result in negative effects on our business.

The FDA has specific regulations governing human cell, tissue, and cellular and tissue-based products, commonly known as “HCT/Ps”. The FDA has broad post-market and regulatory and enforcement powers. The FDA’s regulation of HCT/Ps includes requirements for registration and listing of products, donor screening and testing, processing and distribution (“Current Good Tissue Practices”), labeling, record keeping, adverse-reaction reporting, inspection, and enforcement.

We believe SkinTE and OsteoTE are appropriately regulated under Section 361 of the Public Health Service Act (so-called “361 HCT/Ps”) and that, as a result, no premarket review or approval by the FDA is required. If the FDA does not agree that one or more of our HCT/P products meet its regulatory criteria for regulation solely as 361 HCT/Ps, our product candidates will be regulated as drugs, devices, or biological products, and we could be required to withdraw those products from the market until the required clinical trials, are complete and the applicable premarket regulatory clearances or approvals are obtained.

Other products we develop may not be 361 HCT/Ps. As result, those product candidates would be subject to additional regulatory requirements, including premarket approval or clearance. Evenso if pre-market clearance or approval is obtained, the approval or clearance may place substantial restrictions on the indications for which the products may be marketed or to whom the products may be marketed, and may require warnings to accompany the product or impose additional restrictions on the sale or use of the product. In addition, regulatory approval is subject to continuing compliance with regulatory standards, including the FDA’s current good manufacturing practice (cGMP) or quality system regulations and adverse event reporting regulations.

If we fail to comply with the FDA regulations regarding our products and manufacturing processes, the FDA could take enforcement action, including, without limitation, any of the following sanctions:

Untitled letters, warning letters, fines, injunctions, consent decrees, product seizures, or civil penalties;
Operating restrictions, partial suspension or total shutdown of clinical studies, manufacturing, marketing, or distribution;
Refusing requests for clearance or approval of new products, processes, or procedures, or for certificates or approval to enable export of the same;
Withdrawing or suspending current applications for approval or clearance, or any approvals or clearances already granted; and
Civil or criminal prosecution.

It is likely that the FDA’s regulation of 361 HCT/Ps and other types of products (e.g., drugs, devices, or biologics) will continue to evolve in the future. Complying with any such new regulatory requirements, guidance or statutes may entail significant time delays and expense, which could have a material adverse effect on our business. While the FDA may issue new or revised guidance or regulations for 361 HCT/Ps, we do not know whether or when such revised draft or final guidance or regulations (if any) will be issued, the scope of such guidance, any new rules or regulations, whether they will apply to our technologies or products, or whether they will be advantageous or disadvantageous to us. In addition, even if it does not issue new regulations or guidance, the FDA could in the future adopt more restrictive interpretations of existing regulations or increase its enforcement activity, which may adversely affect our business.

We believe our FDA-registered SkinTE and OsteoTE products satisfy applicable criteria for regulation as a 361 HCT/P and are therefore exempt from FDA requirements for premarket approval or clinical studies. If the FDA disagrees with our interpretation of the relevant laws and regulations as they apply to these product candidates, and requires an Investigational New Drug application (“IND”) or Investigational Device Exemption application (“IDE”) for any of our product candidates, we may need to delay, abandon, or revise our current development plans, discontinue ongoing marketing, or recall products. The submission of an IND, Biologics License Applications (“BLA”), New Drug Application (“NDA”), or other medical device clearance or approval application would require us to compile significant amounts of data related to that regulatory process, as well as data from preclinical or clinical testing. We cannot guarantee that we will ever be able to secure such approvals, if required. Even if such approvals are obtained, regulation as a drug, biologic, or medical device would subject us to additional FDA post marketing requirements that are complex and involve substantial expense, such as compliance with drug, biologic, or medical device current Good Manufacturing Practice or quality system requirements.

The FDA regulates HCT/Ps under a two-tiered framework. Certain higher risk HCT/Ps are regulated as new drugs, biologics, or medical devices. Manufacturers of new drugs, biologics, and some medical devices must complete extensive clinical trials, which must be conducted pursuant to an effective IND or IDE. In addition, the FDA must review and approve a BLA or NDA before a new drug or biologic may be marketed. For most medical devices, including novel or high-risk medical devices, the FDA must approve a premarket approval application (“PMA”) or grant clearance to a premarket notification (“510(k)”) application prior to marketing of the device.

By contrast, the FDA exempts 361 HCT/Ps from these requirements if they meet certain specified criteria. We believe that SkinTE and OsteoTE, meet the criteria for regulation as a 361 HCT/P rather than as a new drug or biologic or medical device and, therefore, we do not currently expect that these products will be subject to the requirement for an IND or IDE or FDA premarket review and approval. Thus, our financial and business plans assume that we will not need to seek or obtain premarket FDA approval or clearance for SkinTE or OsteoTE. Rather, we will have to comply with the requirements for 361 HCT/Ps set forth in FDA regulations and develop adequate substantiation to support marketing claims we plan to make. The FDA could disagree with our belief that our product candidates, including but not limited to SkinTE and OsteoTE, are 361 HCT/Ps. The FDA conducted an inspection of our Salt Lake City, UT manufacturing facility in July 2018, and issued certain inspectional observations on Form FDA 483. We responded to those observations and are continuing a productive dialog with the FDA.

The Tissue Reference Group (“TRG”) is a body within the FDA designed to provide recommendations regarding whether a product candidate will be regulated as a 361 HCT/P. The Office of Combination Products (“OCP”) at FDA provides informal and formal opinions regarding the classification of products as 361 HCT/Ps or drugs, biologics, or medical devices. Product manufacturers are not required to consult with the TRG or OCP and instead can market their products based on their own conclusion that the product meets the 361 HCT/P criteria. We have not consulted the TRG or sought a formal opinion from the OCP.

The regulatory pathway for cell and tissue-based products is subject to significant uncertainty. The FDA’s criteria for regulation as a 361 HCT/P are complex, and the FDA has provided limited guidance on the meaning of certain terms used in the criteria, such as “minimal manipulation,” “homologous,” or “combination of the cells and tissues with another article.” In addition, SkinTE and OsteoTE, use new technology that may present a matter of first impression for the FDA in determining whether to require premarket authorization. Further, our product candidates may receive a high degree of scrutiny from the FDA. The FDA or Congress could change the relevant criteria or interpretations for determining which products qualify as 361 HCT/Ps or the regulatory requirements for HCT/Ps.

Additionally, it may be difficult to convince the courts to overturn any adverse decisions made against us by the FDA. Courts have recognized the longstanding principle that the FDA’s decisions on scientific matters, including the agency’s conclusion that a tissue processing procedure involves more than minimal manipulation, are entitled to substantial deference. This means that if the FDA disagrees with our conclusion that any of our product candidates should be regulated as a 361 HCT/P, and not as a new biologic, drug, or medical device, it may be very difficult to challenge the agency’s position in court.

Even if the FDA regulates our product candidates, including SkinTE or OsteoTE, as 361 HCT/Ps, we must still generate adequate substantiation for any claims we will make in our marketing. Failure to establish such adequate substantiation in the opinion of federal or state authorities could substantially impair our ability to generate revenue.

Although as 361 HCT/Ps, we may not need to submit certain products to the FDA for premarket approval or be subject to FDA requirements for labeling or promotion of new drugs, biologics, or medical devices, we still must generate adequate substantiation for claims we make in our marketing materials. Both the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) and the states retain jurisdiction over the marketing of 361 HCT/Ps (and other) products in commerce and require a reasonable basis for claims made in marketing materials. Through our planned preclinical and clinical studies, as well as other endeavors, we intend to generate such adequate substantiation for any claims we make about our products. If, however, after we commence marketing of any of our product candidates, including SkinTE or OsteoTE, the FTC or one or more states conclude that we lack adequate substantiation for our claims, we may be subject to significant penalties, or may be forced to alter our marketing of our product candidates in one or more jurisdictions. Any of this could materially harm our business. In addition, if our promotion of any of our product candidates suggests that the HCT/P is not intended for homologous use, the FDA might consider the product to be a new drug, biologic, or medical device. We will therefore be limited in the promotional claims that we can make about our product candidates.

Any changes in the governmental regulatory classifications of our product candidates could prevent, limit, or delay our ability to market or develop our product candidates.

The FDA establishes regulatory requirements based on the classification of a product. An HCT/P is a product containing or consisting of human cells or tissue intended for transplantation into a human patient. 361 HCT/Ps are not subject to any premarket clearance or approval requirements and are subject to less extensive post-market regulatory requirements. Because Several of our products are, or will be, designed to satisfy the standards applicable to 361 HCT/Ps, any change in the regulatory classification or designation of our products would affect our ability to obtain FDA approval or clearance for, and marketing of, those products.

If one of our products is deemed not to be a 361 HCT/P, FDA regulations will require premarket clearance or approval requirements that will involve significant time and cost investments by us. Further, there can be no assurance that the FDA will not, at some future point, change its position on current or future products’ 361 HCT/P status, and any regulatory reclassification could have adverse consequences for us and make it substantially more difficult or expensive for us to conduct our business by requiring extensive clinical trials, premarket clearance, or approval, and compliance with additional post-market regulatory requirements with respect to those products. Moreover, increased regulatory scrutiny within the industry in which we operate could lead to increased regulation of HCT/Ps, including 361 HCT/Ps. We also cannot assure you that the FDA will not impose more stringent interpretations, restrictions, or requirements with respect to products that qualify as 361 HCT/Ps.

Even if we successfully launch any product candidate, it will be subject to ongoing regulation. We could be subject to significant penalties if we fail to comply with these requirements, and we may be unable to commercialize our product candidates.

Even if the FDA does not object to the marketing of any of our product candidates as a 361 HCT/P and, therefore, without an NDA, BLA, PMA, or 510(k), we will still be subject to numerous post-market requirements, including those related to registration and listing, record keeping, labeling, current good tissue practices (“cGTPs”), donor eligibility, deviation and adverse event reporting, and other activities. HCT/Ps that do not meet the definition of a 361 HCT/P and, therefore, are required to be approved or cleared via an NDA, BLA, PMA, or 510(k) are also subject to these or additional obligations. If we fail to comply with these requirements, we could be subject to, without limitation, warning letters, product seizures, injunctions, or civil and criminal penalties. We have established our own processing facility, which we believe is cGTP compliant. Any failure by us to maintain cGTP compliance would require remedial actions, which could potentially include actions such as product recalls or delays in distribution and sales of our products, as well as enforcement actions.

We face significant uncertainty in the industry due to government healthcare reform.

There have been and continue to be proposals by the federal government, state governments, regulators and third-party payers to control healthcare costs (including but not limited to capitation – the generalized cap on annual fees for a type of service or procedure such as burn or wound care or rehabilitation), and generally, to reform the healthcare system in the United States. There are many programs and requirements for which the details have not yet been fully established or the consequences are not fully understood. These proposals may affect aspects of our business. We also cannot predict what further reform proposals, if any, will be adopted, when they will be adopted, or what impact they may have on us.

Risks Related to Our Manufacturing

Our failure to comply with the regulatory guidelines set forth by the FDA with respect to our product candidates could delay or prevent the completion of market entry, clinical trials, the approval or registration of any product candidates, or the commercialization of our product candidates.

We are subject to regulation and inspection by the FDA for cGTP, with respect to our 361 HCT/P products, and current Good Manufacturing Practice (“cGMP”), with respect to our product candidates that are not 361 HCT/Ps. Complying with cGTP or cGMP and will require that we expend time, money, and effort in production, recordkeeping, and quality control to assure that the product meets applicable specifications and other requirements. For any products for which we are required to obtain FDA pre-market approval, we, or our contracted manufacturing facility, must also pass a pre-approval inspection prior to FDA approval. Failure to pass a pre-approval inspection may significantly delay FDA approval of our product candidates. If we fail to comply with these requirements, we would be subject to possible regulatory action and may be limited in the jurisdictions in which we are permitted to sell our product candidates. As a result, our business, financial condition, and results of operations may be materially harmed.

We have limited experience in manufacturing products for commercial purposes and we cannot assure you that we will be able to successfully and efficiently manage the manufacturing of our product candidates, either ourselves or through third-party contractors with whom we may enter strategic relationships.

The manufacture of cell and tissue-based therapy products, such as our product candidates, is highly complex and is characterized by inherent risks and challenges such as autologous raw material inconsistencies, logistical challenges, significant quality control and assurance requirements, manufacturing complexity, and significant manual processing. Unlike products that rely on chemicals for efficacy, such as most pharmaceuticals, cell and tissue-based therapy products are difficult to characterize due to the inherent variability of biological input materials.

Additionally, we have limited experience in manufacturing products for commercial purposes and could experience difficulties in the continued manufacturing of our product candidates. Because our experience in manufacturing, sales, marketing, and distribution is limited, we may encounter unforeseen difficulties in our efforts to efficiently manage the manufacturing, sale, and distribution of our product candidates, or have to rely on third-party contractors, over which we may not have sole control, to manufacture our product candidates. Moreover, there can be no assurance that we or any third-party contractors with whom we enter strategic relationships will be successful in streamlining manufacturing operations and implementing efficient, low-cost manufacturing capabilities and processes that will enable us to meet the quality, price, and production standards or production volumes to achieve profitability. Our failure to develop these manufacturing processes and capabilities in a timely manner could prevent us from achieving positive results of operations and cash flows.

Our manufacturing operations in the U.S. depend primarily on one facility. If this facility is destroyed or we experienceit experiences any manufacturing or laboratory difficulties, disruptions, or delays, this could limit supply of our product or adversely affect our ability to sell products or conduct our clinical trials, and our business would be adversely impacted.trials.

All the manufacturingManufacturing of our product candidatesSkinTE takes place at our single U.S. facility. If regulatory, manufacturing, or other problems requirecause us to discontinue production operations at this facility, we willwould not be able to supply our product candidates to patients or have suppliesSkinTE for any clinical trials, which would adversely impact our business. If this facility or the equipment in it is significantly damaged or destroyed by fire, flood, power loss, or similar events, we may not be able to quickly or inexpensively replace our manufacturing capacity quickly or replace the facilityinexpensively, or at all. In the event of a temporary or protracted loss of this facility or equipment, we might not be able to quickly transfer manufacturing to anothera third party. Even if we could transfer manufacturing, from one facility to another, the shift would likely be expensive and time-consuming, particularly since an alternative facility would need to comply with the cGTP or cGMP (if applicable) regulatoryapplicable FDA manufacturing and quality standard requirements and, if applicable, FDA approval would be required before any products manufactured at that facility could be made commercially available.used.

Our success depends on members of our senior management team and the loss of one or more key employees or an inability to attract and retain skilled employees will negatively affect our business, financial condition, and results of operations.

Our success depends in part on our continued ability to attract, retain and motivate highly qualified management, clinical and other personnel. We are highly dependent upon certain members of senior management and other key personnel. Although we have entered into employment agreements with our executive officers, each of them may impairterminate employment with us at any time. The replacement of any of our key personnel likely would involve significant time and costs and may significantly delay or prevent the achievement of our business objectives and could, therefore, negatively affect our business, financial condition, and results of operations. We do not carry any key person insurance policies that could offset potential loss of service under applicable circumstances.

We have from time to time experienced, and we expect to continue to experience, difficulty in hiring and retaining employees with appropriate qualifications. Many of the companies with which we compete for experienced personnel have greater resources than we do. If we hire employees from competitors or other companies, their former employers may attempt to assert that these employees have or we have breached legal obligations, resulting in a diversion of our time and resources to disputes and litigation and, potentially, result in liability.

Job candidates and existing employees often consider the value of the stock awards they receive in connection with their employment. If the perceived value of our stock awards decline, it may harm our ability to obtain credit termsrecruit and retain highly skilled employees.

The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic could materially affect our operations, as well as the business or operations of third parties with whom we conduct business.

The impact of COVID-19, including the impact of restrictions imposed to combat its spread, could result in businesses shutting down, additional work restrictions, and reduced capacity and access to healthcare facilities, in particular as new COVID-19 variants such as the Delta and Omicron and other new variants spread. Depending upon the length of COVID-19 surges and resulting work restrictions and limitations on healthcare facilities, our suppliers.

Our revenuesfuture clinical trials for SkinTE may be dependentadversely affected by: (i) delays or difficulties in enrolling patients in our clinical trials approved under our IND; (ii) delays or difficulties in clinical site activation, including difficulties in recruiting clinical site investigators and clinical site personnel; (iii) delays in clinical sites receiving the supplies and materials needed to conduct the clinical trials, including interruption in shipping that may affect the transport of our reimbursement arrangementclinical trial product; (iv) changes in local regulations as part of a response to the COVID-19 pandemic that may provide us with extended payment terms. However, our financial condition may make it difficult forrequire us to continuechange the ways in which our clinical trials are to receive payment termsbe conducted, which may result in unexpected costs or discontinuance of the clinical trials altogether; (v) diversion of healthcare resources away from the conduct of clinical trials, including the diversion of hospitals serving as our suppliersclinical trial sites and hospital staff supporting the conduct of our clinical trials; (vi) interruption of key clinical trial activities, such as clinical trial site monitoring, due to limitations on travel imposed or vendors making demand for adequate assurance,recommended by federal or state governments, employers, and others, or interruption of clinical trial subject visits and study procedures, the occurrence of which could include a demand for payment-in-advance. If weaffect the integrity or reliability of clinical trial data; (vii) risk that participants enrolled in our clinical trials will acquire COVID-19 while clinical trials are unableongoing, which could impact the results of the clinical trials, including by increasing the number of observed adverse events; (viii) risk that clinical trial investigators or other site staff will acquire COVID-19 while the clinical trial is ongoing, which could impede the conduct or progress of the clinical trials; (ix) delays in necessary interactions with local regulators, ethics committees, and other important agencies and contractors due to obtain reasonable payment termslimitations in employee resources or if anyforced furlough of government employees; (x) limitations in employee resources that would otherwise be focused on the conduct of our material vendorsclinical trial because of sickness of employees or suppliers weretheir families or the desire of employees to successfully demand payment-in-advance,avoid contact with large groups of people; (xi) and interruption or delays to our clinical trial activities.

31

We may not be able to enforce our patent or intellectual property rights against third parties, which could adversely affect the trading price for our common stock.

Successful challenge of any patents or future patents or patent applications such as through opposition, reexamination, inter partes review, interference, or derivation proceedings could result in a loss of patent rights in the relevant jurisdiction. Unauthorized disclosure of our claims to our trade secrets could result in loss of those intellectual property rights. Furthermore, because of the substantial amount of discovery required relating to intellectual property litigation, there is a risk that some of our confidential or sensitive information could be compromised by disclosure in the event of litigation. In addition, during litigation there could be public announcements of the results of hearings, motions, or other interim proceedings or developments. If securities analysts or investors perceive that we have lost rights to our intellectual property or the results of these disputes are negative, it could have a materialsubstantial adverse effect on the price of our liquidity.common stock.

Risks RelatedIn the event that we fail to Our Common Stock

An active trading market forsatisfy any of the listing requirements of the Nasdaq Capital Market, our common stock may not continue to develop or be sustained.delisted, which could affect our market price and liquidity.

Although ourOur common stock is listed on the NASDAQNasdaq Capital Market. For continued listing on the Nasdaq Capital Market, we will be required to comply with the continued listing requirements, including the minimum market capitalization standard, the minimum stockholders’ equity requirement, the corporate governance requirements, and the minimum closing bid price requirement, among other requirements. On August 13, 2021, we received a deficiency letter from the staff of the Listing Qualifications Department (the “Staff”) of the Nasdaq Stock Market (“Nasdaq”) notifying us that we did not meet the $1.00 per share minimum bid price requirement for continued inclusion on the Nasdaq Capital Market pursuant to Nasdaq Listing Rule 5550(a)(2) (the “Minimum Bid Price Requirement”). In accordance with Nasdaq Listing Rule 5810(c)(3)(A), we were provided an initial period of 180 calendar days to regain compliance with the Minimum Bid Price Requirement, which ended February 9, 2022. On February 10, 2022, we received an additional notice from the Staff stating that, although we had not regained compliance with the Minimum Bid Price Rule by February 9, 2022, the Staff determined in accordance with Nasdaq Listing Rule 5810(c)(3)(A) that we are eligible for an additional 180 calendar days from the date of that notice, or NASDAQ, we cannot assure you that an active, liquid trading market for our shares will continueuntil August 8, 2022, to develop or be sustained. If an active market for our common stock does not continue to develop or is not sustained, it may be difficult for you to sell shares quickly or without depressingregain compliance with the marketMinimum Bid Price Rule. To regain compliance, the bid price for the shares or to sell your shares at all.

The trading price of the shares of ourCompany’s common stock has been andmust close at $1.00 per share or more for a minimum of 10 consecutive business days.

To resolve the noncompliance, we may continue to be volatile, and youconsider available options, including effecting a reverse stock split, which may not be able to resell some or all your shares atresult in a desired price.

Our stock price has been highly volatile during the fiscal year ended October 31, 2018, with closing stock prices ranging from a high of $38.97 per share to a low of $12.11 per share. The stock marketpermanent increase in general, and the market for biotech companies in particular, have experienced extreme volatility that has often been unrelated to the operating performance of particular companies. Because of this volatility, investors in our stock may not be able to sell their common stock at or above the price paid for the shares. The market price for our common stock may be influenced by many factors, including:

actual or anticipated variations in our operating results;
changes in financial estimates by us or by any securities analysts who might cover our stock;
the timing and results of our product development plans
failure or discontinuation of any of our development programs;
conditions or trends in our industry;
stock market price and volume fluctuations of comparable companies and, in particular, those that operate in the biotech industry;
announcements by us or our competitors of significant acquisitions, strategic partnerships, or divestitures;
developments or disputes concerning patent applications, issued patents, or other proprietary rights;
announcements of investigations or regulatory scrutiny of our operations or lawsuits filed against us;
capital commitments;
investors’ general perception of our company and our business;
recruitment or departure of key personnel;
announcements and expectations of additional financing efforts; and
sales of our common stock, including sales by our directors and officers or specific stockholders.

In addition, in the past, stockholders have initiated class action lawsuits against biotechnology companies following periods of volatility in the market prices of these companies’ stock. We are currently a party to such litigation and may be in the future due to price volatility. Such litigation could cause us to incur substantial costs and divert management’s attention and resources from the operation of our business.

If equity research analysts do not continue to publish research or reports or publish unfavorable research or reports about us, our business or our industry, our stock price and trading volume could decline.

The trading market for our common stock is influenced by the research and reports that equity research analysts publish about us and our business. Presently we have only limited research coverage by equity research analysts. Equity research analysts may elect not to initiate or continue to provide research coverage of our common stock, and such lack of research coverage may adversely affect the market price of our common stock. We have no control over the analysts or the content and opinions included in their reports. The price of our stock could decline if one or more equity research analysts downgrade our stock or issue other unfavorable commentary or research. If one or more equity research analysts ceases coverage of our company or fails to publish reports on us regularly, demand for our stock could decrease, which in turn could cause our stock price or trading volume to decline.

Sales of a substantial number of shares of our common stock could cause the market price of our common stock and is dependent on many factors, including general economic, market, and industry conditions, the timing and results of our clinical trials, regulatory developments, and other factors detailed from time to drop significantly, even if our businesstime in the reports we file with the SEC. It is doing well.

Salesnot uncommon for the market price of a substantial numbercompany’s shares to decline in the period following a reverse stock split. Furthermore, implementation of a reverse stock split requires approval of a majority of the outstanding voting power of our capital stock, and there is no assurance we can obtain that approval.

In the event that we fail to satisfy any of the listing requirements of the Nasdaq Capital Market our common stock may be delisted, and our current deficiency in meeting the Minimum Bid Price Requirement could result in our common stock being delisted in August 2022 if we are unable to resolve that deficiency. If our securities are delisted from trading on the Nasdaq Stock Market, and we are not able to list our securities on another exchange or to have them quoted on the Nasdaq Stock Market, our common stock could be quoted on the OTC Markets or on the Pink Open Market. As a result, we could face significant adverse consequences including:

a limited availability of market quotations for our securities;
a determination that our common stock is a “penny stock,” which would require brokers trading in our common stock to adhere to more stringent rules and possibly result in a reduced level of trading activity in the secondary trading market for our securities;
a limited amount of news and analyst coverage;
a decreased ability to obtain additional financing because we would be limited to seeking capital from investors willing to invest in securities not listed on a national exchange; and
the inability to use short-form registration statements on Form S-3, including the registration statement on Form S-3 we filed in February 2022, to facilitate offerings of our securities.

32

We will need to issue additional equity securities in the future, which may result in dilution to existing investors and investors purchasing securities in this offering.

We expect to seek the additional capital necessary to fund our future operations through public or private equity offerings, debt financings, and collaborative and licensing arrangements. To the extent we raise additional capital by issuing equity securities, including in a debt financing where we issue convertible notes or notes with warrants and any shares of our common stock to be issued in the public market could occur at any time. Ifa private placement, our stockholders may experience substantial dilution. We expect to sell additional equity securities from time to time in one or more transactions at prices and in a manner we determine. If we sell additional equity securities, existing stockholders may be materially diluted. In addition, new investors could gain rights superior to existing stockholders, such as liquidation and other preferences.

In addition, the market perceives thatexercise or conversion of outstanding options or warrants to purchase shares of capital stock may result in dilution to our stockholders intend to sell, substantial amountsupon any such exercise or conversion. As of March 25, 2022, we had a significant number of securities convertible into, or allowing the purchase of, our common stock, in the public market, the market priceincluding 9,836,067 shares reserved for issuance upon conversion of our Series A Convertible Preferred Stock, 35,500,843 warrants to purchase shares of our common stock, could decline significantly.

In addition, we have filed registration statements on Form S-8 registering the issuance8,911,879 options and rights to acquire shares of our common stock that are outstanding under our equity incentive plans, and 4,097,401 shares of common stock subject to options or other equity awards issued or reserved for future issuance under our equity incentive plans. Shares registered under these registration statements on Form S-8 are available for sale in the public market subject to vesting arrangements and exercise of existing options, the grant of new options in the future, and the restrictions of Rule 144 in the case of our affiliates.

The issuance of additional stock in connection with financings, acquisitions, investments, our stock incentive plans or otherwise will dilute all other stockholders.

Our amended and restated certificate of incorporation authorizes us to issue up to 250,000,000 shares of common stock and up to 25,000,000 shares of preferred stock with such rights and preferences as may be determined by our board of directors (the “Board”). Subject to compliance with applicable rules and regulations, we may issue our shares of common stock or securities convertible into our common stock from time to time in connection with a financing, acquisition, investment, our stock incentive plans or otherwise. Any such issuance could result in substantial dilution to our existing stockholders and cause the trading price of our common stock to decline.

Our executive officers and directors and their affiliates own a significant percentage of our issued and outstanding common stock and can exercise significant influence over matters submitted to stockholders for approval.

As of January 7, 2019, our executive officers and directors and their affiliates beneficially owned approximately 42.5% of our outstanding common stock. As a result, if these stockholders were to choose to act together, they could exert a significant degree of influence over matters submitted to our stockholders for approval, as well as our management and affairs. For example, these persons, if they choose to act together, could have significant influence on the election of directors and approval of any merger, consolidation, or sale of all or substantially all our assets, including a transaction on terms that other stockholders may desire.

Our Restated Certificate of Incorporation, our Restated Bylaws, and Delaware law could deter a change of our management, which could discourage or delay offers to acquire us.

Certain provisions of Delaware law and of our Restated Certificate of Incorporation, as amended, and by-laws, could discourage or make it more difficult to accomplish a proxy contest or other change in our management or the acquisition of control by a holder of a substantial amount of our voting stock. It is possible that these provisions could make it more difficult to accomplish, or could deter, transactions that stockholders may otherwise consider to be in their best interests or in our best interests. These provisions include:

we have a classified Board requiring that members of the Board be elected in different years, which lengthens the time needed to elect a new majority of the Board;
our Board is authorized to issue up to 25,000,000 shares of preferred stock without stockholder approval, which could be issued by our Board to increase the number of outstanding shares or change the balance of voting control and thwart a takeover attempt;
stockholders are not entitled to remove directors other than by a two-thirds vote and only for cause;
stockholders cannot call a special meeting of stockholders;
we require all stockholder actions be taken at a meeting of our stockholders, and not by written consent; and
stockholders must give advance notice to nominate directors or submit proposals for consideration at stockholder meetings.

In addition, we are subject to the anti-takeover provisions of Section 203 of the Delaware General Corporation Law, which regulates corporate acquisitions by prohibiting Delaware corporations from engaging in specified business combinations with particular stockholders of those companies. These provisions could discourage potential acquisition proposals and could delay or prevent a change in control transaction. They could also have the effect of discouraging others from making tender offers for our common stock, including transactions that may be in your best interests. These provisions may also prevent changes in our management or limit the price that investors are willing to pay for our stock.

A material weakness in internal control over financial reporting could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and liquidity.

As discussed in Item 9A -Controls and Procedures, we have identified material weaknesses in internal control over financial reporting through our evaluation of our controls at October 31, 2018. Our material weaknesses consist of:

insufficient internal controls related to information technology general controls in the areas of user access, user provisioning, and change management over certain systems that support the financial reporting process;
inadequate documentation of period end financial disclosure and reporting processes;
ineffective controls related to the documentation and completeness of the Company’s stock-based compensation expense; and

inadequate review procedures and segregation of duties over processing sales invoices.

A material weakness could result in a material misstatement of our annual or interim financial statements requiring a restatement of the affected financial statements. A material misstatement and resulting restatement entail numerous risks, including the following:

We could be subject to civil litigation, including class action shareholder actions arising out of or relating to a restatement, which litigation, if decided against us, could require us to pay substantial judgments, settlements or other penalties;
Negative publicity relating to a restatement may adversely affect our business and the market price of our common stock;
Management’s focus on achieving our business objectives may be diverted to addressing (i) the restatement (ii) customers’, employees’, investors’ and regulators’ questions and concerns regarding the restatement (iii) any negative impact on the Company’s public image with our customers and in the financial market caused by the restatement, and (iv) any subsequent litigation that may result from the restatement;
The SEC may review a restatement and require further amendment of our public filings; and
We may incur significant expenses associated with preparing and filing a restatement.

Each of these risks described above could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition, and liquidity.

Because we do not anticipate paying anyexpect to declare cash dividends on our common stock in the foreseeable future, capital appreciation, if any, will be your sole source of gains and you may never receive a return on your investment.

You should notstockholders must rely on an investment inappreciation of the value of our common stock to provide dividend income. Wefor any return on their investment.

While we have notin the past declared orand paid cash dividends on our commoncapital stock, we currently anticipate that it will retain future earnings for the development, operation, and expansion of our business and do not expect to date and have no plans todeclare or pay any additional cash dividends in the foreseeable future. We currently intend to retain our future earnings, if any, to fund the development and growth of our business. As a result, capitalonly appreciation if any,of the public trading price of our common stock, if any, will be your sole source of gain for the foreseeable future. Investors seeking cash dividends should not purchase our common stock.

We incur costs and demands upon management because of beingprovide a public company.

As a public company listed in the United States, we are incurring, and will continuereturn to incur, significant legal, accounting and other costs. These costs could negatively affect our financial results. In addition, changing laws, regulations and standards relating to corporate governance and public disclosure, including regulations implemented by the SEC and stock exchanges, may increase legal and financial compliance costs and make some activities more time consuming. These laws, regulations and standards are subject to varying interpretations and, as a result, their application in practice may evolve over time as new guidance is provided by regulatory and governing bodies. We intend to invest resources to comply with evolving laws, regulations and standards, and this investment may result in increased general and administrative expenses and a diversion of management’s time and attention from revenue-generating activities to compliance activities. If, notwithstanding our efforts to comply with new laws, regulations and standards, we fail to comply, regulatory authorities may initiate legal proceedings against us and our business may be harmed.investors.

Failure to comply with these rules also might make it more difficult for us to obtain some types of insurance, including directors’ and officers’ liability insurance, and we might be forced to accept reduced policy limits and coverage or incur substantially higher costs to obtain the same or similar coverage. The impact of these events could also make it more difficult for us to attract and retain qualified persons to serve on our board of directors, on committees of our board of directors or as members of senior management

Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments.

None.

Item 2. Properties.

Effective July 15, 2018, we entered intoPolarityTE is party to a commercial lease agreementCommercial Lease Agreement with Adcomp LLC (“Adcomp”) dated December 27, 2017 (the “Adcomp Lease”). The Adcomp Lease is for PolarityTE’s principal business facility and property located at 1960 S 4250 W, Salt Lake City, Corporation, pursuantUtah (the “Property”). The Adcomp Lease pertains to which we leased approximately 44,695 rentable square feet of office space at 123 Wright Brothers Drive in Salt Lake City, Utah. The initial term of the lease is two years, and may be extended for an additional term of five years by agreement of the parties. The base rent plus maintenance fees over the two-year term of the lease is $469,288 per year, or $39,108 per month.

On December 27, 2017, we entered into a commercial lease agreement with Adcomp LLC, a Utah limited liability company, pursuant to which we leased approximately 178,528 rentable square feet of warehouse, manufacturing, office, and lab space at 1960 S. 4250 West, Salt Lake City, UT.space. The initial term of the leaseAdcomp Lease is five years, and it expiresexpiring on November 30, 2022. We havePolarityTE has a one-time option to renew for an additional five years. The initial base rent under this lease is $98,190 per month ($0.55 per sq. ft.) for the first year of the initial lease term and increases 3.0%3% per annum thereafter. The current monthly base rent is $110,514. The initial lease rate on an extension of the lease is $113,830 per month with annual rent increases equal to 3% of the prior year’s lease rate.

Under the original terms of the Adcomp Lease, we have an option to purchase the Property at a purchase price of $17.5 million, which is waived unless we exercise such option on or before March 27, 2022. On December 16, 2021, we gave written notice of its election to exercise the purchase option to Adcomp. Once that notice was given, the Adcomp Lease states the Company and Adcomp are required to negotiate the terms of a purchase agreement covering property diligence, conditions of closing, the timing of closing, and other customary matters for a sale and purchase of improved real estate. In addition, as required by the Adcomp Lease we made an earnest money deposit of $150,000 that may be refunded if closing conditions or contingencies running in our favor are not satisfied or Adcomp defaults in its obligations under the Adcomp Lease or the purchase agreement for the Property. On March 14, 2022, the Company and Adcomp entered into a purchase and sale on the terms described above that provides for a closing of the transaction on November 15, 2022 (the “Adcomp Agreement”).

33

On October 25, 2021, we signed a Purchase and Sale Agreement, the terms of which were finalized on December 10, 2021, and subsequently amended by Amendment No. 1 thereto dated March 15, 2022 (the “BCG Agreement”), with BCG Acquisitions LLC (“BCG”). Under the BCG Agreement we agreed to sell the Property to BCG or its assigns after our purchase of the Property from Adcomp, if the parties could agree on the terms for BCG to demise the building located on the Property to establish a smaller space within the building for us to lease and agree on the terms of that lease (the “BCG Lease”). The BCG Lease and, therefore, the BCG Agreement, was finalized on December 10, 2021. On March 15, 2022, the parties agreed to amend the BCG Agreement to change the closing date of the transaction from March 2022 to November 2022.

Under the BCG Agreement the Company has agreed to sell the Property to BCG for $17.5 million, subject to the closing of our purchase of the Property from Adcomp. The BCG Agreement also provides for property diligence (which has been completed by BCG), conditions of closing, the timing of closing, and other customary matters for a sale and purchase of improved real estate. Under the BCG Agreement, BCG made an initial earnest money deposit totaling $200,000, which the parties subsequently agreed to reduce to $150,000, that will be refunded if we are unable to complete the purchase of the Property from Adcomp on a timely basis, closing conditions or contingencies running in favor of BCG are not satisfied, or we default in our obligations under the BCG Agreement for the Property. Under the BCG Lease, BCG will demise the building on the Property to create a space of approximately 62,500 square feet that the Company will lease for a term of 10 years with an option to extend for an additional 10 years. The parties may agree to increase the size of the space prior to commencement of the BCG Lease.

The closing of the transactions described above are subject to a number of risks and uncertainties including, but not limited to, the following: our completion of diligence and title review of the Property pursuant to the Adcomp Agreement; satisfaction of all closing conditions, including obtaining financing for the purchase, and closing on the purchase of the Property from Adcomp; and satisfaction of all closing conditions, including BCG obtaining financing for the purchase, and closing on the sale of the Property to BCG. Consequently, we may not be successful in closing the transactions described above. If the transactions fail for any reason we will continue to occupy the Property under an extension of the existing lease.

The foregoing description of the terms and conditions of the Adcomp Lease and the Purchase and Sale Agreement between us and BCG are not complete and are in all respects subject to the actual provisions of such agreements, copies of which are exhibits to this Annual Report.

In May 2018, we purchased two parcels of real property in Cache County, Utah, consisting of approximately 1.75 combined gross acres of land, together with the buildings, structures, fixtures, and personal property located at 1072 West RSI Drive, Logan, Utah. This facility is used for the operation of our pre-clinical contract services business.business, IBEX.

On October 19, 2018, we entered into an office lease with Lefrak SBN Limited Partnership, a Georgia limited partnership, covering approximately 7,250 square feet of space in the building located at 40 West 57th Street, New York, New York City. The lease is for a term of three years. The annual lease rate is $60 per square foot. Initially we will occupy and pay for only 3,275 square feet of space, and we are not obligated under the lease to pay for the remaining 3,975 square feet covered by the lease unless we elect to occupy that additional space. We have a sublease with the affiliate of one of our directors pursuant to which said affiliate will sublease 1,220 square feet at the same lease rate we pay to the landlord, and an option to expand the space occupied to an additional 2,753 square feet, which means we would be leasing 6,028 square feet from the landlord and subleasing 3,972 square feet to the affiliate of our director.

We lease office space in Hazlet, New Jersey at a cost of approximately $1,100 per month under a month to month lease agreement.

We expect that we will require additional facilities to continue our research and development program and commercialization efforts, and are actively seeking suitable locations.

Item 3. Legal Proceedings.

On June 26, 2018,September 24, 2021, a class action complaint alleging violations of the Federal securities laws was filed in the United States District Court, District of Utah, by Jose MorenoMarc Richfield against the Company and two directorscertain officers of the Company, Case No. 2:18-cv-00510-JNP21-cv-00561-BSJ. The Court subsequently appointed a Lead Plaintiff and ordered the Lead Plaintiff to file an amended Complaint by February 7, 2022, which was extended to February 21, 2022. The Lead Plaintiff filed an amended complaint on February 21, 2022, against the Company, two current officers of the Company, and three former officers of the Company (the “Moreno Complaint”“Complaint”). The Complaint alleges that during the period from January 30, 2018, through November 9, 2021, the defendants made or were responsible for, disseminating information to the public through reports filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission and other channels that contained material misstatements or omissions in violation of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and Rule 10b-5 adopted thereunder. Specifically, the Complaint alleges that the defendants misrepresented or failed to disclose that: (i) the Company’s product, SkinTE, was improperly registered as a 361 HCT/P under Section 361 of the Public Health Service Act and that, as a result, the Company’s ability to commercialize SkinTE as a 361 HCT/P was not sustainable because it was inevitable SkinTE would need to be registered under Section 351 of the Public Health Service Act; (ii) the Company characterized itself as a commercial stage company when it knew sales of SkinTE as a 361 HCT/P were unsustainable and that, as a result, it would need to file an IND and become a development stage company; (iii) issues arising from an FDA inspection of the Company’s facility in July 2018, were not resolved even though the Company stated they were resolved; and (iv) the IND for SkinTE was deficient with respect to certain chemistry, manufacturing, and control items, including items identified by the FDA in July 2018, and as a result it was unlikely that the FDA would approve the IND in the form it was originally filed. The Company believes the allegations in the Complaint are without merit, and intends to defend the litigation, vigorously. At this early stage of the proceedings, we are unable to make any prediction regarding the outcome of the litigation.

34

On July 6, 2018,October 25, 2021, a similarstockholder derivative complaint alleging violations of the Federal securities laws was filed in the same courtUnited States District Court, District of Utah, by Steven Battams against the same defendants by Yedid Lawi,Company, each member of the Board of directors, and two officers of the Company, Case No. 2:18-cv-00541-PMW21-cv-00632-DBB (the “Lawi“Stockholder Derivative Complaint”). Both the MorenoThe Stockholder Derivative Complaint and Lawi Complaint allegealleges that the defendants made, or were responsible for, disseminating information to the public through reports filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission and other channels that contained material misstatements or omissions in violation of Sections 1010(b) and 20(a) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and Rule 10b-5 adopted thereunder. Specifically, both complaints allegethe Stockholder Derivative Complaint alleges that the defendants misrepresented or failed to disclose that: (i) the status of oneIND for the Company’s product, SkinTE, filed with the FDA was deficient with respect to certain chemistry, manufacturing, and control items; (ii) as a result, it was unlikely that the FDA would approve the IND in its current form; (iii) accordingly, the Company had materially overstated the likelihood that the SkinTE IND would obtain FDA approval; and (iv) as a result, the public statements regarding the IND were materially false and misleading. The parties stipulated to a stay of the Company’s patent applications while toutingStockholder Derivative Complaint until (1) the unique naturedismissal of the Company’s technology and its effectiveness. Plaintiffs are seeking damages suffered by them and the class consistingComplaint described above, (2) denial of the persons who acquired the publicly-traded securities of the Company between March 31, 2017, and June 22, 2018. Plaintiffs have filed motions to consolidate and for appointment as lead plaintiff. On November 28, 2018, the Court consolidated theMoreno andLawi cases under the captionIn re PolarityTE, Inc. Securities Litigation(the “Consolidated Securities Litigation”), and requested the appointment of the plaintiff inLawi as the lead plaintiff. An order for appointment of the lead plaintiff has not been entered. After the lead plaintiff is appointed, the plaintiff will have 60 days to file an amended complaint. The Company believes the allegations in the Moreno Complaint and Lawi Complaint are without merit, and intends to defend the litigation, vigorously. The Company expects its first response will be to file a motion to dismiss after the firstComplaint, or (3) notice is given that any party is withdrawing its consent to occurthe stipulated stay of the plaintiff filing an amended complaint or the period for filing an amended complaint expires.Stockholder Derivative Complaint proceeding. At this early stage of the proceedings, the Company iswe are unable to make any prediction regarding the outcome of the litigation.

In November 2018, a shareholder derivative lawsuit was filed in the United States District Court, District of Utah, with the captionMonther v. Lough, et al., case no. 2:18-cv-00791-TC, alleging violations of the Exchange Act, breach of fiduciary duty, and unjust enrichment on the part of certain officers and directors based on the facts and circumstances recited in the Consolidated Securities Litigation. On November 26, 2018, the court issued an order staying all proceedings until after the disposition of motions to dismiss the Consolidated Securities Litigation.

On February 26, 2015, a complaint for patent infringement was filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas by Richard Baker, an individual residing in Australia, against Microsoft, Nintendo, a former subsidiary of the Company, and a number of other game publisher defendants. The complaint alleged that the Zumba Fitness Kinect game infringed plaintiff’s patents in motion tracking technology. The plaintiff represented himself pro se in the litigation and sought monetary damages in the amount of $1.3 million. The case was subsequently transferred to the Western District of Washington. On June 16, 2017, final judgment was entered in favor of the defendants finding that the accused products did not literally infringe the asserted patent and that plaintiff was barred from pursing infringement under the doctrine of equivalents due to prosecution history estoppel. The plaintiff appealed that decision to the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. On April 9, 2018, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the judgment of the District Court for the Western District of Washington. On May 7, 2018, the plaintiff filed a petition for panel rehearing and rehearing en banc by the Court of Appeals. The petition for rehearing was denied on June 8, 2018. The plaintiff subsequently filed a petition for a writ of certiorari with the Supreme Court of the United States, which was denied in November 2018. Consequently, this matter has been resolved without liability to the Company.

In the ordinary course of business, we may become involved in lawsuits, claims, investigations, proceedings, and threats of litigation relating to intellectual property, commercial arrangements, employment, regulatory compliance, and other matters. Except as noteddescribed above, at OctoberDecember 31, 2018,2021, we were not party to any legal or arbitration proceedings that may have significant effects on our financial position or results of operations. No governmental proceedings are pending or, to our knowledge, contemplated against us. We are not a party to any material proceedings in which any director, member of senior management, or affiliate of ours is either a party adverse to us or our subsidiaries or has a material interest adverse to us or our subsidiaries.

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 for trading on the Nasdaq Capital Market under the symbol “PTE.” On August 13, 2021, we received a deficiency letter from the Staff of Nasdaq notifying us that we did not meet the $1.00 per share minimum bid price requirement for continued inclusion on the Nasdaq Capital Market pursuant to the Minimum Bid Price Requirement. In accordance with Nasdaq Listing Rule 5810(c)(3)(A), we were provided an initial period of 180 calendar days to regain compliance with the Minimum Bid Price Requirement, which ended February 9, 2022. On February 10, 2022, we received an additional notice from the Staff stating that, although we had not regained compliance with the Minimum Bid Price Rule by February 9, 2022, the Staff determined in accordance with Nasdaq Listing Rule 5810(c)(3)(A) that we are eligible for an additional 180 calendar days from the date of that notice, or until August 8, 2022, to regain compliance with the Minimum Bid Price Rule. To regain compliance, the bid price for the Company’s common stock must close at $1.00 per share or more for a minimum of 10 consecutive business days. To resolve the noncompliance, we may consider available options, including effecting a reverse stock split.

At March 25, 2022, there were approximately 98 holders of record of our common stock.

 

35

The following table provides information on our compensation plans at December 31, 2021, under which equity securities are authorized for issuance.

Plan category (a) Number of securities to be issued upon exercise of outstanding options, warrants, and rights (b) Weighted- average exercise price of outstanding options, warrants and rights (c) Number of securities remaining available for future issuances under equity compensation plans (excluding securities reflected in column (a))
Equity compensation plans approved by security holders  5,677,802  $7.81   194,102 
Equity compensation plans not approved by security holders (1)  95,000  $13.36   -   
Total  5,772,802       194,102 

(1) These plans are individual grants of stock options to three employees in connection with their engagement or employment by us. Each stock option vests in 24 monthly installments subject to continued engagement or employment. The grant date, number of shares, and exercise price for each stock option granted are as follows:

Grant Date No. of Shares Exercise Price
04/06/2017  75,000  $13.12 
04/10/2017  10,000  $14.25 
04/10/2017  10,000  $14.25 

Shares Forgone by Employees or Reacquired by Us to Satisfy Tax Withholding Liability

During the three-month period ended December 31, 2021, we withheld or acquired from employees shares of common stock to satisfy statutory withholding tax liability upon the vesting of share-based awards. The following table sets forth information on our acquisition of these shares.

Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities

  (a)  (b)  (c) (d)
Period Total number of shares (or units) purchased  Average price paid per share (or unit)  Total number of shares (or units) purchased as part of publicly announced plans or programs Maximum number (or approximate dollar value) of shares (or units) that may yet be purchased under the plans or programs
October 1-31, 2021  78,846  $0.59  N/A N/A
November 1-30, 2021    $  N/A N/A
December 1-31, 2021  150,434  $0.41  N/A N/A
Total  229,280  $0.47     

Item 6. Selected Financial Data[Reserved]

As a smaller reporting company, we are not required to provide the information under this item, pursuant to Regulation S-K Item 301(c).

36

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

The following information should be read in conjunction with the consolidated financial statements and related notes thereto included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

In addition to historical information, this report contains forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties that may cause our actual results to differ materially from plans and results discussed in forward-looking statements. We encourage you to review the risks and uncertainties discussed in the sections entitled Item 1A. “Risk Factors” and “Forward-Looking Statements” included at the beginning ofabove in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. The risks and uncertainties can cause actual results to differ significantly from those in our forward-looking statements or implied in historical results and trends. We caution readers not to place undue reliance on any forward-looking statements made by us, which speak only as of the date they are made. We disclaim any obligation, except as specifically required by law and the rules of the SEC, to publicly update or revise any such statements to reflect any change in our expectations or in events, conditions, or circumstances on which any such statements may be based, or that may affect the likelihood that actual results will differ from those set forth in the forward-looking statements.

Overview

We arePolarityTE is a commercial-stageclinical stage biotechnology and regenerative biomaterials company focused on transforming the lives of patients by discovering, designing and developing a range of regenerative tissue products and biomaterialsbiomaterials. PolarityTE also operates a pre-clinical research business. PolarityTE’s first regenerative tissue product is SkinTE, which is intended for the fieldsrepair, reconstruction, replacement, and supplementation of medicine, biomedical engineeringskin in patients who have a need for treatment of acute or chronic wounds, burns, surgical reconstruction events, scar revision, or removal of dysfunctional skin grafts.

Since the beginning of 2017, PolarityTE has incurred substantial operating losses and material sciences. We operate two segments; the regenerative medicine business segmentits operations have been financed primarily by public equity financings. The clinical trials for SkinTE and the contract research segment.

Segment Reporting

The regenerative medicine business segmentregulatory process will likely result in an increase in PolarityTE’s expenses. PolarityTE will continue to incur substantial operating losses as we pursue an IND and BLA, and PolarityTE expects to seek financing from external sources over the last year has establishedforeseeable future to fund its operations.

Regenerative Tissue Product

Our first regenerative tissue product is SkinTE. On July 23, 2021, we submitted an IND for SkinTE to the FDA through our subsidiary, PTE-MD, as the first step in the regulatory process for obtaining licensure for SkinTE under Section 351 of the Public Health Service Act. The FDA subsequently issued clinical hold correspondence to us identifying certain issues that needed to be addressed before the IND could be approved. We provided responses to the FDA, and advanced our core “TE” program, which includes ouron January 14, 2022, the FDA sent correspondence informing us that the clinical hold had been removed. The IND approval enables us to commence the first commercial product,of two expected pivotal studies needed to support a BLA seeking a chronic cutaneous ulcer indication for SkinTE. The commercial launchfirst planned pivotal study is the COVER DFUs Trial, which is a multi-center, randomized controlled trial evaluating SkinTE in the treatment of Wagner 2 DFUs. We plan to enroll up to 100 patients at up to 20 sites in the U.S. in the COVER DFUs Trial, which will compare treatment with SkinTE has includedplus the build outstandard-of-care to the standard-of-care alone. The primary endpoint is the incidence of commercial, manufacturing,DFUs closed at 24 weeks. Secondary endpoints include PAR at 4, 8, 12, 16, and corporate structure24 weeks, improved quality of life, and new onset of infection of the DFU being evaluated. As we pursue the first study, we plan to supportengage in discussions with the expected,FDA regarding the design and implementation of the second pivotal study.

We expect to incur significant growthoperating costs in the next three to four calendar years as we pursue the regulatory process for SkinTE with the FDA, conduct clinical trials and studies, and pursue product research, all while operating our business and incurring continuing fixed costs related to the maintenance of SkinTE revenueour assets and deploymentsbusiness. We expect to incur significant losses in 2019the future, and beyond. This includes equipment, personnel, systems,those losses could be more severe as a result of unforeseen expenses, difficulties, complications, delays, and leased properties.other unknown events. Our net losses may fluctuate significantly from quarter-to-quarter and year-to-year, depending upon the timing of our clinical trials and our expenditures for satisfying all the conditions of obtaining FDA licensure for SkinTE.

37

Testing and Research Services

Beginning in 2017, we developed internally a laboratory and development continues to expandresearch capability to advance the product development pipeline.

Inof SkinTE and related technologies, which we operate through our subsidiary, Arches. At the beginning of May 2018, we acquired assets of a preclinical research and veterinary sciences business and related real estate,to be used, in part, for preclinical studies on its regenerative tissue products, which we now operate through our subsidiary Ibex Preclinical Research, Inc. The aggregate purchase price was $3.8 million, of which $2.3 million was paid at closingIBEX. Through Arches and the balance satisfied by a promissory note payable to the Seller with an initial fair value of $1.22 millionIBEX, we also offered research and contingent consideration with an initial fair value of approximately $0.3 million. As a result, we have significant research facilities and a well-educated and skilled team of scientists and researchers that comprise the contract research segment of our business. These resources are highly beneficial to the work we are doing on our TE products and in RTD and ARC. We also offer researchlaboratory testing services to unrelated third parties on a contract basis,basis. As noted above, Arches offered COVID-19 testing from the end of May 2020 to August 2021, when it discontinued the service, and since then Arches has been engaged in supporting our IND and clinical trial effort and has not offered services to outside third parties. IBEX continues to offer pre-clinical research services to third parties, which generates positive cash flow to defray our operating expenses, but we offerdo not believe this positive cash flow will be a significant contributor to defraying our costs associated with obtaining regulatory licensure or approval of SkinTE.

PPP Loan

As described above, PTE-MD entered into a promissory note evidencing an unsecured loan in the amount of $3,576,145 made to PTE-MD under the trademark POLARITYRD. Contract researchPaycheck Protection Program. On October 15, 2020, PTE-MD applied to the Lender for forgiveness of the PPP Loan in its entirety (as provided for in the CARES Act) based on PTE-MD’s use of the PPP Loan for payroll costs, rent, and utilities. On October 26, 2020, PTE-MD was advised that the Lender approved the application, and that the Lender was submitting the application to the SBA for a final decision. The SBA subsequently approved PTE-MD’s application for forgiveness of the PPP Loan, and the principal and interest of $3,612,376 was fully paid by the SBA on June 12, 2021.

On September 17, 2021, PTE-MD received notice from the Lender that the SBA is reviewing the PPP Loan. As part of this review, the SBA requested that PTE-MD provide documents that it is required to maintain but may not have been required to submit with its application for the PPP Loan. These documents included an affiliation worksheet showing the relationship between PolarityTE and PTE-MD and affiliated subsidiaries, documents showing the use of the PPP Loan proceeds, documents showing PTE-MD’s calculation of the loan amount it requested in its loan application, our federal tax returns, and documents showing employee compensation information. PTE-MD submitted the documents to the SBA through the Lender on September 28, 2021, and there has been no further communication from the SBA since that date.

Business Effects of COVID-19

The current COVID-19 pandemic has presented a substantial public health and economic challenge around the world and is affecting our employees, patients, clinicians, communities, and business operations, as well as the U.S. economy and financial markets. The full extent to which the COVID-19 pandemic will directly or indirectly impact the timing and cost of pursuing FDA licensure of SkinTE under a BLA is highly uncertain and cannot be accurately predicted. We have engaged and will need to continue to engage CROs for our future clinical trials and the COVID-19 pandemic and response efforts may have an impact on the ability of CROs to timely perform the trials we need for SkinTE.

Recent Developments

On March 16, 2022, we completed a registered direct offering of (i) 3,000.000435 shares of Series A Convertible Preferred Stock, par value $0.001 per share (“Series A”); (ii) 2,000.00029 shares of Series B Convertible Preferred Stock, par value $0.001 per share (“Series B,” and together with the Series A, the “Preferred Stock”); and (iii) warrants to purchase up to 16,393,445 shares of common stock (“Common Warrants”). The shares of Preferred Stock have a stated value of $1,000 per share and are convertible, following the date of the issuance thereof, into an aggregate of 9,836,067 shares of our common stock upon the conversion of Series A and into an aggregate of 6,557,378 shares of our common stock upon the conversion of Series B, at a conversion price of $0.305 per share each. Each Common Warrant has an exercise price of $0.35 per share and will become exercisable six months after the original issuance date and will expire two years following the original issuance. We also issued to designees of the placement agent for the registered direct offering as part of the placement agent’s compensation warrants to purchase up to 819,672 shares of common stock at an exercise price of $0.38125 per share. We expect to realize net proceeds of approximately $4,485,000 from the offering after deducting offering expenses. On March 17, 2022, the holder of the Series B converted the shares to 6,557,378 shares of our common stock.

38

The investor in this offering is a holder of warrants to purchase up to 9,090,901 shares of common stock at an exercise price of $1.20 per share issued on January 14, 2021, and warrants to purchase up to 8,016,033 shares of common stock at an exercise price of $1.20 per share issued on January 25, 2021 (collectively, the “Existing Warrants”). Concurrent with the offering, we entered into a Warrant Amendment Agreement (the “Warrant Amendment Agreement”) with the investor pursuant to which, in consideration for the investor’s purchase of $5 million of securities in the offering (the “Purchase Commitment”), we agreed to reduce the exercise price of the Existing Warrants to $0.35 per share, effective upon the consummation of the offering, and confirmation by the placement agent that the investor satisfied the Purchase Commitment. Pursuant to the Warrant Amendment Agreement, the Existing Warrants will not be exercisable at the adjusted price until the date that is six months after the consummation of this offering. Except for these amendments, no other changes have been made to the Existing Warrants. We are currently assessing the impact of the Existing Warrant exercise price reduction to our consolidated financial statements.

On March 30, 2021, we entered into a sales agreement (“Sales Agreement”) with an investment banking firm to sell shares of common stock having aggregate sales proceeds of up to $50.0 million, from time to time, through an “at the market” equity offering program under which the investment banking firm would act as sales agent. By written notice given by us to the investment banking company on February 28, 2022, we exercised our right to terminate the Sales Agreement and the “at the market” equity offering program. As of the date of termination, no common stock had been sold under the Sales Agreement. Upon such termination we were obligated to make a one-time payment to the investment banking firm of $400,000.

Liquidity and Capital Resources

As of December 31, 2021, we had $19.4 million in cash and cash equivalents and working capital of approximately $17.7 million. As of December 31, 2020, we had $25.5 million in cash and cash equivalents, and working capital of approximately $22.7 million.

We believe cash and cash equivalents on our balance sheet will fund our business activities into the fourth calendar quarter of 2022. For the year ended December 31, 2021, cash used in operating activities was $22.6 million, or an average of $1.9 million per month, compared to $37.8 million of cash used in operating activities, or an average of $3.2 million per month, for the year ended December 31, 2020.

As noted above, we are focused primarily on the advancement of our IND and subsequent BLA to attain a license to manufacture and distribute SkinTE. To that end, in June 2021, we engaged a CRO to provide services helpfor the COVER DFUs Trial at a cost of approximately $6.5 million consisting of $3.1 million of service fees and $3.4 million of estimated costs. In July 2021, we prepaid 10% of the total cost of the original work order, or $0.5 million, which will be applied to payment of the final invoice under the work order. Over the approximately three-year term of the DFU Trial the service provider will submit to us defrayfor payment invoices on a monthly basis for units of work stated in the work order that are completed and billable expenses incurred. Our expectation is that the second clinical trial will be similar to the COVER DFUs Trial with respect to size, length of time to complete, and cost. In the course of advancing our IND and subsequent BLA, we may propose additional clinical trials to advance our application or broaden the therapeutic indications of use for SkinTE. Clinical trials are the major expense we see in the near and long term, and while we are pursuing clinical trials, we will continue to incur the costs of maintaining a first-rate research facilityour business. In addition to clinical trials, our most significant uses of cash to maintain our business going forward are expected to be compensation, costs of occupying, operating, and allow us to meet companies pursuing new technologies that may be opportunities for collaborative or strategic relationships going forward.

Researchmaintaining our facilities, and Development Expenses. Research and development expenses primarily represent employee relatedthe costs including stock compensation, for research and development executives and staff, lab and office expenses and other overhead charges.

General and Administrative Expenses. General and administrative expenses primarily represent employee related costs, including stock compensation, for corporate executive and support staff, general office expenses, professional fees and various other overhead charges. Professional fees, including legal and accounting expenses, typically represent one of the largest components ofassociated with maintaining our general and administrative expenses. These fees are partially attributable to our required activitiesstatus as a publicly traded company listed on Nasdaq.

For the year ended December 31, 2021, the gross profit on sales of SkinTE was $2.6 million, which partially contributed to covering our operating costs for the period. As discussed above in this Annual Report, we ceased our SkinTE sales activity at the end of May 2021, so SkinTE sales will not contribute to defraying our operating costs in 2022. To mitigate the effect of this lost revenue, we eliminated some staff and resources that supported the SkinTE commercial effort, but we did not see the benefit of these cost reductions until the fourth quarter of 2021 because of severance and other costs associated with winding down our SkinTE commercial activity. In 2022 our plan is to preserve the facilities, equipment, and staff we need to advance the COVER DFUs Trial and other work necessary for advancing the process for obtaining regulatory approval of SkinTE.

During 2021, we engaged in discussions with certain third parties regarding potential M&A and strategic initiatives. In the fourth quarter of 2021 we recognized $1.2 million one-time costs for professional services associated with such M&A and strategic initiatives and estimate we will recognize an additional $1.4 million of such costs in the first quarter of 2022.

39

As of the date of this Annual Report we do not expect that our cash and cash equivalents of $19.4 million as SEC filings,of December 31, 2021, would be sufficient to fund our current business plan including related operating expenses and corporate-capital expenditure requirements beyond the fourth calendar quarter of 2022. Accordingly, there is substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern, as we do not believe that our cash and business-development initiatives.

Income Taxes. Income taxes consistcash equivalents will be sufficient to fund our business plan for at least twelve months from the date of issuance of our provisions for income taxes,annual financial statements. We plan to address this condition by raising additional capital to finance our operations. Although we have been successful in raising capital in the past, financing may not be available on terms favorable to us, if at all, so we may not be successful in obtaining additional financing. Therefore, it is not considered probable, as affecteddefined in applicable accounting standards, that our plan to raise additional capital will alleviate the substantial doubt regarding our ability to continue as a going concern.

To enhance our ability to do future financings, on February 11, 2022, we filed a registration statement on Form S-3 to register sales of our securities after our current registration statement on Form S-3 expires with the filing of this Annual Report. Pursuant to General Instruction I.B.6 of Form S-3, after this Annual Report and the new Form S-3 registration statement is effective the aggregate market value of securities sold by us during the period of 12 calendar months immediately prior to, and including, the sale is limited to one-third of the aggregate market value of the voting and non-voting common equity held by our net operating loss carryforwards. Future utilizationnon-affiliates so long as the aggregate market value of our net operating loss, or NOL, carryforwards may be subject to a substantial annual limitation duecommon stock held by non-affiliates is less than $75.0 million. In the event that subsequent to the “change in ownership” provisionseffective date of the Internal Revenue Code. The annualnew Form S-3 registration statement the aggregate market value of our outstanding common stock held by non-affiliates equals or exceeds $75.0 million, then the one-third limitation may resulton sales shall not apply to additional sales.

Our actual capital requirements will depend on many factors, including the cost and timing of advancing our IND and subsequent BLA for SkinTE, the cost and timing of clinical trials, the cost of establishing and maintaining our facilities in compliance with cGMP and cGTP (current good tissue practices) regulations, and the expirationcost and timing of NOL carryforwards before utilization. Dueadvancing our product development initiatives related to SkinTE. Our forecast of the period of time through which our history of losses, a valuation allowance sufficient to fully offset our NOL and other deferred tax assets has been established under current accounting pronouncements, and this valuation allowancefinancial resources will be maintained unless sufficient positive evidence developsadequate to support its reversal.operations is a forward-looking statement that involves risks and uncertainties, and actual results could vary materially.

Critical Accounting Estimates

We will need to raise additional capital in the future to fund our effort to obtain FDA approval of SkinTE and maintain our operations. Any additional equity financing including financings involving convertible securities, if able to be obtained, may be highly dilutive, on unfavorable terms, or otherwise disadvantageous, to existing stockholders, and debt financing, if available, may involve restrictive covenants or require us to grant a security interest in our assets. If we elect to pursue collaborative arrangements, the terms of such arrangements may require us to relinquish rights to certain of our technologies, products, or marketing territories. Our discussionfailure to raise additional capital when needed, and analysison acceptable terms, would require us to reduce our operating expenses and would limit our ability to continue operations, any of thewhich would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, and results of operations is based upon our consolidated financial statements, whichoperation.

Results of Operations

Changes in Polarity’s Operations

There have been preparedsignificant changes in accordanceour operations affecting Polarity’s results of operations for the year ended December 31, 2021, compared to year ended December 31, 2020.

SkinTE was registered and listed with accounting principles generally acceptedthe FDA in August 2017 based on our determination that SkinTE should be regulated solely under Section 361 of the Public Health Service Act and Part 1271 of Title 21 of the Code of Federal Regulations (i.e., as a so-called 361 HCT/P) and that, as a result, no premarket review or approval by the FDA was required. We proceeded to develop sales and manufacturing capabilities for SkinTE and focused on advancing commercialization of SkinTE. We began a regional commercial rollout of SkinTE in October 2018, and while SkinTE was marketed it was used in complex wounds, such as diabetic foot ulcers penetrating to tendon, capsule, and bone classified, Stage 3 and 4 pressure injuries, and acute wounds. Following informal, voluntary discussions with the FDA, we were advised by the FDA in April 2020 that its preliminary assessment is that SkinTE does not meet the requirements to be regulated solely as a 361 HCT/P. Rather, based on the FDA’s preliminary assessment, SkinTE should be regulated under Section 351 of the Public Health Service Act. We re-evaluated our regulatory approach and determined it was prudent to submit an IND for SkinTE and an eventual BLA rather than engage in a protracted dispute with the FDA. Accordingly, we ceased commercial sales of SkinTE at the end of May 2021.

40

On July 23, 2021, we submitted an IND for SkinTE to the FDA through our subsidiary, PTE-MD, as the first step in the United Statesregulatory process for obtaining licensure for SkinTE under Section 351 of America, or GAAP.the Public Health Service Act. The FDA subsequently issued clinical hold correspondence to us identifying certain issues that needed to be addressed before the IND could be approved. We provided responses to the FDA, and on January 14, 2022, the FDA sent correspondence informing us that the clinical hold had been removed. The IND approval enables us to commence the first of two expected pivotal studies needed to support a BLA seeking a chronic cutaneous ulcer indication for SkinTE. We ceased selling SkinTE at the end of May 2021, when the period of enforcement discretion previously announced by the FDA with respect to its IND and premarket approval requirements for 361 HCT/Ps came to an end, and we do not expect to be able to commercialize SkinTE until our BLA is approved, which we believe will take at least three to four years.

The preparation of financial statementsArches began offering COVID-19 testing services in conformityMay 2020 under 30-day renewable testing agreements with accounting principles generally acceptedmultiple nursing home and pharmacy facilities in the United Statesstate of America requires managementNew York controlled by a single company, which substantially added to make estimatesour services net revenues in the last seven months of 2020 and assumptions that affectfirst three months of 2021. When the reported amounts of assetsNew York nursing homes and liabilities or the disclosure of gain or loss contingenciespharmacies adopted on-site employee testing at the dateend of March 2021, our COVID-19 testing revenues declined substantially, and in August 2021, we decided to cease COVID-19 testing. Arches focused on supporting our IND and clinical trial efforts for the remainder of 2021, and we expect it will continue in that role in 2022 and not provide research services to third parties.

The COVID-19 pandemic had a significant adverse effect on the preclinical research services offered by IBEX in 2020, but there was a resurgence in that business in 2021. The increase in revenues from IBEX services helped to offset the loss of COVID-19 testing revenues in the last nine months of 2021. As a result, revenues from our services business were unchanged in 2021 compared to 2020 and we expect services revenues will be less in 2022 than 2021 since Arches will not be a contributor to services revenues in 2022.

In March 2022, the Company reached a non-binding understanding with an unrelated third party that contemplates the sale of IBEX and the real property used in the operation of IBEX. The potential sale is subject to a number of contingencies. Even though the proposed sale may not materialize, we are exploring our options with respect to IBEX, which is likely to result in curtailed operation of the financial statementsbusiness or some other disposition in 2022. Under the circumstance, we believe IBEX may not generate services revenues through the remainder of 2022 that would help defray our operating costs.

As a result of the foregoing developments, we made a number of changes to our operations that impacted our results of operations. These included reductions in its work force in 2021 and 2020, and reducing the reported amountsservices and infrastructure needed to support a larger work force and commercial sales effort.

Comparison of the years ended December 31, 2021, and December 31, 2020.

  For the Year Ended  Increase (Decrease) 
(in thousands) December 31, 2021  December 31, 2020  Amount  % 
Net revenues                
Products $3,076  $3,730  $(654)  (18)%
Services  6,328   6,396   (68)  (1)%
Total net revenues  9,404   10,126   (722)  (7)%
Cost of revenues                
Products  448   1,068   (620)  (58)%
Services  3,868   3,356   512   15%
Total cost of revenues  4,316   4,424   (108)  (2)%
Gross profit  5,088   5,702   (614)  (11)%
Operating costs and expenses                
Research and development  14,182   11,532   2,650   23%
General and administrative  20,476   27,557   (7,081)  (26)%
Sales and marketing  2,808   8,719   (5,911)  (68)%
Restructuring and other charges  678   3,834   (3,156)  (82)%
Impairment of goodwill and intangible assets  

630

   

   

630

   

100

%

Total operating costs and expenses  38,774   51,642   (12,868)  (25)%
Operating loss  (33,686)  (45,940)  12,254   (27)%
Other income (expense), net                
Gain on extinguishment of debt  3,612      3,612   100%
Change in fair value of common stock warrant liability  4,995   2,914   2,081   71%
Inducement loss on sale of liability classified warrants  (5,197)     (5,197)  (100)%
Interest (expense) income, net  (127)  (182)  55   (30)%
Other income, net  216   354   (138)  (39)%
Net loss $(30,187) $(42,854) $12,667   (30)%

41

Net Revenues. Net revenues decreased $0.7 million, or 7%, for the year ended December 31, 2021, compared to year ended December 31, 2020.

Products net revenues of $3.1 million in 2021 were 18% less products net revenues in 2020 due to the cessation of commercial sales of SkinTE at the end of May 2021.

The mix of business activity generating services net revenues changed from a majority of service revenues generated by COVID-19 testing in 2020, to a majority of service revenues generated by pre-clinical research services in 2021. Service revenues generated by our pre-clinical research services business in the year ended December 31, 2021, were substantially higher than in 2020, as this business activity experienced a strong recovery from the poor results in 2020, which we believe was caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. Our COVID-19 testing services were a significant contributor to overall services revenues only in the first three months of 2021, which was offset by the increases from revenues from our pre-clinical research services business. As a result of these developments net revenues from services remained essentially unchanged in fiscal year 2021 compared to fiscal year 2020.

Cost of Revenues. The amount for cost of revenues remained essentially unchanged for the year ended December 31, 2021, compared to year ended December 31, 2020. There was a change, however, in the mix of cost of revenues amounts between products and services. Due to the cessation of SkinTE sales activity at the end of May 2021, products cost of revenues decreased by 58% from $1.1 million in 2020 to $0.4 million in 2021. This decrease was largely offset by an increase in services cost of revenues in the amount of $0.5 million. Services cost of revenues increased from $3.4 million in 2020 to $3.9 million in 2021 due to an increase in revenues and resulting cost of sales in our pre-clinical research services, which is a lower margin business than the COVID -19 testing services that was the major component of our services revenues in 2020.

Operating Costs and Expenses. Operating costs and expenses decreased $12.9 million, or 25%, for the year ended December 31, 2021, compared to the year ended December 31, 2020. The reduction in operating costs and expenses is attributable to reductions in general and administrative expenses, sales and marketing expenses, and restructuring and other charges that were partially offset by increases in research and development expenses.

Research and development expenses increased 23% for the year ended December 31, 2021, compared to the year ended December 31, 2020. The substantial increase in 2021 is primarily attributable to an increase in lab supply costs and consulting services for work on the CMC elements of our IND; re-allocation of costs for manufacturing supplies and compensation following the cessation of SkinTE sales from products cost of goods, general and administrative expenses, and sales and marketing expenses to research and development costs; the costs in our pre-IND clinical trials that we concluded during 2021; and, costs incurred in connection with the planning and initial payments required for the clinical trial we are about to begin under the IND for SkinTE.

We effectuated a reduction in force for our commercial operations in 2021. Consequently, there were reductions in cash compensation, stock compensation, consulting fees, and travel expense. As we reduced and then ended our commercial sales of SkinTE, we also reduced expenses related to a larger operation by terminating our lease for the Utah corporate office in September 2020 and ceasing operations at our manufacturing node in Georgia in the fourth quarter of 2020, from which we recognized the benefits in 2021. Furthermore, with the cessation of SkinTE sales we re-allocated manufacturing supplies and compensation from general and administrative expenses to research and development costs. These reductions were partially offset by executive and employee bonus compensation paid or accrued in 2021 at levels higher than bonus compensation paid or accrued in 2020 and professional fees incurred in connection with our pursuit of a strategic transaction that did not materialize. The cost cutting measures and re-allocation of costs described above are the primary causes of a 26% decrease in general and administrative expense period over period for the year ended December 31, 2021, compared to the year ended December 31, 2020.

42

When we reduced the commercial sales team and related commercial activities, we also took steps to reduce staff and consultants in sales and marketing. With the cessation of SkinTE sales several employees who supported sales and marketing moved into new roles in research and development, so their compensation was allocated to research and development. Consequently, there were significant reductions in cash compensation, stock compensation, consulting fees, and travel expense, which resulted in a 68% decrease in sales and marketing expense for the year ended December 31, 2021, compared to the year ended December 31, 2020.

We realized restructuring and other charges as a result of the transition to a clinical stage company, much of which were recognized in the year ended December 31, 2020. In connection with reducing our commercial sales activity in 2020 we incurred severance charges of $1.1 million. We abandoned operations at the manufacturing node in Augusta, Georgia, which resulted in the recognition of a charge in the amount of $1.2 million consisting of equipment, leasehold improvements, and a right of use asset. In 2020 we also decided to abandon equipment in addition to the development of a vivarium research facility at our Salt Lake City location resulting in a charge of $1.5 million. By contrast, during the reporting periods. Among12-month period ended December 31, 2021, we recognized an impairment of property and equipment in the more significant estimates includedamount of $0.4 million and severance charges of $0.6 million, which were offset by a $0.3 million gain on the termination of Polarity’s Augusta node lease. Consequently, there was an 82% decrease in these financial statements arerestructuring and other charges for the valuationyear ended December 31, 2021, compared to the year ended December 31, 2020.

We recognized an impairment of warrant liability, valuation of derivative liability, stock-based compensation, the valuation allowances for deferred tax benefits, and the valuation of tangiblegoodwill and intangible assets included in acquisitions. Actual results could differ from those estimates.

We have identifiedpertaining to IBEX for $0.6 million based on management’s judgment regarding the policies below as criticallikelihood that IBEX will continue to our business operations andbe a meaningful contributor to the understandingoperations of our financial results. The impactthe Company through the remainder of 2022.

Operating Loss and any associated risks relatedNet Loss. Operating loss decreased $12.3 million, or 27%, for the year ended December 31, 2021, compared to these policies on our business operations is discussed throughout management’s discussionthe year ended December 31, 2020. Net loss decreased $12.7 million, or 30%, for the year ended December 31, 2021, compared to the year ended December 31, 2020.

Warrants issued in connection with financings we completed in 2021 and analysis2020 are classified as liabilities and remeasured each period until settled, classified as equity or expiration. As a result of financial condition and results of operations when such policies affect our reported and expected financial results.

Goodwill and Intangible Assets.Goodwill represents the excess acquisition cost over theperiodic remeasurement, we recorded a gain for change in fair value of net tangible and intangible assets acquired. Goodwill is not amortized and is subjectcommon stock warrant liability of $5.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2021, compared to annual impairment testing or between annual tests if an event ora gain of $2.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2020. For additional information on the change in circumstance occurs that would more likely than not reduce the fair value of common stock warrant liability please see Note 12 to the Consolidated Financial Statements included in this report.

We issued common stock purchase warrants in January 2021, as an inducement to holders of warrants issued in December 2020 to exercise those December warrants. As a reporting unit below its carrying value. In testing for goodwill impairment,result, we recognized an inducement loss of $5.2 million. There was no similar action taken in 2020.

When the Company hasPPP Loan was forgiven in June 2021, we recognized a gain on extinguishment of debt in the option to first assess qualitative factors to determine whetheramount of $3.6 million. This gain together with the existence of events or circumstances lead to a determination that it is more likely than not that thepositive change in fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount. If, after assessingcommon stock warrant liability was offset by the totalityinducement loss of events$5.2 million recognized in January 2021, which, primarily accounts for the difference of $3.5 million between our operating loss and circumstances,net loss for the Company concludes that it is not more likely than not that the fair valueyear ended December 31, 2021.

Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates

Revenue Recognition. With respect to revenue recognition in contract services provided by IBEX, revenues generally consist of a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount, then performingsingle performance obligation that IBEX satisfies over time using an input method based on costs incurred to date relative to the two-step impairment test is not required. If the Company concludes otherwise, it istotal costs expected to be required to performsatisfy the two-step impairment test. The goodwill impairment test is performed at the reporting unit level by comparing the estimated fair value ofperformance obligation. Our management believes that this method provides a reporting unit with its respective carrying value. If the estimated fair value exceeds the carrying value, goodwill at the reporting unit level is not impaired. If the estimated fair value is less than carrying value, further analysis is necessary to determine the amount of impairment, if any, by comparing the implied fair valuefaithful depiction of the reporting unit’s goodwill totransfer of services over the carrying valueterm of the reporting unit’s goodwill.

The fair value of reporting units is based on widely accepted valuation techniques that the Company believes market participants would use, although the valuation process requires significant judgment and often involves the use of significant estimates and assumptions. The Company utilizes a market cap approach in estimating the fair value of reporting units. The estimates and assumptions used in determining fair value could have a significant effect on whether or not an impairment charge is recorded and the magnitude of such a charge. Adverse market or economic events could result in impairment charges in future periods.

Intangible assets deemed to have finite lives are amortized on a straight-line basis over their estimated useful lives, which generally range from one to eleven years. The useful life is the period over which the asset is expected to contribute directly, or indirectly, to its future cash flows. Intangible assets are reviewed for impairment when certain events or circumstances exist. For amortizable intangible assets, impairment exists when the undiscounted cash flows exceed its carrying value. At least annually, the remaining useful life is evaluated.

Impairment of Long-Lived Assets.The Company reviews long-lived assets, including property and equipment, for impairment whenever events or changes in business circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of the assets may not be fully recoverable. Factors that the Company considers in deciding when to perform an impairment review include significant underperformance of the business in relation to expectations, significant negative industry or economic trends, and significant changes or planned changes in the use of the assets. If an impairment review is performed to evaluate a long-lived asset for recoverability, the Company compares forecasts of undiscounted cash flows expected to result from the use and eventual disposition of the long-lived asset to its carrying value. An impairment loss would be recognized when estimated undiscounted future cash flows expected to result from the use of an asset are less than its carrying amount. The impairment loss would beperformance obligation based on the excessremaining services needed to satisfy the obligation. This requires that our services personnel at IBEX make reasonable estimates of the carrying valueextent of progress toward completion of the impaired asset over its fair value, determinedcontract and, as a result, unbilled receivables and deferred revenue are recognized based on discounted cash flows. No impairment loss has been recognized.payment timing and work completed.

Income Taxes. The Company accounts for income taxes under the asset and liability method. Deferred tax assets and liabilities are recognized for the future tax consequences attributable to differences between the financial statement carrying amounts of existing assets and liabilities and their respective tax bases and operating loss and tax credit carryforwards. Deferred tax assets and liabilities are measured using enacted tax rates expected to apply to taxable income in the years in which those temporary differences are expected to be recovered or settled. The effect on deferred tax assets and liabilities of a change in tax rates is recognized in income in the period that includes the enactment date. The Company evaluates the potential for realization of deferred tax assets at each quarterly balance sheet date and records a valuation allowance for assets for which realization is not more likely than not.

Stock Based Compensation. The Company measuresStock-Based Compensation. We measure all stock-based compensation to employees and non-employees using a fair value method and records such expense in general and administrative and research and development expenses. Compensation expense for stock options with cliff vesting is recognized on a straight-line basis over the vesting period of the award, based on the fair value of the option on the date of grant.method. For stock options with graded vesting, the Company recognizeswe recognize compensation expense over the service period for each separately vesting tranche of the award as though the award were in substance, multiple awards.

awards based on the fair value on the date of grant. The fair value for options issued is estimated at the date of grant using a Black-Scholes option-pricing model. The risk-free rate is derived from the U.S. Treasury yield curve in effect at the time of the grant.grant commensurate with the expected term of the option. The volatility factor is determined based on the Company’sour historical stock prices. Forfeitures are recognized as they occur.

The fair value of restricted stock grants is measured based on the fair market value of the Company’sour common stock on the date of grant and amortized to compensation expense over the vesting period of, generally, six months to three years.

43

The accounting for non-employee options and restricted stock is similar to that of employees, however, unlike employee options and restricted stock, the measurement date is not the grant date. The measurement date is when performance is complete. Until the options or shares vest, they are re-measured (re-valued) each reporting period and the expense marked up or marked down accordingly.

Accounting for WarrantsCommon Stock Warrant Liability. The Company accounts for the issuance of common stock purchase warrants issued in connection with the equity offerings in accordance with the provisions of ASC 815, Derivatives and Hedging (“ASC 815”). The Company classifies as equity any contracts that (i) require physical settlement or net-share settlement or (ii) gives the Company a choice of net-cash settlement or settlement in its own shares (physical settlement or net-share settlement). The Company classifies as assets or liabilities any contracts that (i) require net-cash settlement (including a requirement to net-cash settle the contract if an event occurs and if that event is outside the control of the Company) or (ii) gives the counterparty a choice of net-cash settlement or settlement in shares (physical settlement or net-share settlement). In addition, under ASC 815, registered common stock warrants that require the issuance of registered shares upon exercise and do not expressly preclude an implied right to cash settlement are accounted for as derivative liabilities. The derivative warrant liabilities were settled during the year.

Change in Fair Value of Derivatives. The Company assessed the classification of common stock purchase warrants as of the date of each offering and determined that certain instruments met the criteria for liability classification. Accordingly, the Company classified the warrants as a liability at their fair value and adjusts the instruments to fair value at each reporting period. This liability is subject to re-measurement at each balance sheet date until the warrants are exercised or expired, and any change in fair value is recognized as “change in fair value of warrant liability” in the consolidated statements of operations. The fair value of the warrants hascommon stock warrant liability is estimated using the Monte Carlo simulation model, which involves simulated future stock price amounts over the remaining life of the commitment. The fair value estimate is affected by our stock price as well as other derivatives, been estimated using a Monte-Carlo or Black-Scholes valuation model. The warrants were settled during the year.

Revenue Recognition. The Company recognizes revenue upon the shipmentchange of products or the performance of services when each of the following four criteria is met: (i) persuasive evidence of an arrangement exists; (ii) products are delivered or services are performed; (iii) the sales price is fixed or determinable; and (iv) collectability is reasonably assured. Contract services recognizes revenue based on the proportional performance method over the term of the respective service contract which requires us to make reasonable estimates of the extent of progress toward completion of the contract. Under this method, revenue is recognized according to the percentage of cost completed for the study. As a result, unbilled receivables and deferred revenue are recognized based on payment timing and work completed. The Company has one significant customer which makes up approximately 19% of consolidated revenues.control considerations.

Results of Operations

Year ended October 31, 2018 versus the year ended October 31, 2017

Net Revenues. For the year ended October 31, 2018, total net revenues were $1.6 million including net revenues from product sales of $0.7 million from the sale of the Company’s core product SkinTE in the regenerative medicine business segment. As SkinTE was commercially launched in the 2018 fiscal year, there were no regenerative medicine revenues in the prior fiscal year. Net revenues from services sales were $0.9 million from the contract research segment operations driven primarily by the POLARITYRD preclinical research business, which was acquired in this fiscal year.

Cost of Sales. For the year ended October 31, 2018, cost of sales was approximately $1.0 million and approximately 64% of net revenues. Product cost of sales were $0.5 million or 73% of product sales. Service cost of sales were $0.5 million or 57% of service sales.

Research and Development Expenses. Research and development expenses increased $12.3 million, or 173%, in the fiscal year ended October 31, 2018, compared to the fiscal year ended October 31, 2017. The increase was primarily due to additional personnel hired to advance the product development pipeline, and their associated costs, including stock-based compensation, salaries, and benefits, as well as, lab supplies and related expenses.

General and Administrative Expenses. General and administrative expenses increased $29.4 million, or 156%, in the fiscal year ended October 31, 2018 compared to the fiscal year ended October 31, 2017. During the fiscal year, the Company expanded its infrastructure to support the commercial launch of SkinTE, build out of an FDA manufacturing and R&D facility, and support increased corporate operations. The resulting increase in expenses is driven primarily by employee-related costs, including stock-based compensation, salaries, and benefits, and increased outside services expense, including legal and accounting fees and consulting expenses.

Sales and Marketing Expenses. For the year ended October 31, 2018, sales and marketing expenses were $2.4 million. This represents the sales personnel and marketing costs primarily driven by the initial regional release of SkinTE. There were no sales personnel and marketing costs during the year ended October 31, 2017.

Other (Expenses) Income. For the year ended October 31, 2018, other (expenses) income mainly included a change in fair value of derivatives of approximately a $3.8 million gain, interest income of $0.4 million and a loss on extinguishment of warrant liability of approximately $0.5 million. For the year ended October 31, 2017, other (expenses) income was insignificant.

Net loss from continuing operations. Net loss from continuing operations for the year ended October 31, 2018 was approximately $65.4 million, compared to a net loss of approximately $130.5 million for the year ended October 31, 2017, primarily reflecting the decrease of $104.7 million in research and development - intellectual property acquired expenses offset by the increase in operating expenses driven by expanding operations discussed above.

Liquidity and Capital Resources

As of October 31, 2018, our cash and cash equivalents balance was approximately $71.0 million and our working capital was approximately $68.0 million, compared to cash and cash equivalents of $17.7 million and working capital of $2.5 million at October 31, 2017.

As reflected in the consolidated financial statements, we had an accumulated deficit of approximately $324.4 million at October 31, 2018, a net loss of approximately $65.4 million and approximately $28.5 million net cash used in continuing operating activities for the year ended October 31, 2018.

On April 12, 2018, we completed a public offering of 2,335,937 shares of our common stock at an offering price of $16.00 per share, resulting in net proceeds of $34.6 million, after deducting offering expenses. On June 7, 2018, we completed an underwritten offering of 2,455,882 shares of our common stock at an offering price of $23.65 per share, resulting in net proceeds of approximately $58.0 million, after deducting offering expenses.

Based upon the current status of our product development and commercialization plans, we believe that our existing cash and cash equivalents will be adequate to satisfy our capital needs for at least the next 12 months from the date of filing. We anticipate needing substantial additional financing to continue clinical deployment and commercialization of our lead product SkinTE, development of our other product candidates, and scaling the manufacturing capacity for our products and product candidates, and prepare for commercial readiness. We will continue to pursue fundraising opportunities when available, however, such financing may not be available on terms favorable to us, if at all. If adequate funds are not available, we may be required to delay, reduce the scope of, or eliminate one or more of our product development programs. We plan to meet our capital requirements primarily through issuances of equity securities, debt financing, revenue from product sales and future collaborations. Failure to generate revenue or raise additional capital would adversely affect our ability to achieve our intended business objectives.

Our actual capital requirements will depend on many factors, including among other things: our ability to scale the manufacturing for and to commercialize successfully our lead product, SkinTE; the progress and success of clinical evaluation and acceptance of SkinTE; our ability to develop our other product candidates; and the costs and timing of obtaining any required regulatory registrations or approvals. Our forecast of the period of time through which our financial resources will be adequate to support our operations is a forward-looking statement that involves risks and uncertainties, and actual results could vary materially. The foregoing factors, along with the other factors described in the section, Item 1A, “Risk Factors” in Part I of this Report on Form 10-K will impact our future capital requirements and the adequacy of our available funds. If we are required to raise additional funds, any additional equity financing may be highly dilutive, or otherwise disadvantageous, to existing stockholders, and debt financing, if available, may involve restrictive covenants. If we elect to pursue collaborative arrangements, the terms of such arrangements may require us to relinquish rights to certain of our technologies, products or marketing territories. Our failure to raise capital when needed, and on acceptable terms, would require us to reduce our operating expenses and would limit our ability to respond to competitive pressures or unanticipated requirements to develop our product candidates and to continue operations, any of which would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operation.

Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements

As of October 31, 2018, we had no off-balance sheet arrangements.

Inflation

Our management currently believes that inflation has not had, and does not currently have, a material impact on continuing operations.

Cash Flows

Cash and cash equivalents and working capital were approximately $71.0 million and $68.0 million, respectively, as of October 31, 2018 compared to cash and cash equivalents and working capital of approximately $17.7 million and $2.5 million at October 31, 2017, respectively.

Operating Cash Flows

Cash used in continuing operating activities for the year ended October 31, 2018 amounted to approximately $28.5 million compared to approximately $7.6 million for the 2017 period. The increase in net cash used in continuing operating activities mostly relates to the increases in both research and development, sales and marketing, and general and administrative expenses.

Cash used in discontinued operating activities in the year ended October 31, 2018, amounted to $0 compared to approximately $33,000 for the same period in 2017.

Investing Cash Flows

Cash used in continuing investing activities for the year ended October 31, 2018 amounted to approximately $11.5 million compared to $2.5 million for the 2017 period. For the year ended October 31, 2018, the activity relates to the acquisition of IBEX and the purchase of property and equipment. For the year ended October 31, 2017, the activity only relates to the purchase of property and equipment.

Financing Cash Flows

Net cash provided by financing activities for the year ended October 31, 2018 amounted to approximately $93.3 million compared to approximately $21.2 million for the 2017 period. The $92.7 million in net proceeds from the sale of common stock in the year ended October 31, 2018, accounts for the majority of that period’s financing activity and accounts for the majority of the increase in net cash provided by financing activities as compared to the comparable prior year period.

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

As a smaller reporting company, we are not required to provide the information under this item, pursuant to Regulation S-K Item 305(e).

Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data.

The financial statements required by Item 8 are submitted in a separate section of this report beginning on Page F-1 and are incorporated herein and made a part hereof.

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

None.

Item 9A. Controls and Procedures.

Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures.

We maintain disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) under the Exchange Act) that are designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed in our reports filed under the Exchange Act, is recorded, processed, summarized, and reported within the time periods specified in the SEC’s rules and forms, and that such information is accumulated and communicated to our management, including our principal executive officer and principal financial and accounting officer, as appropriate, to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure.

Our management, with the participation of our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, evaluated the effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures as of the end of the period covered by this report. Based on the evaluation of the effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures as of OctoberDecember 31, 2018,2021, our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer concluded that, as of such date, our disclosure controls and procedures were not effective due to the material weaknesses identified below. To address the material weaknesses, management performed additional analyses and other procedures to determine whether the financial statements included herein fairly present our financial results. Subject to the limitations above, management believes that the consolidated financial statements and other financial information contained in this report, fairly present in all material respects our financial condition, results of operations, and cash flows for the periods presented.effective.

Management’s Annual Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting.

Our management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting as defined in Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) under the Exchange Act. Our internal control over financial reporting is designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States of America, or GAAP.(“GAAP”). Our internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that:

pertain to the maintenance of records that in reasonable detail accurately and fairly reflect transactions involving our assets;
provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with GAAP, and that our receipts and expenditures are being made only in accordance with the authorization of our management; and
provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use or disposition of our assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.

As permitted by the SEC, management’s assessment did not include the internal controls over financial reporting of the acquired IBEX operations which is included in our consolidated financial statements as of October 31, 2018 and for the period from the acquired date through October 31, 2018. IBEX represented approximately 53% of consolidated revenue for the year ended October 31, 2018 and approximately 6% of total assets as of October 31, 2018.

Our management does not expect that our disclosure controls and procedures or our internal controls will prevent all errors and all fraud. A control system, no matter how well conceived and operated, can provide only reasonable, not absolute, assurance that the objectives of the control system are met. Because of the inherent limitations in all control systems, no evaluation of controls can provide absolute assurance that all control issues and instances of fraud, if any, within the Companya company have been detected. These inherent limitations include the realities that judgments in decision-making can be faulty, and that breakdowns can occur because of a simple error or mistake. Additionally, controls can be circumvented by the individual acts of some persons, by collusion of two or more people, or by management override of the control. The design of any system of controls is also based in part upon certain assumptions about the likelihood of future events, and there can be no assurance that any design will succeed in achieving its stated goals under all potential future conditions. Over time, controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate. Projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate. Because of the inherent limitations in a cost-effective control system, misstatements due to error or fraud may occur and not be detected.

44

Management assessed the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting as of OctoberDecember 31, 2018.2021. In making this assessment, management used the framework set forth in the report entitled Internal Control-Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission in 2013, or COSO. The COSO framework summarizes each of the components of a company’s internal control system, including (i) the control environment, (ii) risk assessment, (iii) control activities, (iv) information and communication, and (v) monitoring. Based on this evaluation, management determined that our system of internal control over financial reporting was not effective as of OctoberDecember 31, 2018.2021.

A material weakness is a deficiency, or a combination of deficiencies, within the meaning of Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (“PCOAB”) Audit Standard No. 5,Changes in internal controlInternal Control over financial reporting, such that there is a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement of the Company’s annual or interim financial statements will not be prevented or detected on a timely basis. Management has identified the following material weaknesses, which have caused management to conclude that as of October 31, 2018Financial Reporting

There were no changes in our internal control over financial reporting was not effective at the reasonable assurance level:

(1) insufficient internal controls related to information technology general controls in the areas of user access, user provisioning, and change management over certain systems that support the financial reporting process;

(2) inadequate documentation of period end financial disclosure and reporting processes;

(3) ineffective controls related to the documentation and completeness of the Company’s stock-based compensation expense; and

(4) inadequate review procedures and segregation of duties over processing sales invoices.

EisnerAmper, LLP has provided an attestation report on the Company’s internal control over financial reporting as of October 31, 2018.

Changes in Internal Control over Financial Reporting

We have taken several steps to remediate the material weaknesses identified above. These steps include the following:

Period End Reporting – The Company implemented period end checklists and other procedures to ensure proper documentation. Management believes that preparing and implementing sufficient period end documentation will improve financial disclosure and reporting processes.
Stock-Based Compensation System – The Company is in the process of implementing a systemic solution to our stock-based compensation accounting, including internal processes and an external compensation account management tool. Management expects the tool to be in production in early 2019. The system implementation and additional procedures enable the Company to properly document the stock-based compensation expense.
IT Systems & Controls – The Company has hired additional IT personnel and adopted access restrictions and protocols to prevent unauthorized access and unauthorized changes to data and records.
Processing Revenue Transactions – The Company has hired additional accounting staff. The additional headcount will result in the proper segregation of duties and provide more checks and balances within the department. During the fourth quarter, the Company implemented processes and procedures to remediate the issue.

In addition to the steps taken to address the material weaknesses listed above, the Company has implemented the following material changes to its internal controls during the third and fourth quarters of the yearthree-month period ended OctoberDecember 31, 2018:2021.

Enterprise Resource Planning System – The Company implemented a phased approach to a company-wide enterprise resource planning system to further enhance our internal control environment. Management continues to monitor the impact of this implementation on our processes as well as the impact to the internal controls over financial reporting.
Changes to Personnel – The Company hired nine additional people to its accounting and finance staff as of the year ended October 31, 2018. Four of the staff additions were hired during the last fiscal quarter of the year. These personnel have improved the financial reporting and control environment.

We believe these actions will be effective in remediating the material weakness described above. As we continue to evaluate and work to improve our internal control over financial reporting, management may determine to take additional measures to address the material weakness or determine to modify the remediation plan described above. Until the remediation steps set forth above are fully implemented and operating for a sufficient period of time, the material weakness described above will continue to exist.

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

To the Board of Directors and Stockholders

PolarityTE, Inc.

Opinion on the Internal Control over Financial Reporting

We have audited PolarityTE, Inc. and Subsidiaries’ (the “Company”) internal control over financial reporting as of October 31, 2018, based on criteria established in Internal Control - Integrated Framework (2013) issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (“COSO”). In our opinion, because of the effect of the material weaknesses described in the following paragraph on the achievement of the objectives of the control criteria, PolarityTE, Inc. and Subsidiaries has not maintained effective internal control over financial reporting as of October 31, 2018, based on criteria established in the Internal Control - Integrated Framework (2013) issued by COSO.

The Company acquired IBEX during the year ended October 31, 2018, and management excluded this entity from its assessment of the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting as of October 31, 2018, which represented approximately 53% of consolidated revenue for the year ended October 31, 2018 and approximately 6% of total assets as of October 31, 2018. Our audit of internal control over financial reporting of the Company also excluded an evaluation of the internal control over financial reporting of this entity.

A material weakness is a control deficiency, or combination of deficiencies, in internal control over financial reporting, such that there is a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement of the Company’s annual or interim financial statements will not be prevented or detected on a timely basis. The following material weaknesses have been identified and included in management’s assessment.

(1)insufficient internal controls related to information technology general controls (ITGC) in the areas of user access, user provisioning, and change management over certain systems that support the financial reporting process;
(2)inadequate documentation over period end financial disclosure and reporting processes;
(3)

ineffective controls related to the documentation and completeness of the Company’s stock-based compensation expense; and

(4)

inadequate review procedures and segregation of duties over processing sales invoices.

These material weaknesses were considered in determining the nature, timing, and extent of the audit tests applied in our audit of the October 31, 2018 financial statements, and this report does not affect our report dated January 14, 2019, on those financial statements.

We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) (“PCAOB”), the consolidated balance sheets of PolarityTE, Inc. and Subsidiaries as of October 31, 2018 and 2017, and the related consolidated statements of operations, stockholders’ equity, and cash flows for each of the years then ended, and the related notes, and our report dated January 14, 2019 expressed an unqualified opinion.

Basis for Opinion

The Company’s management is responsible for maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting and for its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, included in the accompanying Management’s Annual Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the Company’s internal control over financial reporting based on our audit. We are a public accounting firm registered with the PCAOB and are required to be independent with respect to the Company in accordance with the U.S. federal securities laws and the applicable rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission and the PCAOB.

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

Definition and Limitations of Internal Control over Financial Reporting

An entity’s internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. An entity’s internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that (i) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the entity; (ii) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the entity are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of the entity; and (iii) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the entity’s assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.

Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.

/s/ EisnerAmper LLP

EISNERAMPER LLP

Iselin, NJ

January 14, 2019

Item 9B. Other Information.

Change in Fiscal YearNone.

Pursuant to authority conferred on the Board under the Company’s Restated Bylaws, on January 11, 2019, the Board approved a change in the Company’s fiscal year end from October 31 to December 31. The change in fiscal year is effective December 31, 2018, and the Company will file an Annual Report on Form 10-K for the two-month transition period ended December 31, 2018. The change is fiscal year is reflected in an amendment to Article IX, Section 4 of the Company’s Restated Bylaws to read as follows:Item 9C. Disclosure Regarding Foreign Jurisdictions that Prevent Inspections.

Section 4.        Fiscal YearNone.

Except as otherwise determined by the Board of Directors from time to time, the fiscal year of the Corporation shall end on the last day of December of each year.

PART III

Item 10 - Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance.ITEM 10. DIRECTORS, EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

The following table sets forthinformation under the namescaptions “Proposal No. 1 Election of Directors,” “Corporate Governance and ages of all our directors.

Denver Lough36Class III Director
Steve Gorlin80Class II Director
Jeff Dyer59Class I Director
Jon Mogford50Class I Director
Willie C. Bogan69Class II Director
Peter A. Cohen71Class III Director
Rainer Erdtmann54Class III Director
David Seaburg47Class II Director
Minnie Baylor-Henry71Class I Director

The following is a summary of the background and qualifications of each of our directors.

Dr. Denver Lough,was appointed our Chairman and Chief Executive Officer and Chief Scientific Officer on December 1, 2016 and has continued to serve in this capacity throughout 2018. He also served as Chief Scientific Officer from December 2016 to May 2018, when he became Chief R&D Officer. Prior to December 2016, Dr. Lough served both clinical and research roles at multiple institutions. From 2012 until 2016 Dr. Lough was a Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery House Staff Officer at Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Department of Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery. Dr. Lough has received numerous accolades and awards by national societies related to basic and translational science applications in tissue engineering, regenerative medicine, and immunology as well as within solid organ and reconstructive transplantation. We believe that Dr. Lough is qualified to serve as a member of our Board because of his experience in clinical medicine, surgery, research as well as the development and innovation of technologies related to regenerative medicine and related patent applications and intellectual property which the Company has reviewed for potential development. Dr. Lough holds an M.D. and PhD in Biochemistry, Molecular and Cell Biology from Georgetown University, which he earned in 2012. Dr. Lough has served within the Department of Surgery and Institute for Plastic Surgery Southern Illinois University School of Medicine and Translational Research Director at Laboratory for Regenerative Medicine and Applied Sciences. He has served within the Laboratories for Craniomaxillofacial Regenerative Medicine at the Johns Hopkins Hospital Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery. In addition, Dr. Lough was a lead research associate in the Vascularized Composite Allotransplantation Laboratory at the Johns Hopkins Hospital Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery and has been a research consultant to the Johns Hopkins Hendrix Burn Research Center. He has also served within the Brady Urological Institute at the Johns Hopkins School of Medicine. Dr. Lough was assembled as a member among other burn experts as a Taiwanese presidential disaster response team following the largest civilian burn disaster in 2015.

Steve Gorlin joined the Board in February 2017. Mr. Gorlin helped found several biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies over the past 40 years, including Hycor Biomedical, Inc. (acquired by Agilent), Theragenics Corporation (NYSE: TGX), CytRx Corporation (NASDAQ: CYTR), Medicis Pharmaceutical Corporation (acquired by Valeant), EntreMed, Inc. (NASDAQ: ENMD), MRI Interventions, DARA BioSciences, Inc. (NASDAQ: DARA), MiMedx Group, Inc. (NASDAQ: MDXG), and Medivation, Inc. (NASDAQ: MDVN). Since December 2014, Mr. Gorlin has served as a director of Catasys, Inc. and Co-Chairman of the board of directors of Medovex, Inc., and since May 2011 he has served on the board of directors of NTC China, Inc. In addition, since 2011, Mr. Gorlin has served as a member of the board of directors of DemeRX, Inc. (“DemeRX”) and from 2011 until 2012 he served as Chairman of the board of DemeRX. Since July 2015, he has also served as Vice Chairman of the board of NantKwest, Inc. and from July 2013 until May 2015 he served on various executive committees and the board of directors of Conkwest, Inc., a private company, which is now NantKwest, Inc. From November 2006 until June 2013, Mr. Gorlin served as a member of the board of directors of MiMedx Group, Inc. From 2010 until 2014 Mr. Gorlin served on the Business Advisory Council to the Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, from 2011 until 2013 he served on The Johns Hopkins BioMedical Engineering Advisory Board and from 2007 until 2011 he served on the Board of the Andrews Institute. HeDirectors,” and “Board of Directors” in our proxy statement for our 2022 annual meeting of stockholders (our “2022 Proxy Statement”) is presently a member of the Research Institute Advisory Committee (RIAC) of Massachusetts General Hospital. Mr. Gorlin founded several non-medical related companies, including Perma-Fix, Inc., Pretty Good Privacy, Inc. (sold to Network Associates), Judicial Correction Services, Inc. (sold to Correctional Healthcare) and NTC China, Inc. He started The Touch Foundation, a nonprofit organization for the blind and was a principal financial contributor to the founding of Camp Kudzu for diabetic children. Mr. Gorlin is qualified to serve as a member of the Company’s Board because of his experience in regenerative medicine and pharmaceutical drug and medical device research and development.

Jeff Dyer was appointed to our Board of Directors on March 2, 2017. Mr. Dyer has served as the Horace Beesley Professor of Strategy at Brigham Young University since September 1999. From August 1993 until September 1999 he served as an Assistant Professor at Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania, and from July 1984 until September 1988 he served as Management Consultant and Manager of Bain & Company. Mr. Dyer received his Bachelor of Science degree in psychology and MBA from Brigham Young University and his PhD in management from University of California, Los Angeles. Mr. Dyer is qualified to serve as a member of the Company’s Board because of his extensive business and management expertise and knowledge of capital markets.

Dr. Jon Mogford was appointed to our Board of Directors on February 8, 2017. Dr. Mogford has served in various capacities for the Texas A&M University System (“Texas A&M”). Since May 2013, Dr. Mogford has served as the Vice Chancellor for Research, from August 2012 until April 2013 he served as the Chief Research Officer and from November 2011 until August 2012 he served as Associate Vice Chancellor for Strategic Initiatives at Texas A&M. Prior to joining Texas A&M in 2011, from February 2010 until October 2011, Dr. Mogford served as Deputy Director of the Defense Sciences Office (DSO) of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) in the U.S. Department of Defense. From July 2005 until January 2009, Dr. Mogford served as Program Manager of DSO of DARPA. In addition, since November 2016, Dr. Mogford has served as a member of the board of directors of Medovex Corp. Dr. Mogford is the recipient of the Secretary of Defense Medal for Outstanding Public Service. Dr. Mogford obtained his bachelor’s degree in Zoology from Texas A&M University and doctorate in Medical Physiology from the Texas A&M University Health Science Center, College Station, Texas. His research in vascular physiology continued at the University of Chicago as a Postdoctoral fellow from 1997 until 1998. Dr. Mogford transitioned his research focus to the field of wound healing at Northwestern University, both as a Research Associate and as a Research Assistant Professor from 1998 until 2003. He then served as a Life Sciences Consultant to DARPA on the Revolutionizing Prosthetics program from December 2003 until June 2005. Dr. Mogford is qualified to serve as a member of the Company’s Board because of his experience and research in regenerative medicine.

Willie C. Bogan joined the Board in April 2018. Mr. Bogan served as Associate General Counsel and Corporate Secretary of McKesson Corporation (“McKesson”), a San Francisco-based healthcare services and information technology company (relocating to Las Colinas, TX in 2019) currently ranked 6th on the Fortune 500, from July 2009 until his retirement from McKesson in November 2015. He joined McKesson in November 2006 as Associate General Counsel and Assistant Secretary. Before joining McKesson, Mr. Bogan held senior advisory positions at the following public companies in the San Francisco Bay Area: Bank of America; Safeway; Charles Schwab; and Catellus Development Corporation, a real estate development company. Prior to becoming in-house counsel, he was a partner at Steinberg Miller Bogan & Goldstein in Manhattan Beach, California. He started his law career as a law firm associate in Los Angeles, California. Mr. Bogan graduated Phi Beta Kappa and Summa Cum Laude from Dartmouth College where he majored in Spanish. He received an M.A. degree in Politics and Economics from Oxford University where he studied as a Rhodes Scholar. He earned his J.D. degree from Stanford Law School. Mr. Bogan is qualified to serve as a member of the Board because of his knowledge of the healthcare industry and his experience as an advisor to public companies and their boards of directors on securities law and corporate governance matters.

Peter A. Cohen joined the Board in June 2018. Mr. Cohen has served as Vice Chairman of the Board of Scientific Games Corporation since September 2004. Mr. Cohen was Chairman of Cowen Inc. (formerly known as Cowen Group, Inc.), a diversified financial services company, from November 2009 through June 2018, and served as Chief Executive Officer from November 2009 through December 2017. Mr. Cohen was a founding partner and principal of Ramius LLC, a private investment management firm formed in 1994 that was combined with Cowen in late 2009. Mr. Cohen served as a member of the board of directors of Chart Acquisition Corp. (which, because of a business combination, is now known as Tempus Applied Solutions Holdings, Inc.) from September 2011 to November 2016. From November 1992 to May 1994, Mr. Cohen was Vice Chairman of the Board and a director of Republic New York Corporation, as well as a member of its executive management committee. Mr. Cohen was Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Shearson Lehman Brothers from 1983 to 1990. Mr. Cohen is currently a Trustee of Mount Sinai Medical Center and has served on its board for approximately thirty years. Mr. Cohen is qualified to serve as a member of the Board because of his knowledge of the capital markets and corporate finance, and his experience as a public company director.

Rainer Erdtmann joined the Board in August 2018. He has 26 years of experience in finance and investment banking. For the past three years Mr. Erdtmann has been a portfolio manager and general partner of Point Sur Investors LLC, specializing in identifying innovative biotech companies. Prior to Point Sur Investors, from February 2009 until September 2015, Mr. Erdtmann was with Pharmacyclics, Inc., a Nasdaq-listed company. He began as Vice President, Finance & Administration, Corporate Secretary and acted as the Principal Financial and Accounting Officer. In that capacity he was responsible for accounting, SEC reporting, audits, and investor relations. He built and had operational responsibility for Finance, IT, HR, Legal, Facilities, and Events. He later served as Executive Vice President of Corporate Affairs including Corporate Communications. Additionally, he structured and administered the international revenue for Pharmacyclics into a swiss-based subsidiary. Mr. Erdtmann began his career at Commerzbank, Germany, where he was an investment banker and portfolio manager for institutional international accounts. Mr. Erdtmann earned the Diplom Kaufmann degree, with honors, in Finance and Banking from the Westfaelische Wilhelms Universitaet, Muenster, Germany. Mr. Erdtmann is qualified to serve as a member of the Board because of his knowledge of the biotech industry, his deep experience in capital markets and finance, and his knowledge of commercial and business practices in Europe and North America.

David Seaburg joined the Board in August 2018. David Seaburg is a Managing Director and Head of Sales Trading at Cowen & Company, a diversified financial services company. Over the course of his 20+ year career at Cowen in both Equity Sales Trading and Trading, Mr. Seaburg has advanced to increasingly senior level roles at the firm. In 2006, Mr. Seaburg was named Head of Sales Trading and appointed to the firm’s Equity Operating Committee. Mr. Seaburg is a CNBC Fast Money Contributor and provides regular on-air market commentary for the network. Mr. Seaburg holds a Bachelor of Arts degree in Business Finance and Economics from Northeastern University. Mr. Seaburg is qualified to serve as a member of the Board because of his knowledge of financial management, marketing, investor relations, acquisition transactions, and capital markets.

Minnie Baylor-Henry joined the Board in December 2018. She is a regulatory affairs leader who provides regulatory strategic support services to life sciences companies through her consulting firm, B-Henry & Associates. Before starting her consulting company, Ms. Baylor-Henry was employedincorporated herein by Johnson & Johnson (“J&J”) and members of the J&J health care group in a number of positions, including: Worldwide Vice President Regulatory Affairs - Medical Devises for J&J from January 2011 to March 2015; Vice President - Medical & Regulatory Affairs – Specialty Pharmaceuticals, and Vice President-Regulatory Affairs – Over-the-Counter Products for McNeil Consumer Health Care from August 2003 to October 2008; and, Senior Director, Regulatory Affairs for RW Johnson Pharmaceutical Research & Development Corporation from July 1999 to August 2003. From October 2008 to October 2010, Ms. Baylor-Henry served as the National Director Regulatory Affairs Life Sciences for Deloitte. For eight years prior to August 1999, Ms. Baylor-Henry served in several positions with the U.S. Food & Drug Administration, including Director/Branch Chief – Division of Drug Marketing, Advertising and Communications, National Health Fraud Coordinator – Office of Regulatory Affairs/ Federal/ State Relations, and Regulatory Review Officer. From July 2018, to the present Ms. Baylor-Henry has served as a director of scPharmaceuticals, Inc., a publicly-held company engaged in the business of developing technologies that enable the subcutaneous administration of therapies that have previously been limited to intravenous delivery. Ms. Baylor-Henry received her pharmacy degree from Howard University’s College of Pharmacy and a law degree from Catholic University’s Columbus School of Law. Ms. Baylor-Henry is qualified to serve as a member of the Board because of her knowledge of the healthcare industry and experience with the regulatory regimen applicable to biologic and pharmaceutical products.

The following table sets forth the names, and positions of our executive officers.

NamePosition(s)
Denver LoughChief Executive Officer, Chief R&D Officer, Chairman and Class III Director
Edward SwansonChief Operating Officer
Paul E. MannChief Financial Officer
Cameron HoylerGeneral Counsel, Secretary, EVP Corporate Development & Strategy

The following is a summary of the background of each of our executive officers, except for Dr. Lough, which is presented above with our director information.

Dr. Edward Swanson,33,was appointed as Chief Operating Officer and Director of the Company on December 1, 2016. Following completion of his undergraduate degree in Applied Sciences in Biomedical Sciences at the School of Engineering and Applied Sciences at the University of Pennsylvania, Dr. Swanson received his medical degree from Harvard Medical School, where he attended as a student from August 2008 to May 2012, graduating with honors for his thesis researching surgical outcomes within craniofacial and plastic surgery. From July 2012 until December 2016, Dr. Swanson was a Surgical Resident in Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery in the Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery at The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine. During his time at Johns Hopkins, he served in a leadership role within the residency, sitting on the Program Evaluation Committee from July 2015 to December 2016, and The Johns Hopkins Hospital House staff Patient Safety and Quality Council from July 2014 to June 2015. Dr. Swanson has extensive experience in basic and translational biomedical research, including as a research associate in Wound Healing in the Division of Plastic Surgery at the Brigham and Women’s Hospital and Harvard Medical School from May 2004 to August 2004, thesis student in Traumatic Brain Injury at the University of Pennsylvania from August 2006 to May 2007, research fellow in Pancreatic Cancer Cellular Biology at the Brigham and Women’s Hospital and Harvard Medical School from July 2007 to July 2008, research fellow in Nanomedicine at Harvard Medical School and MIT from May 2008 to August 2008, and research fellow in Vascularized Composite Allotransplantation at the Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School during his final year of medical school. In addition, Dr. Swanson directed large animal translational research as a lead research associate in the Vascularized Composite Allotransplantation Laboratory in the Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery at The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine from July 2014 to June 2015, overseeing experimental projects funded by multimillion dollar grants. Furthermore, Dr. Swanson has demonstrated national and international leadership throughout the field of plastic and reconstructive surgery at a young age, with greater than 40 peer-reviewed publications, five book chapters, and 30 national/international conference presentations. We believe that Dr. Swanson is qualified to serve as a member of our Board because of his experience in technology related to regenerative medicine and related technologies and their clinical applications, which the Company has reviewed for potential development.

Paul E. Mann, age 42, served as the Healthcare Portfolio Manager for Highbridge Capital Management from August 2016 until he joined the Company as Chief Financial Officer in June 2018. From August 2013 to March 2016, Mr. Mann served as an analyst with Soros Fund Management. Prior to joining Soros Fund Management, Mr. Mann was an analyst and portfolio manager with Lodestone Natural Resources and UBS from September 2011 to March 2013. Prior to moving to the buy-side, Mr. Mann spent 11 years as a sell-side analyst at Morgan Stanley and Deutsche Bank. He started his career as a research scientist at Proctor and Gamble and he has an MA (Cantab) and an MEng in Chemical Engineering from Cambridge University. Mr. Mann is a CFA charter holder.

Cameron Hoyler, 35, was appointed General Counsel in April 2017, EVP Corporate Development & Strategy in May 2018, and Secretary in September 2018. Prior to joining the Company, Mr. Hoyler was an attorney at King & Spalding LLP, where he practiced in the Life Sciences and Product Liability groups from September 2012 to April 2017. Mr. Hoyler represented and counseled clients involved in disputes and transactions in a variety of settings, including product liability, employment, commercial, trademark, real estate, and insurance coverage. While at King & Spalding LLP, Mr. Hoyler devoted the vast majority of his practice to representing clients in the pharmaceutical and medical device industries, including Bristol-Myers Squibb Company, AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP, and McKesson Corporation, in addition to working for clients in other highly-regulated industries, such as Chevron U.S.A. Inc. and Monsanto Company. From September 2010 to September 2012, Mr. Hoyler practiced at the law firm of Filice, Brown, Eassa & McLeod, where his practice included product liability, premises liability, employment, and insurance-related matters. He earned his Bachelor of Arts from the University of Pennsylvania, and his Juris Doctor from the University of San Francisco School of Law.

Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance

Section 16(a) of the Exchange Act requires the Company’s directors, executive officers, and stockholders who own more than 10% of the Company’s stock to file forms with the SEC to report their ownership of the Company’s stock and anyreference. There were no material changes in ownership. The Company assists its directors and executives by identifying reportable transactions of which it is aware and preparing and filing the forms on their behalf. All persons required to file forms with the SEC must also send copies of the forms to the Company. We have reviewed all forms provided to us. Based on that review and on written information given to us by our executive officers and directors, we believe that all Section 16(a) filings during the past fiscal year were filed on a timely basis and that all directors, executive officers and 10% beneficial owners have fully complied with such requirements during the past fiscal year, except that immediately following his election to the Board Peter A. Cohen did not report on a timely basis the restricted stock units awarded to him in consideration for joining the Board due to a delay in obtaining his EDGAR filer codes.

Code of Ethics

We have adopted Code of Business Ethics and Practices that applies to every employee, officer, and director. Our Code of Business Ethics and Practices is publicly available, and can be found on our website at http://www.polarityte.com/ by clicking on the link to “Investor Relations” and the link to “Corporate Governance.”

Procedure for Recommending Directors

There has not been a material change to the procedures by which security holdersstockholders may recommend nominees for election to our board of directors since August 17, 2018, the date we filed our Proxy Statement for the annual meeting of stockholders held on September 20, 2018.

Audit Committee

Our board of directors has a standing Audit Committee. The board of directors has affirmatively determined the Audit Committee is composed of independent directors, as independence is defined for members of an audit committee in the rules of The NASDAQ Stock Marketdirectors. See also, “Part 1, Item 1- Contact and Rule 10A-3(b)(1) adopted under the exchange Act. The members of the Audit Committee at October 31, 2018, were Jeff Dyer, Steve Gorlin, and Jon Mogford. The Board has determined that Jeff Dyer meets the qualification requirements of an audit committee financial expert as defined in Item 407 of Regulation S-K.Available Information,” above.

Item 11 - Executive Compensation.ITEM 11. EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

Summary Compensation Table

The following Summary Compensation Table sets forth summary information as to compensation paid or accrued to our named executive officers during the last two fiscal years ended October 31, 2018 and 2017. Our named executive officers include our principal executive officer and the two most highly compensated executive officers other than the principal executive officer who were serving as executive officers at the end of the last completed fiscal year. There is no individual who was not serving as an executive officer at the end of the last completed fiscal year who served as an executive officer during the last completed fiscal year and would have been one of the two most highly compensated executive officers had the individual been serving at the end of the fiscal year.

Name and

Principal Position

 Year Salary ($)  Bonus ($)  

Stock

Awards ($)(1)

  

Option

Awards ($)(1)

  Total ($) 
                  
Denver Lough 2018  448,462   1,010,000   2,395,050(2)  9,860,825(5)  13,714,337 
Chairman of the Board, 2017  315,000   100,000   -0-   2,121,250(6)  2,536,250 
Chief Executive Officer, Chief R&D Officer                      
                       
Edward Swanson 2018  338,462   650,000   798,350(3)  2,738,775(7)  4,525,587 
Chief Operating Officer 2017  270,000   100,000   -0-   1,794,578(8)  2,164,578 
                       
Paul E. Mann 2018  133,846   75,666   3,971,124(4)  9,682,330(9)  13,862,967 
Chief Financial Officer 2017  -   -   -   -   - 

(1) The figures in these columns represent the aggregate grant date fair value for restricted stock and option awards, respectively, granted during fiscal years 2018 and 2017 computed in accordance with FASB ASC Topic 718. See Note 11 to our consolidated financial statements presented in this Annual Report for details as to the assumptions used to determine the grant date fair value of the restricted stock and option awards.

(2) Represents 105,000 shares at a grant date fair value of $22.81 per common share.

(3) Represents 35,000 shares at a grant date fair value of $22.81 per common share.

(4) Represents 100,000 shares at a grant date fair value of $37.05 per common share and 11,667 shares at a grant date fair value of $22.81 per common share.

(5) Represents stock options to purchase 400,000 common shares at an exercise price of $24.95 per common share and 195,000 common shares at an exercise price of $20.12.

(6) Represents stock options to purchase 1,000,000 common shares at an exercise price of $3.15 per common share.

(7) Represents stock options to purchase 100,000 common shares at an exercise price of $24.95 and 65,000 common shares at an exercise price of $20.12.

(8) Represents stock options to purchase 846,000 common shares at an exercise price of $3.15 per common share.

(9) Represents stock options to purchase 350,000 common shares at an exercise price of $31.88 per common share and 21,666 common shares at an exercise price of $20.12.

Narrative Disclosure to Summary Compensation Table

Denver Lough’s Employment Agreement

We have a written employment agreement with Dr. Lough dated November 10, 2017. We paid Dr. Lough a bonus of $150,000 when we signed the agreement. The agreement has an initial term of three years and automatically renews for successive one-year periods unless either party provides the other party with written notice of his or its intention not to renew at least three months prior to the expiration of the current term.

Dr. Lough’s base salary is $530,000 per year. He is eligible to receive a bonus in the amount of 100% of annual salary, as may be determined from time to time by the Board of Directors in its discretion, and is eligible to participate in any equity- based incentive compensation plan or program we adopt. During 2018, Dr. Lough was awarded:

cash bonuses totaling $1,010,000,

restricted stock units representing the right to receive a total of 105,000 shares of common stock that vest in four equal installments every six months beginning six months following the grant date, and

options to purchase 400,000 common shares at an exercise price of $24.95 and 195,000 common shares at an exercise price of $20.12, both exercisable for a term of 10 years that vest in 24 equal monthly installments beginning one month after the grant date.

Dr. Lough, if terminated while not in material breach of the agreement, shall also have the right to participation payments paid to the Company (or any affiliate) from commercial transactions associated with U.S. Patent Application No. 14/954,335 and PCT International Patent Application No. PCT/US2015/063114, and any and all patents and patent applications, whether domestic or foreign, claiming priority thereto or arising therefrom, and intellectual property rights associated with the patents (sales or licenses to third parties).

Edward Swanson’s Employment Agreement

We have a written employment agreement with Dr. Swanson dated November 10, 2017. We paid Dr. Swanson a bonus of $100,000 when we signed the agreement. The agreement has an initial term of two years and automatically renews for successive one-year periods unless either party provides the other party with written notice of his or its intention not to renew at least three months prior to the expiration of the current term.

Dr. Swanson’s base salary is $400,000 per year. He is eligible to receive a bonus in the amount of 100% of annual salary, as may be determined from time to time by the Board of Directors in its discretion, and is eligible to participate in any equity- based incentive compensation plan or program we adopt. During 2018, Dr. Swanson was awarded:

cash bonuses totaling $650,000,

restricted stock units representing the right to receive a total of 35,000 shares of common stock that vest in four equal installments every six months beginning six months following the grant date, and

options to purchase 100,000 common shares at an exercise price of $24,95 and 65,000 common shares at an exercise price of $20.12, both exercisable for a term of 10 years that vest in 24 equal monthly installments beginning one month after the grant date.

Paul E. Mann’s Employment Agreement

Mr. Mann’s employment agreement (the “Mann Agreement”) provides for an annual base salary of $400,000 and a discretionary annual bonus up to 100% of his base salary as determined at the discretion of the board of directors. Mr. Mann was granted options under the Company’s 2017 Equity Incentive Plan to purchase 350,000captions “Board of Directors” and 21,666 shares of the Company common stock at a price equal to fair value as determined under the Plan exercisable over a period of 10 years, which vests subject to continued employment“Executive Compensation” in 24 equal monthly installments beginning one month after the effective date of his engagement, and restricted stock awards equivalent to 100,000 and 11,667 shares of Company common stock that vests, subject to continued employment, in four installments every six months beginning on the date six months following the effective date of his engagement. At the discretion of the Board, Mr. Mann may be granted additional equity compensation awards. Mr. Mannour 2022 Proxy Statement is also entitled to certain payments and benefits if the Company terminates his employment without “cause” or he terminates his employment for “good reason”. Benefits are also provided if Mr. Mann is terminated because of a change in control. The benefit levels under the employment agreements generally include continued payment of base salary, a bonus for the year of termination, accelerated vesting of equity awards and continued welfare benefits, and are described in more detail under the “Potential Payments Upon Termination or Change-In-Control” below. Mr. Mann is entitled to participate in the Company’s insurance and benefit plans on the same basis as other employees of the Company.

Potential Payments Upon Termination or Change-In-Control

Under our employment agreements with Dr. Lough, Dr. Swanson, and Mr. Mann, we are obligated to make payments or provide benefits to them in the event of a termination of employment or a change of control. If employment of one of these officer is terminated for any reason, then the officer is entitled to receive:

the sum of his then base salary from the date of termination,
reasonable expenses incurred by the officer relating to the performance of his duties,
accrued but unused vacation time through the date of termination,
the sum of his then annual bonus, and
all equity awards earned and vested prior to the date of termination.

Furthermore, if the officer is terminated for any reason other than “cause,”incorporated herein by the officer for “good reason,” or because of a change in control, then the officer is entitled to receive the greater of:reference.

a cash amount equal to the sum of the officer’s base salary, annual bonus, and equity awards earned during the year immediately preceding the date of termination, or
the amount payable (including base salary, annual bonus, and equity awards) for the remainder of the term of the employment agreement;

subject to the officer delivering to us a written release agreement.

Under the agreements, “cause” means: the willful and continued failure of the officer to perform substantially his duties and responsibilities (other than due to death or disability) and such failure is not cured within 30 days following a written demand for performance; conviction of, or plea of guilty ornolo contendereto, a felony; or fraud, dishonesty, or gross misconduct that is materially and demonstratively injurious to the Company. “Good reason” means the occurrence of any of the following events without the officer’s consent: the assignment to the officer of duties that are significantly different from, or that result in a substantial diminution of, the duties that he assumed on at the beginning of the employment agreement; the assignment to the officer of a title that is different from and subordinate to the title at the beginning of the employment agreement; or material breach of the employment agreement by the Company. Should the officer be required to serve in a diminished capacity in a division or unit of another entity (including the acquiring entity), after a change in control, such event constitutes good reason regardless of the title of the officer.

Dr. Lough, if terminated while not in material breach of his employment agreement, is entitled to receive participation payments on amounts paid to us from commercial transactions associated with U.S. Patent Application No. 14/954,335, and PCT International Patent Application No. PCT/US2015/063114, and any and all patents and patent applications, whether domestic or foreign, claiming priority thereto or arising therefrom, and intellectual property rights associated with the patents, such as sales or licenses to third parties.

Outstanding Equity Awards at Fiscal Year-End

The following table shows grants of stock options and grants of unvested stock awards outstanding on the last day of the fiscal year ended October 31, 2018, to each of the executive officers named in the Summary Compensation Table.

  Option Awards Stock Awards 
Name Option Grant Date Number of Securities Underlying Unexercised Options Exercisable (#)(1)  Number of Securities Underlying Unexercised Options Unexercisable (#)(1)  

Option Exercise Price

($)

  

Option

Expiration

Date

 

Number

of Shares or

Units of Stock

That Have

Not Vested

(#)

  

Market Value of Shares or Units of Stock That Have Not Vested

($)(2)

 
Denver 11-30-2016  958,333   41,667  $3.15  11-30-2026  105,000  $1,600,200 
Lough 11-10-2017  183,333   216,667  $24.59  11-10-2027  -   - 
  9-20-2018  8,125   186,875  $20.12  9-20-2028  -   - 
                         
Edward 11-30-2016  810,750   35,250  $3.15  11-30-2026  35,000  $533,400 
Swanson 11-10-2017  45,833   54,167  $24.59  11-10-2027  -   - 
  9-20-2018  2,708   62,292  $20.12  9-20-2028  -   - 
                         
Paul E. 6-20-2018  58,333   291,667  $31.88  6-20-2028  100,000  $1,524,000 
Mann 9-20-2018  903   20,763  $20.12  9-20-2028  11,667  $177,805 

(1)All stock option listed vest in 24 monthly installments beginning one month following the grant date.
(2)Market value based on closing stock price of $15.24 on October 31, 2018

Director Compensation

The following table shows the total compensation paid or accrued during the fiscal year ended October 31, 2018, to each of our directors, current and former.

Name 

Fees Earned or

Paid in Cash ($)

  

Stock

Awards

($)(1)

  

Option

Awards

($)(1)

  

All Other

Compensation ($)

  

Total

($)

 
                
Steve Gorlin  38,000   119,500(2)  82,225(6)  -0-   239,775 
Jeff Dyer  45,000   119,500(2)  82,225(6)  -0-   246,775 
Jon Mogford  40,000   119,500(2)  82,225(6)  -0-   241,775 
Willie C. Bogan  20,000   777,300(3)  -0-   -0-   797,300 
Peter A. Cohen  10,000   706,200(4)  -0-   -0-   716,200 
Rainer Erdtmann  -0-   -0-   800,542(7)  -0-   800,542 
David Seaburg  -0-   1,347,600(5)  -0-   -0-   1,347,600 
Minnie Baylor-Henry(8)  -0-   -0-   -0-   -0-   -0- 

(1) The figures in these columns represent the aggregate grant date fair value for restricted stock and option awards, respectively, granted during fiscal years 2018 and 2017 computed in accordance with FASB ASC Topic 718. See Note [   ] to our consolidated financial statements presented in this Annual Report for details as to the assumptions used to determine the grant date fair value of the restricted stock and option awards.

(2) Represents 5,000 shares at a grant date fair value of $23.91 per common share.

(3) Represents 30,000 shares at a grant date fair value of $25.91 per common share.

(4) Represents 30,000 shares at a grant date fair value of $23.54 per common share.

(5) Represents 60,000 shares at a grant date fair value of $22.46 per common share.

(6) Represents stock options to purchase 5,000 common shares at an exercise price of $24.59 per common share.

(7) Represents stock options to purchase 50,000 common shares at an exercise price of $20.47 per common share.

(8) Minnie Baylor-Henry became a director in December 2018. At that time, she received the initial director compensation previously approved by resolution of the Board in September 2018 for all new directors. The compensation included a grant to her of 8,975 restricted stock units for an equal number of common shares that vest in three annual installments commencing December 10, 2019, subject to continued service as a director, and an option to purchase 19,329 shares of the Company’s common stock exercisable over a term of 10 years that vest in three annual installments commencing December 10, 2019, subject to continued service as a director. The restricted stock units and option were issued under the Company’s 2019 Equity Incentive Plan, and the option exercise price is $13.65 per share, which is fair value determined under the Plan. The fair value of the compensation determined in accordance with FASB ASC Topic 718 is $350,000. Ms. Baylor-Henry will also be entitled to participate in the annual compensation package the Company provides to its non-employee directors.

During the fiscal year ended October 31, 2017, our non-employee directors were compensated in accordance with the following terms.

Each non-employee director receives a quarterly cash retainer of $10,000. The Company’s Audit Committee Chairman receives a $15,000 annual Service Fee, the Compensation Committee Chairman receives a $10,000 annual service fee, and the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee Chairman receives an $8,000 annual service fee.
Each non-employee director is entitled to receive 10-year options under the Company equity incentive plan to purchase that number of shares of the Company’s Common Stock valued at $150,000, calculated by dividing $150,000 by the Black-Scholes value of the stock options based on the closing stock price the day the stock options are awarded.
Each non-employee director is entitled to a fee of $1,500 for each Board of Directors meeting at which the director is present in person, and each member of our Board committees is entitled to a fee of $800 for each committee meeting at which the director is present in person. Each non-employee director is entitled to a fee of $500 for each teleconference called by either the Chairman of the Board of Directors, the President of the Company or the Chairman of a Board of Directors committee.

Effective November 1, 2018, non-employee directors will be compensated as follows:

Each non-employee director receives an annual cash retainer of $45,000 paid quarterly;
Our Audit Committee Chairman will receive an annual fee of $20,000, our Compensation Committee Chairman will receive an annual fee of $15,000, and our Nominating and Governance Committee Chairman will receive an annual fee of $10,000;
Non-chair members of our Audit Committee will receive an annual fee of $9,000, of our Compensation Committee will receive an annual fee of $7,000, and of our Nominating and Governance Committee Chairman will receive an annual fee of $5,000; and
Each non-employee director is entitled to receive an annual equity award with a value of $175,000 determined under the Black-Scholes formula, which may be issued entirely in stock options exercisable over 10 Years that vest, subject to continuing service, in 12 monthly installments beginning one month after the grant date, or 65% in stock options and 35% restricted stock units that vest, subject to continuing service, in a lump sum one year after the grant date.

David Seaburg

In August 2018 David Seaburg was elected by the Board of Directors to serve as a director of the Company. Subsequently the Company entered into a written consulting agreement with Mr. Seaburg pursuant to which he will provide investor relations and other services to the Company over a period of two years for a fee consisting of (i) quarter-annual cash payment of $10,000, (ii) 60,000 restricted stock units issued under the Company equity incentive plan that vest in four equal installments every six months during the term of the agreement subject to continued service, and (iii) an annual award under the Company equity incentive plan of options exercisable over a term of 10 years to purchase common stock in number equal to the number of shares of common stock with a value of $150,000 at the time of the award based on a Black-Scholes calculation.

Item 12 - SecurityITEM 12. SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT AND RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS

The information under the captions “Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and ManagementManagement” in our 2022 Proxy Statement is incorporated herein by reference.

ITEM 13. CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS AND DIRECTOR INDEPENDENCE

The information under the captions “Corporate Governance and the Board of Directors” and “Certain Relationships and Related Stockholder Matters.Transactions” in our 2022 Proxy Statement is incorporated herein by reference.

The following table sets forth information regarding the beneficial ownership of our common stock as of January 7, 2019, by

45
 each person known to us to be the beneficial owner of more than 5% of the common stock,
each of our current directors,
each officer named in the Summary Compensation Table presented in Item 11, above, and
all our directors and executive officers as a group.

ITEM 14. PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTING FEES AND SERVICES

The number of shares of common stock beneficially owned by each person is determinedinformation under applicable SEC rules. Under such rules, beneficial ownership includes any shares asthe proposal pertaining to which the person has sole or shared voting power or investment power, and any shares that the person has the right to acquire within 60 daysratification of the dateappointment of EisnerAmper LLP, as of whichindependent public accountant for the beneficial ownership determinationfiscal year ending December 31, 2022, in our 2022 Proxy Statement is made. Applicable percentages are based upon 21,456,643 voting shares issued and outstanding as of January 7, 2019, and treating any shares thatincorporated herein by reference.

With the holder has the right to acquire within 60 days as outstanding for purposes of computing their percent ownership. Except as otherwise indicated, eachexception of the stockholders listed below has sole voting and investment power over the shares beneficially owned, subject to community property laws where applicable, and addresses are c/o PolarityTE, Inc., 123 Wright Brothers Drive, Salt Lake City, Utah 84116.

  Number of Shares of Common Stock Beneficially Owned  

Percentage of

Common Stock

 
Executive Officers and Directors (1):        
         
Denver Lough  8,357,292   36.7 
Edward Swanson  927,898   4.1 
Paul Mann  166,181   0.7 
Cameron Hoyler  215,417   1.0 
Steve Gorlin  111,209   0.5 
Jon Mogford  112,757   0.5 
Jeff Dyer  173,731   0.8 
Willie C. Bogan  10,376   nil 
Peter A. Cohen  60,376   0.3 
Rainer Erdtmann (2)  163,187   0.8 
David Seaburg  25,000   0.1 
Minnie Baylor-Henry  -0-   -0- 
Executive Officers and Directors as a Group (12 persons)  10,323,424   42.5 
         
Greater that 5% Holders:        
         
Barry Honig (3)
555 S. Federal Hwy, #450, Boca Raton, FL 33432
  1,927,388   9.0 
         
Michael Brauser (4)
4400 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 850, Miami, FL 33137
  1,431,638   6.7 

(1) Includes the following numberinformation specifically incorporated by reference in Part III of shares of options that were exercisable or restricted share awards expected to vest within 60 days of January 14, 2019: Dr. Lough, 1,037,292; Dr. Swanson 927,898; Mr. Hoyler, 125,417; Mr. Gorlin, 56,208, Dr. Mogford, 57,756; Mr. Dyer, 147,208; Mr. Bogan, 10,375; Mr. Cohn, 10,375; Mr. Erdtmann, 19,005; and Mr. Seaburg, 15,000.

(2) Includes 94,180 shares owned by Point Sur Investors Fund I. Mr. Erdtmann is Managing Director and General Partner of Point Sur Investors LLC, the general partner of Point Sur Investors Fund I, and as a result maythis Annual Report on Form 10-K from our 2022 Proxy Statement, our 2022 Proxy Statement will not be deemed to have shared voting and investment control overbe filed as part of this report. Without limiting the shares held by Point Sur Investors Fund I.

(3) The stockforegoing, the information for Mr. Honig is based on information contained in an amendment to Schedule 13G filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on July 23, 2018, reflecting the stockholder’s beneficial ownership as of July 23, 2018.

(4) The stock information for Mr. Brauser is based on information contained in an amendment to Schedule 13G filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on June 28, 2018, reflecting the stockholder’s beneficial ownership as of June 27, 2018.

Item 13 - Certain Relationships and Related Transactions and Director Independence.

Director Independence

Our Board is currently comprised of nine members. The Board has reviewed the materiality of any relationship that each of our directors has with the Company, either directly or indirectly. Based upon this review, the Board has determined that Steve Gorlin, Jeff Dyer, Dr. Jon Mogford, Willie C. Bogan, Peter A. Cohen, Rainer Erdtmann,and Minnie Baylor-Henry are “independent directors” as defined by the rules of The NASDAQ Stock Market.

Certain Relationships and Related Transactions

In October 2018, we entered into an office lease covering approximately 7,250 square feet of rental space in the building located at 40 West 57th Street in New York City. The lease is for a term of three years. The annual lease rate is $60 per square foot. Initially we will occupy and pay for only 3,275 square feet of space, and we are not obligated under the lease to pay for the remaining 3,975 square feet coveredcaption “Audit Committee Report” in our 2022 Proxy Statement is not incorporated by the lease unless we elect to occupy that additional space. Comparable annual lease rates for similar office spacereference in the area range between $67 and $110 per square foot. We believe the terms of the lease are very favorable to us, and we obtained these favorable terms through the efforts of Peter A. Cohen, a director, which he provided so that the company he owns, Peter A. Cohen, LLC (“Cohen LLC”), could sublease a portion of the office space.

Initially, we are using three offices and two work stations in the office and share common areas representing approximately 2,055 square feet. Cohen LLC is using approximately 1,220 square feet. The monthly lease payment for 3,275 square feet is $16,377. Of this amount $6,103 is allocated pro rata to Cohen LLC based on square footage occupied. Additional lease charges for operating expenses and taxes are allocated under the sublease based on the ratio of rent paid by us and Cohen LLC to total rent.

Cohen LLC identified two associated entities that may wish to occupy an additional 2,753 square feet of space in the office. Under the terms of the sublease Cohen LLC can add this additional space to the 1,220 square feet occupied, which would bring the total space occupied by us and Cohen LLC to 6,028 square feet. Because a portion of the additional space subleased to Cohen LLC is less private and attractive, we agreed to reduce the overall annual lease rate for the Cohen LLC space to $58.60 per square foot, which means we will be paying an annual lease rate for the space we use of $62.70. Assuming Cohen LLC subleases the additional office space, our annual lease payment to the lessor would be $361,680, and Cohen LLC would pay to us $232,830 under the sublease.

Item 14 - Principal Accountant Fees and Services.

The following table sets forth the fees billed by EisnerAmper LLP (“EisnerAmper”), for each of our last two fiscal years for the categories of services indicated.

  2018 ($)  2017 ($) 
Audit Fees  485,210   198,540 
Audit Related Fees      
Tax Fees      
Other Fees      
Total Fees  485,210   198,540 

Audit fees consist of fees billed for professional services rendered for the audit of our financial statements and review of interim consolidated financial statements included in quarterly reports and services that are normally provided by the principal accountants relating to statutory and regulatory filings or engagements.

Audit related fees consist of fees billed for assurance and related services that are reasonably related to the performance of the audit or review of our consolidated financial statements and are not included in audit fees.

Tax fees consist of fees billed for professional services for tax compliance, tax advice, and tax planning. These services include preparation of federal and state income tax returns.

Other fees consist of fees for product and services other than the services reported in the categories described above.

Audit Committee Pre-Approval Policies and Procedures

Our Audit Committee assists the Board in overseeing and monitoring the integrity of our financial reporting process, our compliance with legal and regulatory requirements, and the quality of our internal and external audit processes. The role and responsibilities of the Audit Committee are set forth in a written charter adopted by the Board, which is available on our website atwww.polarityte.com.The Audit Committee is responsible for selecting, retaining, and determining the compensation of our independent public accountant, approving the services they will perform, and reviewing the performance of the independent public accountant. The Audit Committee reviews with management and our independent public accountant our annual financial statementsAnnual Report on Form 10-K and our quarterly financial statements on Forms 10-Q. The Audit Committee reviews and reassesses the charter annually and recommends any changes to the Board for approval. The Audit Committee is responsible for overseeing our overall financial reporting process. In fulfilling its responsibilities for the financial statements for fiscal year 2018, the Audit Committee took the following actions:10-K.

reviewed and discussed the audited financial statements for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2018, with management and EisnerAmper;
discussed with EisnerAmper the matters required to be discussed in accordance with the rules set forth by the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (“PCAOB”), relating to the conduct of the audit;
received written disclosures and the letter from EisnerAmper regarding its independence as required by applicable requirements of the PCAOB regarding EisnerAmper’s communications with the Audit Committee and the Audit Committee further discussed with EisnerAmper its independence; and
considered the status of pending litigation, taxation matters, and other areas of oversight relating to the financial reporting and audit process that the Audit Committee determined appropriate.

Our Audit Committee approved all services that our independent accountants provided to us in the past two fiscal years.

PART IV

Item 15. Exhibits, Financial Statement Schedules.

(1)Financial Statements.
The financial statements required by Item 15 are submitted in a separate section of this report, beginning on Page F-1, incorporated herein and made a part hereof.
(2)Financial Statement Schedules.
Schedules have been omitted because of the absence of conditions under which they are required or because the required information is included in the financial statements or notes thereto.
(3)Exhibits.

(1) Financial Statements.

The financial statements required by Item 15 are submitted in a separate section of this report, beginning on Page F-1, incorporated herein and made a part hereof.

(2) Financial Statement Schedules.

Schedules have been omitted because of the absence of conditions under which they are required or because the required information is included in the financial statements or notes thereto.

(3) Exhibits.

The following index lists the exhibits that are filed with this report or incorporated by reference, as noted:

2.11.1Sales Agreement dated March 30, 2021, between the Company and Plan of ReorganizationCantor Fitzgerald & Co. (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 2.11.1 to our Annual Report on Form 8-K10-K filed with the Commission on December 7, 2016)March 30, 2021)
3.1Restated Certificate of Incorporation (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.1 to our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed on September 15, 2014).
3.2Restated Bylawsof PolarityTE, Inc. (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.1 to our Current Report on Form 8-K filed on June 17, 2005)October 1, 2021).
3.33.2Certificate of Designations, Preferences and Rights of the 0% Series A Convertible Preferred Stock of Majesco Entertainment Company (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to our Current Report on Form 8-K filed on December 18, 2014)
3.4Certificate of Designations, Preferences and Rights of the 0% Series B Convertible Preferred Stock of Majesco Entertainment Company (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to our Current Report on Form 8-K filed on April 30, 2015)
3.5Certificate of Designations, Preferences and Rights of the 0% Series C Convertible Preferred Stock of Majesco Entertainment Company (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.4 to our Current Report on Form 8-K filed on June 9, 2015)

3.6Certificate of Designations, Preferences and Rights for 0% Series D Convertible Preferred Stock (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to our Current Report on Form 8-K filed on October 20, 2015)
3.7Certificate of Amendment to Restated Certificate of Incorporation (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.1 to our Form 8-K filed with the Commission on July 29, 2016)
3.8Form of Certificate of Designation of Preferences, Rights and Limitations of Series EA Convertible Preferred Stock (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.1 to our Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Commission on December 7, 2016)March 17, 2022).
3.93.3Certificate of Amendment to Restated CertificateDesignation of Incorporation (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.1 to our Form 8-K filed with the Commission on April 7, 2017)
3.10ArticlesPreferences, Rights and Limitations of MergerSeries B Convertible Preferred Stock (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.2 to our Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Commission on April 7, 2017)March 17, 2022).
3.113.4Certificate of Designations, PreferencesPolarityTE, Inc., Amended and Rights of the 0% Series E Convertible Preferred StockRestated Bylaws - September 28, 2021 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.33.2 to our Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Commission on April 7, 2017)October 1, 2021).
3.124.1Certificate of Designations, Preferences and Rights of Series F Convertible Preferred Stock (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.1 to our Form 8-K filed with the Commission on September 20, 2017)
3.13Amendment No. 1 to Restated Bylaws dated January 11, 2019, Changing Fiscal Year
4.2Form of Common Stock Warrant (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to our Form 8-K filed with the Commission on April 14, 2016)
4.3Form of WarrantCertificate (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to our Form 8-K filed with the CommissionSEC on September 20, 2017).February 14, 2020)
#10.014.2Form of Equity Incentive PlanWarrant Agency Agreement (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.34.2 to our Form 8-K filed with the CommissionSEC on December 7, 2016)February 14, 2020)
10.024.3Stockholders AgreementForm of letter agreement for repricing of common stock warrants issued February 14, 2020 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.499.1 to our Form 8-K filed with the CommissionSEC on December 7, 2016)November 23, 2020)
10.034.4Voting AgreementForm of Series A Common Stock Purchase Warrant dated December 23, 2020 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.54.1 to our Form 8-K filed with the CommissionSEC on December 7, 2016)23, 2020)
10.044.5Form of Series B Pre-Funded Common Stock Purchase Warrant Bill of Sale of Laboratory Equipmentdated December 23, 2020 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.64.2 to our Form 8-K filed with the CommissionSEC on December 7, 2016)23, 2020)
10.054.6Lease by and Between the Company and Paradigm Resources LCForm of Placement Agent Common Stock Purchase Warrant dated December 23, 2020 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.74.3 to our Form 8-K filed with the CommissionSEC on December 7, 2016)23, 2020)
10.064.7Form of SubscriptionSeries A Common Stock Purchase Warrant – January 2021 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to our Form 8-K filed with the SEC on January 14, 2021)
4.8Form of Series B Pre-Funded Common Stock Purchase Warrant – January 2021 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.2 to our Form 8-K filed with the SEC on January 14, 2021)
4.9Form of Placement Agent Common Stock Purchase Warrant – January 2021 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.3 to our Form 8-K filed with the SEC on January 14, 2021)
4.10Form of Common Stock Purchase Warrant – January 2021 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to our Form 8-K filed with the SEC on January 26, 2021)

46

4.11Form of Placement Agent Common Stock Purchase Warrant – January 2021 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.2 to our Form 8-K filed with the SEC on January 26, 2021)
4.12Form of Common Warrant – March 2022 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to our Form 8-K filed with the SEC on March 17, 2022)
4.13Form of Placement Agent Warrant – January 2021 March 2022 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.2 to our Form 8-K filed with the SEC on March 17, 2022)
#10.1Employment Agreement with David Seaburg (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.30 to our Form 10-KT filed with the SEC on March 18, 2019)
#10.2Employment Agreement with Richard Hague (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to our Form 8-K filed with the Commission on December 16, 2016)
10.07Form of Registration Rights Agreement (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2 to our Form 8-K filed with the Commission on December 16, 2016)
10.08Form of First Amendment to Agreement and Plan of Reorganization (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.3 to our Form 8-K filed with the Commission on December 16, 2016)
10.09Form of Exchange Agreement (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to our Form 8-K filed with the Commission on January 19, 2017)
10.10Purchase Agreement by and Among the Company and Zift Interactive LLC (incorporated by reference to our Form 10-Q filed with the CommissionSEC on September 14, 2017)May 10, 2019)
10.11#10.3Form of Subscription Agreement (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to our Form 8-K filed with the Commission on September 20, 2017)
10.12Form of Registration Rights Agreement (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2 to our Form 8-K filed with the Commission on September 20, 2017)
#10.13Employment Agreement with Denver Lough (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to our Form 8-K filed with the Commission on November 16, 2017)
#10.14Employment Agreement with Edward Swanson (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2 to our Form 8-K filed with the Commission on November 16, 2017)
#10.15Employment Agreement with John Stetson (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.3 to our Form 8-K filed with the Commission on November 16, 2017)
#10.16Employment Agreement with Cameron Hoyler (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.4 to our Form 8-K filed with the Commission on November 16, 2017)
10.17Commercial Lease Agreement by and Between the Company and Adcomp LLC (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to our Form 8-K filed with the Commission on December 29, 2017)
#10.18Executive Employment Agreement with Paul Mann (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to our Form 8-K filed with the CommissionSEC on September 14, 2018)
#*10.19#10.4ConsultingAmendment No. 1 to Employment Agreement with David Seaburg dated(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2 to our Form 10-Q filed with the SEC on August 8, 20182019)

#*10.20#10.5Amendment No. 1 to Employment Agreement with Richard Hague (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to our Form 10-Q filed with the SEC on August 8, 2019)
#10.6Amendment No. 1 to Employment Agreement with Paul Mann (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.3 to our Form 10-Q filed with the SEC on August 8, 2019)
#10.7Form of Notice of Restricted Stock Grant and Restricted Stock Award Agreement under the 2019 Equity Incentive Plan (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.4 to our Form 10-Q filed with the SEC on August 8, 2019)
#10.8Form of Restricted Stock Unit Agreement – 2017 Equity Incentive Plan (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.20 to our Form 10-K filed with the SEC on January 14, 2019)
#*10.21#10.09Form of Stock Option Agreement – 2017 Equity Incentive Plan (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.21 to our Form 10-K filed with the SEC on January 14, 2019)
#*10.22#10.10Form of Restricted Stock Unit Agreement – 2019 Equity Incentive Plan (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.22 to our Form 10-K filed with the SEC on January 14, 2019)
#*10.23#10.11Form of Stock Option Agreement – 2019 Equity Incentive Plan (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.23 to our Form 10-K filed with the SEC on January 14, 2019)
#10.24#10.12PolarityTE 2017 Equity Incentive Plan (incorporated by reference to Appendix A of our proxy statement filed with the SEC on February 24, 2017)
#10.13PolarityTE 2019 Equity Incentive Plan (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 99.2 to our Form S-8 registration Statement filed with the SEC on October 5, 2018)
#10.14PolarityTE 2019 Employee Stock Purchase Plan (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 99.1 to our Form S-8 registration Statement filed with the CommissionSEC on October 5, 2018)
#10.25#10.15PolarityTE 2019 Employee2020 Stock PurchaseOption and Incentive Plan (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 99.299.1 to our Form S-8 registration Statement8-K filed with the CommissionSEC on October 5, 2018December 29, 2020)
*10.26#10.16Form of Incentive Stock Option Agreement – 2020 Stock Option and Incentive Plan (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.17 to our Form 10-K filed with the SEC on March 12, 2020)
#10.17Form of Non-qualified Stock Option Agreement – Non-employee Directors – 2020 Stock Option and Incentive Plan (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.18 to our Form 10-K filed with the SEC on March 12, 2020)
#10.18Form of Non-qualified Stock Option Agreement – Employees – 2020 Stock Option and Incentive Plan (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.19 to our Form 10-K filed with the SEC on March 12, 2020)
#10.19Form of Non-qualified Stock Option Agreement – Consultants – 2020 Stock Option and Incentive Plan (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.20 to our Form 10-K filed with the SEC on March 12, 2020)
#10.20Form of Restricted Stock Award – 2020 Stock Option and Incentive Plan (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.21 to our Form 10-K filed with the SEC on March 12, 2020)
#10.21Form of Restricted Stock Unit Award – Non-employee Directors - 2020 Stock Option and Incentive Plan (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.22 to our Form 10-K filed with the SEC on March 12, 2020)
#10.22Form of Restricted Stock Unit Award – Employees - 2020 Stock Option and Incentive Plan (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.23 to our Form 10-K filed with the SEC on March 12, 2020)
#10.23Settlement Terms Agreement dated August 21, 2019, between Denver Lough and the Company (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to our Form 10-Q filed with the SEC on November 12, 2019)
#10.24Form of Indemnification Agreement for directors and officers (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to our Form 8-K filed with the SEC on March 25, 2020)
#10.25Employment Agreement with Richard Hague dated August 18, 2021 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to our Form 8-K filed with the SEC on August 24, 2021)
#10.26Employment Agreement with Cameron Hoyler dated August 18, 2021 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2 to our Form 8-K filed with the SEC on August 24, 2021)

47

#10.27Employment Agreement with Jacob Patterson dated August 18, 2021 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.3 to our Form 8-K filed with the SEC on August 24, 2021)
#10.28Consulting Agreement with David Seaburg dated September 1, 2021 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.4 to our Form 10-Q filed with the SEC on November 10, 2021)
10.29Agreement of Lease by and between the Company and Lefrak SbnSBN Limited Partnership for office space at 40 West 57th Street, New York, New York 10019dated October 19, 2018 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.26 to our Form 10-K filed with the SEC on January 14, 2019)
*10.2710.30Sublease Agreement by and between the Company and Peter Cohen LLC for office space at 40 West 57th Street, New York, New York 10019 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.27 to our Form 10-K filed with the SEC on January 14, 2019)
*21.110.31SubsidiariesSublease Agreement with Joseph M. Still Burn Centers, Inc., dated April 22, 2019 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.28 to our Form 10-K filed with the SEC on March 12, 2020)
10.32Commercial Lease Agreement by and Between the Company and Adcomp LLC (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to our Form 8-K filed with the SEC on December 29, 2017)
10.33Purchase Agreement dated December 5, 2019, between the Company and Keystone Capital Partners, LLC (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to our Form 8-K filed with the SEC on December 5, 2019)
10.34Note and Loan Agreement dated April 12, 2020, between PolarityTE MD, Inc., and KeyBank National Association (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to our Form 8-K filed with the SEC on April 15, 2020)
10.35Form of Securities Purchase Agreement dated December 21, 2020 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to our Form 8-K filed with the SEC on December 23, 2020)
10.36Form of Securities Purchase Agreement dated January 11, 2021 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to our Form 8-K filed with the SEC on January 14, 2021)
10.37Form of letter agreement for exercise of Series A Common Stock Purchase Warrant dated December 23, 2020 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to our Form 8-K filed with the SEC on January 26, 2021)
10.38Purchase and Sale Agreement between PolarityTE, Inc., and BCG Acquisitions LLC (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2 to our Form 8-K filed with the SEC on December 17, 2021)
10.39Purchase and Sale Agreement between PolarityTE, Inc., and Adcomp LLC (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2 to our Form 8-K filed with the SEC on March 15, 2022)
10.40Amendment No. 1 to Purchase and Sale Agreement between PolarityTE, Inc., and BCG Acquisitions LLC (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.4 to our Form 8-K filed with the SEC on March 15, 2022)
10.41Form of Securities Purchase Agreement dated March 15, 2022 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to our Form 8-K filed with the SEC on March 17, 2022)
10.42Form of Warrant Amendment Agreement dated March 15, 2022 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2 to our Form 8-K filed with the SEC on March 17, 2022)
21.1Subsidiaries (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 21.1 to our Form 10-K filed with the SEC on March 12, 2020)
*23.1Consent of EisnerAmper LLPIndependent Registered Public Accounting Firm
*31.1Certification of Principal Executive OfficerPursuant to Rule 13a-14(a)
*31.2Certification of Principal Financial OfficerPursuant to Rule 13a-14(a)
*32.1Certification Pursuant to Rule 13a-14(b) and Section 1350, CertificateChapter 63 of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial OfficerTitle 18, United States Code

*101.INSXBRLInline EXBRL Instance Document
*101.SCHInline XBRL Taxonomy Extension Schema Document
*101.CALInline XBRL Taxonomy Extension Calculation Linkbase Document
*101.DEFInline XBRL Taxonomy Extension Definition Linkbase Document
*101.LABInline XBRL Taxonomy Extension Labels Linkbase Document
*101.PREInline XBRL Taxonomy Extension Presentation Linkbase Document
*104Cover Page Interactive Data File

#Constitutes a management contract, compensatory plan, or arrangement.
*Filed herewith.

Item 16. Form 10-K Summary.

Not Applicable.

6748
 

SIGNATURES

Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.

POLARITYTE, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
By:/s/ Denver LoughRichard Hague

Chief Executive Officer (Principal

(Principal Executive Officer)

Date:January 14, 2018March 30, 2022
By:/s/ Paul MannJacob Patterson

Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)

Date:January 14, 2019March 30, 2022

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities and on the dates indicated.

SignatureTitleDate
/s/ Denver LoughPeter A. CohenChief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board of DirectorsJanuary 14, 2019March 30, 2022
Denver LoughPeter A. Cohen
/s/ Steven GorlinJeffrey DyerDirectorJanuary 14, 2019March 30, 2022
Steven GorlinJeffrey Dyer
/s/ Jeffery DyerChris NoletDirectorJanuary 14, 2019March 30, 2022
Jeffery DyerChris Nolet
/s/ Jon MogfordDirectorJanuary 14, 2019
Jon Mogford
/s/ Willie C. BoganDirectorJanuary 14, 2019March 30, 2022
Willie C. Bogan
/s/ Peter A. CohenDirectorJanuary 14, 2019
Peter A. Cohen
/s/ Rainer ErdtmannDirectorJanuary 14, 2019
Rainer Erdtmann
/s/ David SeaburgDirectorJanuary 14, 2019March 30, 2022
David Seaburg

49
/s/ Minnie Baylor-HenryDirectorJanuary 14, 2019
Minnie Baylor-Henry 

POLARITYTE, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

Consolidated Financial Statements

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm,EisnerAmper LLP, Iselin, New Jersey, PCAOB ID 274F-51
Consolidated Balance Sheets as of December 31, 2021 and 2020F-53
Consolidated Statements of Operations for the Years Ended December 31, 2021 and December 31, 2020F-54
Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Loss for the Years Ended December 31, 2021 and December 31, 2020F-55
Consolidated Statements of Stockholders’ Equity for the Years Ended December 31, 2021 and December 31, 2020F-56
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the Years Ended December 31, 2021 and December 31, 2020F-57
Notes to Consolidated Financial StatementsF-58

50

REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

To the Board of Directors and Stockholders of

PolarityTE, Inc.

Opinion on the Financial Statements

We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of PolarityTE, Inc. and Subsidiaries (the “Company”) as of OctoberDecember 31, 20182021 and 2017,2020, and the related consolidated statements of operations, comprehensive loss, stockholders’ equity, and cash flows for each of the years then ended, and the related notes (collectively referred to as the “financial statements”). In our opinion, the financial statements present fairly, in all material respects, the consolidated financial position of the Company as of OctoberDecember 31, 20182021 and 2017,2020, and the consolidated results of their operations and their cash flows for each of the years then ended, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.

WeGoing Concern

The accompanying financial statements have been prepared assuming that the Company will continue as a going concern. As discussed in Note 3 to the financial statements, the Company has recurring losses and negative cash flows from operating activities that raise substantial doubt about its ability to continue as a going concern. Management’s plans in regard to these matters are also have audited,described in accordance withNote 3. The financial statements do not include any adjustments that might result from the standardsoutcome of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) (“PCAOB”), the Company’s internal control over financial reporting as of October 31, 2018, based on criteria established in Internal Control - Integrated Framework (2013) issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (“COSO”), and our report dated January 14, 2019 expressed an adverse opinion.this uncertainty.

Basis for Opinion

These financial statements are the responsibility of the Company’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the Company’s financial statements based on our audits. We are a public accounting firm registered with the PCAOBPublic Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) (“PCAOB”) and are required to be independent with respect to the Company in accordance with the U.S. federal securities laws and the applicable rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission and the PCAOB.

We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the PCAOB. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement, whether due to error or fraud. The Company is not required to have, nor were we engaged to perform, an audit of its internal control over financial reporting. As part of our audits we are required to obtain an understanding of internal control over financial reporting but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting. Accordingly, we express no such opinion.

Our audits included performing procedures to assess the risks of material misstatement of the financial statements, whether due to error or fraud, and performing procedures that respond to those risks. Such procedures included examining, on a test basis, evidence regarding the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. Our audits also included evaluating the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall presentation of the financial statements. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.

Critical Audit Matter

The critical audit matter communicated below is a matter arising from the current period audit of the financial statements that was communicated or required to be communicated to the audit committee and that: (1) relates to accounts or disclosures that are material to the financial statements and (2) involved our especially challenging, subjective, or complex judgments. The communication of the critical audit matter does not alter in any way our opinion on the financial statements, taken as a whole, and we are not, by communicating the critical audit matter below, providing a separate opinion on the critical audit matter or on the accounts or disclosures to which it relates.

51

Accounting for Liability Classified Common Stock Warrants

As discussed in Note 12 to the financial statements, the Company issued common stock warrants to purchasers of its common stock. The warrants are classified as a liability and are recorded at fair value in the Company’s balance sheets with a value of $6,844,000 as of December 31, 2021. Management utilized the Monte Carlo Simulation model to estimate the fair value of each warrant on the date of issuance and at each interim and annual reporting date until settled or classified as equity. Estimates and assumptions impacting the fair value measurement include simulated future stock price amounts over the remaining life of the commitment, as well as estimated change of control considerations. This valuation technique involves a significant amount of estimation and judgement. In general, the assumptions used in calculating the fair value of the liability classified common stock warrants represent management’s best estimate but the estimate involves inherent uncertainties and the application of significant management judgement.

We identified the accounting for liability classified common stock warrants as a critical audit matter due to (i) the significant management judgment and subjectivity in developing the assumptions to the models utilized (ii) there was subjectivity in assessing the features of the common stock warrants in evaluating classification and the relevant accounting guidance for classification is complex, and (iii) the complexity of the Monte Carlo Simulation model. This in turn led to a high degree of auditor judgment and subjectivity. We also applied significant judgement in performing our audit procedures which involved the use of valuation professionals with specialized skill and knowledge to evaluate the audit evidence obtained from the audit procedures performed, in particular to evaluate the reasonableness of management’s valuation technique, as well as certain inputs used within the model.

Addressing the matter involved performing procedures and evaluating audit evidence in connection with forming our overall opinion on the financial statements. We obtained an understanding and evaluated the design of controls relating to the Company’s valuation and accounting for liability classified common stock warrants. Our procedures also included, among others, (i) use of a valuation specialist in evaluating management’s process for selecting the appropriate valuation models and techniques and assumptions used as inputs to those valuation models; (ii) testing the completeness, mathematical accuracy, and relevance of underlying data used in the models and calculations; and (iii) evaluating the features of the equity linked instruments and applying our understanding of the applicable provisions of U.S. GAAP in testing their classification.

/s/ EisnerAmper LLP

We have served as the Company’s auditor since 2010. Partners of Amper, Politziner & Mattia LLP joined EisnerAmper LLP in 2010. Amper, Politziner & Mattia LLP had served as the Company’s auditor since 2009.

EISNERAMPER LLP

Iselin, New Jersey

January 14, 2019March 29, 2022

F-152
 

POLARITYTE, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS

(in thousands, except share and per share amounts)

 December 31, 2021 December 31, 2020 
 October 31, 2018  October 31, 2017       
ASSETS                
        
Current assets:        
Current assets        
Cash and cash equivalents $70,961  $17,667  $19,375  $25,522 
Accounts receivable  940    
Accounts receivable, net  978   3,819 
Inventory  238         883 
Assets held for sale  441    
Prepaid expenses and other current assets  1,163   297   1,595   992 
Total current assets  73,302   17,964   22,389   31,216 
Non-current assets:        
Property and equipment, net  12,927   2,173   6,923   10,550 
Operating lease right-of-use assets  1,146   2,452 
Intangible assets, net  957         542 
Goodwill  278         278 
Other assets  378   15   720   472 
Total non-current assets  14,540   2,188 
TOTAL ASSETS $87,842  $20,152  $31,178  $45,510 
                
LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY                
        
Current liabilities:        
Current liabilities        
Accounts payable and accrued expenses $4,363  $1,939  $3,115  $4,148 
Other current liabilities  286      1,520   2,106 
Current portion of long-term note payable  519         2,059 
Deferred revenue  150      74   168 
Warrant liability and embedded derivative     13,502 
Total current liabilities  5,318   15,441   4,709   8,481 
Long-term note payable, net  736    
Common stock warrant liability  6,844   5,975 
Operating lease liabilities  43   1,476 
Other long-term liabilities  126      338   723 
Long-term notes payable     1,517 
Total liabilities  6,180   15,441   11,934   18,172 
                
Commitments and Contingencies        
Commitments and Contingencies (Note 16)  -   - 
                
Redeemable convertible preferred stock - 0 and 6,455 shares authorized, issued and outstanding at October 31, 2018 and 2017; liquidation preference - $0 and $17,750.     4,541 
        
STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY:        
Convertible preferred stock - 25,000,000 shares authorized, 0 and 3,230,655 shares issued and outstanding at October 31, 2018 and 2017, aggregate liquidation preference $0 and $2,140, respectively     109,995 
Common stock - $.001 par value; 250,000,000 shares authorized; 21,423,999 and 6,515,524 shares issued and outstanding at October 31, 2018 and 2017, respectively  21   7 
STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY        
Preferred stock – 25,000,000 shares authorized, 0 shares issued and outstanding at December 31, 2021 and 2020      
Common stock - $.001 par value; 250,000,000 shares authorized; 82,484,462 and 54,857,099 shares issued and outstanding at December 31, 2021 and 2020, respectively  82   55 
Additional paid-in capital  406,087   149,173   527,560   505,494 
Accumulated deficit  (324,446)  (259,005)  (508,398)  (478,211)
Total stockholders’ equity  81,662   170   19,244   27,338 
TOTAL LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY $87,842  $20,152  $31,178  $45,510 

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements

F-253
 

POLARITYTE, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS

(in thousands, except share and per share amounts)

  For the Years Ended 
  October 31, 
  2018  2017 
Net revenues        
Products $689  $ 
Services  874    
Total net revenues  1,563    
Cost of sales:       
Products  500    
Services  502    
Total costs of sales  1,002    
Gross profit  561    
         
Operating costs and expenses        
Product research and development  19,376   7,107 
Research and development - intellectual property acquired     104,693 
General and administrative  48,252   18,812 
Sales and marketing  2,365    
Total operating costs and expenses  69,993   130,612 
Operating loss  (69,432)  (130,612)
         
Other income (expense)        
Interest income  395   23 
Change in fair value of derivatives  3,814   109 
Loss on extinguishment of warrant liability  (520)   
Net loss from continuing operations before income taxes  (65,743)  (130,480)
Benefit for income taxes  302    
Net loss from continuing operations  (65,441)  (130,480)
Loss from discontinued operations     (449)
Gain on sale of discontinued operations     100 
Loss from discontinued operations, net     (349)
Net loss after income taxes  (65,441)  (130,829)
Deemed dividend – accretion of discount on Series F preferred stock  (1,290)  (369)
Deemed dividend – exchange of Series F preferred stock  (7,057)   
Cumulative dividends on Series F preferred stock  (373)  (124)
Net loss attributable to common stockholders $(74,161) $(131,322)
         
Net loss per share, basic and diluted:        
Loss from continuing operations $(4.29) $(26.50)
Loss from discontinued operations     (0.07)
Net loss  (4.29)  (26.57)
Deemed dividend – accretion of discount on Series F preferred stock  (0.09)  (0.07)
Deemed dividend – exchange of Series F preferred stock  (0.46)  - 
Cumulative dividends on Series F preferred stock  (0.02)  (0.03)
Net loss attributable to common stockholders $(4.86) $(26.67)
Weighted average shares outstanding, basic and diluted:  15,259,731   4,923,327 
  2021  2020 
  For the Year Ended December 31, 
  2021  2020 
Net revenues        
Products $3,076  $3,730 
Services  6,328   6,396 
Total net revenues  9,404   10,126 
Cost of revenues        
Products  448   1,068 
Services  3,868   3,356 
Total costs of revenues  4,316   4,424 
Gross profit  5,088   5,702 
Operating costs and expenses        
Research and development  14,182   11,532 
General and administrative  20,476   27,557 
Sales and marketing  2,808   8,719 
Restructuring and other charges  678   3,834 
Impairment of goodwill and intangible assets  

630

   

 
Total operating costs and expenses  38,774   51,642 
Operating loss  (33,686)  (45,940)
Other income (expense), net        
Gain on extinguishment of debt  3,612    
Change in fair value of common stock warrant liability  4,995   2,914 
Inducement loss on sale of liability classified warrants  (5,197)   
Interest (expense) income, net  (127)  (182)
Other income, net  216   354 
Net loss $(30,187) $(42,854)
         
Net loss per share attributable to common stockholders        
Basic $(0.38) $(1.11)
Diluted $(0.38) $(1.16)
Weighted average shares outstanding        
Basic  80,014,014   38,779,316 
Diluted  80,014,014   39,367,390 

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements

F-354
 

POLARITYTE, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITYCOMPREHENSIVE LOSS

(in thousands, except share and per share amounts)thousands)

  Preferred Stock  Common Stock  Additional Paid-in  Accumulated  Total Stockholders’ 
  Number  Amount  Number  Amount  Capital  Deficit  Equity 
Balance - October 31, 2016  7,374,454  $10,153   2,782,963  $3  $123,417  $(128,176) $5,397 
Issuance of common stock in connection with:                            
Conversion of Series A preferred stock to common stock  (3,991,487)  (976)  761,798   1   975       
Conversion of Series B preferred stock to common stock  (6,512)  (549)  108,543      549       
Conversion of Series C preferred stock to common stock  (23,185)  (1,809)  504,184   1   1,808       
Conversion of Series D preferred stock to common stock  (129,665)  (1,517)  216,106      1,517       
Issuance of Series E preferred stock for research and development intellectual property  7,050   104,693               104,693 
Stock option exercise        268,847      1,301      1,301 
Warrants exchanged for common stock        56,250      78      78 
Stock-based compensation expense        1,057,500   1   17,744      17,745 
Common stock issued for cash        759,333   1   2,277      2,278 
Deemed dividend – accretion of discount on Series F preferred stock              (369)     (369)
Cumulative dividends on Series F preferred stock              (124)     (124)
Net loss                 (130,829)  (130,829)
Balance as of October 31, 2017  3,230,655  $109,995   6,515,524  $7  $149,173  $(259,005) $170 
Issuance of common stock in connection with:                            
Conversion of Series A preferred stock to common stock  (3,146,671)  (769)  713,036   1   768       
Conversion of Series B preferred stock to common stock  (47,689)  (4,020)  794,820   1   4,019       
Conversion of Series C preferred stock to common stock  (2,578)  (201)  59,950      201       
Conversion of Series D preferred stock to common stock  (26,667)  (312)  44,445      312       
Conversion of Series E preferred stock to common stock  (7,050)  (104,693)  7,050,000   7   104,686       
Exchange of Series F preferred stock and dividends to common stock        1,003,393   1   13,060      13,061 
Extinguishment of warrant liability        151,871      3,045      3,045 
Stock option exercises        161,433      687      687 
Proceeds received from issuance of common stock, net of issuance costs of $2,785        4,791,819   4   92,672      92,676 
Stock-based compensation expense        126,000      38,821      38,821 
Deemed dividend – accretion of discount on Series F preferred stock              (1,290)     (1,290)
Cumulative dividends on Series F preferred stock              (373)     (373)
Series F preferred stock dividends paid in common stock        11,708      306      306 
Net loss                 (65,441)  (65,441)
Balance as of October 31, 2018    $   21,423,999  $21  $406,087  $(324,446) $81,662 
  2021  2020 
  For the Year Ended December 31, 
  2021  2020 
Net loss $(30,187) $(42,854)
Other comprehensive income (loss):        
Unrealized gain on available-for-sale securities     11 
Reclassification of realized gains included in net loss     (83)
Comprehensive loss $(30,187) $(42,926)

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements

F-455
 


 

POLARITYTE, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWSSTOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY

(in thousands)thousands, except share and per share amounts)

  For the Years Ended October 31, 
  2018  2017 
CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES        
Net loss $(65,441) $(130,829)
Loss from discontinued operations     349 
Loss from continuing operations  (65,441)  (130,480)
Adjustments to reconcile net loss from continuing operations to net cash used in continuing operating activities:     ��  
Stock based compensation expense  38,821   16,627 
Change in fair value of derivatives  (3,814)  (109)
Depreciation and amortization  1,394   432 
Loss on extinguishment of warrant liability  520    
Amortization of intangible assets  100   - 
Amortization of debt discount  35    
Change in fair value of contingent consideration  20    
Research and development - intellectual property acquired     104,693 
Changes in operating assets and liabilities:        
Accounts receivable  (940)   
Inventory  (238)   
Prepaid expenses and other current assets  (911)  (190)
Other assets  (378)   
Accounts payable and accrued expenses  2,136   1,411 
Deferred revenue  150    
Other long-term liabilities      
Net cash used in continuing operating activities  (28,546)  (7,616)
Net cash provided by discontinued operating activities     33 
Net cash used in operating activities  (28,546)  (7,583)
         
CASH FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES        
Purchase of property and equipment  (9,221)  (2,544)
Acquisition of IBEX  (2,258)   
Net cash used in continuing investing activities  (11,479)  (2,544)
Net cash provided by discontinued investing activities  60   25 
Net cash used in investing activities  (11,419)  (2,519)
         
CASH FLOWS FROM FINANCING ACTIVITIES        
Proceeds from stock options exercised  687   1,301 
Net proceeds from the sale of preferred stock and warrants     17,667 
Net proceeds from the sale of common stock  92,676   2,278 
Payment of contingent consideration liability  (30)   
Payments on capital leases  (74)   
Net cash provided by financing activities  93,259   21,246 
         
Net increase in cash and cash equivalents  53,294   11,144 
Cash and cash equivalents - beginning of period  17,667   6,523 
Cash and cash equivalents - end of period $70,961  $17,667 
         
Supplemental schedule of non-cash investing and financing activities:        
Conversion of Series A preferred stock to common stock $769  $976 
Conversion of Series B preferred stock to common stock $4,020  $549 
Conversion of Series C preferred stock to common stock $201  $1,809 
Conversion of Series D preferred stock to common stock $312  $1,517 
Conversion of Series E preferred stock to common stock $104,693  $ 
Exchange of Series F preferred stock for common stock $13,061  $ 
Extinguishment of warrant liability $2,525  $ 
Unpaid liability for acquisition of property and equipment $300  $54 
Warrants exchanged for common stock shares $  $78 
Establishment of warrant liability in connection with Series F Preferred Stock issuance $  $4,299 
Establishment of derivative liability in connection with Series F Preferred Stock issuance $  $9,319 
Deemed dividend – accretion of discount on Series F preferred stock $1,290  $369 
Cumulative dividends on Series F preferred stock $373  $124 
Series F preferred stock dividends paid in common stock $306  $ 
Contingent consideration for IBEX acquisition $278  $ 
Contingent consideration earned and recorded in accounts payable $33  $ 
Note payable issued as partial consideration for IBEX acquisition $1,220  $ 
Property and equipment additions through capital leases $251  $ 
  Number  Amount  Capital  Income  Deficit  Equity 
  For the Year Ended December 31, 2021 and 2020 
  Common Stock  Additional Paid-in  Accumulated Other Comprehensive  Accumulated  Total Stockholders’ 
  Number  Amount  Capital  Income  Deficit  Equity 
Balance – December 31, 2019  27,374,653  $27  $474,174  $           72  $(435,357) $38,916 
Issuance of common stock, net of issuance costs of $1,319  10,854,710   11   12,589         12,600 
Issuance of common stock, net of issuance costs  10,854,710   11   12,589         12,600 
Issuance of common stock and pre-funded warrants through underwritten offering, net of issuance costs of $251  5,450,000   5   2,261         2,266 
Issuance of common stock and pre-funded warrants through underwritten offering, net of issuance costs  5,450,000   5   2,261         2,266 
Issuance of common stock upon exercise of warrants  10,073,298   10   9,263         9,273 
Stock option exercise  10,208      31         31 
Stock-based compensation expense        7,258         7,258 
Purchase of ESPP shares  97,445      75         75 
Vesting of restricted stock units  1,161,658   2   (2)         
Shares withheld for tax withholding  (117,987)     (155)        (155)
Forfeiture of restricted stock awards  (46,886)               
Other comprehensive income           (72)     (72)
Net loss              (42,854)  (42,854)
Balance – December 31, 2020  54,857,099   55   505,494      (478,211)  27,338 
Beginning balance, value  54,857,099   55   505,494      (478,211)  27,338 
Issuance of common stock and pre-funded warrants through underwritten offering, net of issuance costs of $114  6,670,000   7   1,248         1,255 
Issuance of common stock and pre-funded warrants through underwritten offering, net of issuance costs      7   1,248           1,255 
Issuance of common stock upon exercise of warrants  10,713,543   10   6,661         6,671 
Reclassification of warrant liability upon exercise        8,964         8,964 
Issuance of common stock upon exercise of pre-funded warrants  7,658,953   8            8 
Stock-based compensation expense        5,600         5,600 
Stock option exercises  2,500      3         3 
Purchase of ESPP shares  101,900      55         55 
Vesting of restricted stock units  3,126,564   2   (2)         
Shares withheld for tax withholding  (608,144)     (463)        (463)
Forfeiture of restricted stock awards  (37,953)               
Net loss              (30,187)  (30,187)
Balance – December 31, 2021  82,484,462  $82  $527,560  $  $(508,398) $19,244 
Ending balance, value  82,484,462  $82  $527,560  $  $(508,398) $19,244 

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements

56

POLARITYTE, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS

(in thousands)

  2021  2020 
  For the Year Ended December 31, 
  2021  2020 
CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES        
Net loss $(30,187) $(42,854)
Adjustments to reconcile net loss to net cash used in operating activities:        
Stock-based compensation expense  5,381   7,258 
Depreciation and amortization  2,652   3,074 
Impairment of goodwill and intangible assets  630    
Amortization of intangible assets  190   189 
Amortization of debt discount     19 
Bad debt expense  75   148 
Inventory write-off  747    
Gain on extinguishment of debt – PPP loan  (3,612)   
Change in fair value of common stock warrant liability  (4,995)  (2,914)
Inducement loss on sale of liability classified warrants  5,197    
Loss on restructuring and other charges  321    
Loss on sale of property and equipment and ROU assets  12   2,806 
Loss on abandonment of property and equipment  209    
Other non-cash adjustments  (45)  (21)
Changes in operating assets and liabilities:        
Accounts receivable  2,766   (2,236)
Inventory  136   (631)
Prepaid expenses and other current assets  (603)  272 
Operating lease right-of-use assets  1,318   1,700 
Other assets/liabilities, net  (248)  (200)
Accounts payable and accrued expenses  (1,047)  (2,761)
Other current liabilities  (29)  35 
Deferred revenue  (94)  70 
Operating lease liabilities  (1,404)  (1,708)
Net cash used in operating activities  (22,630)  (37,754)
CASH FLOWS FROM (USED IN) INVESTING ACTIVITIES        
Purchase of property and equipment  (123)  (1,339)
Proceeds from sale of property and equipment  27    
Purchase of available-for-sale securities     (14,144)
Proceeds from maturities of available-for-sale securities     16,945 
Proceeds from sale of available-for-sale securities     16,171 
Net cash provided by/(used in) investing activities  (96)  17,633 
CASH FLOWS FROM FINANCING ACTIVITIES        
Proceeds from term note payable and financing arrangements  1,028   4,629 
Principal payments on term note payable and financing arrangements  (1,054)  (1,675)
Principal payments on financing leases  (555)  (508)
Net proceeds from the sale of common stock, warrants and pre-funded warrants  9,884   32,020 
Proceeds from the sale of new warrants  1,002    
Proceeds from warrants exercised  6,671   1,008 
Proceeds from pre-funded warrants exercised  8    
Cash paid for tax withholdings related to net share settlement  (463)  (155)
Proceeds from stock options exercised  3   31 
Proceeds from ESPP purchase  55   75 
Net cash provided by financing activities  16,579   35,425 
Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents  (6,147)  15,304 
Cash and cash equivalents - beginning of period  25,522   10,218 
Cash and cash equivalents - end of period $19,375  $25,522 
         
Supplemental cash flow information:        
Cash paid for interest $118  $187 
         
Supplemental schedule of non-cash investing and financing activities:        
Fair value of placement agent warrants issued in connection with offering $838  $ 
Reclassification of warrant liability to stockholders’ equity upon exercise of warrant $8,964  $8,265 
Allocation of proceeds from sale of common stock and warrants to warrant liability $8,629  $17,154 
Unpaid liability for acquisition of property and equipment $21  $87 
Right-of-use asset obtained in exchange for new lease liability $42  $82 
Accrued offering costs $400  $ 
Reclassification of equipment to assets held for sale $441  $ 

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements

57

POLARITYTE, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

1. PRINCIPAL BUSINESS ACTIVITY AND BASIS OF PRESENTATION

PolarityTE, Inc. and(together with its subsidiaries, (thethe “Company”) is a commercial-stageclinical stage biotechnology and regenerative biomaterials company focused on transforming the lives of patients by discovering, designing and developing a range of regenerative tissue products and biomaterialsbiomaterials. The Company also operates a laboratory testing and clinical research business.

The Company’s first regenerative tissue product is SkinTE. In July 2021, the Company submitted an investigational new drug application (“IND”) for SkinTE to the fieldsUnited States Food and Drug Administration (the “FDA”) through its subsidiary, PolarityTE MD, Inc. Prior to June 1, 2021, the Company sold SkinTE under Section 361 of medicine, biomedical engineeringthe Public Health Service Act in 2020 and material sciences.

Asset Acquisitioninto 2021 and, Name Change. On December 1, 2016, Majesco Entertainment Company (n/k/a PolarityTE, Inc.), a Delaware corporation entered intoafter the Company’s decision to file an agreement to acquireIND under Section 351 of that Act, under an enforcement discretion position stated by the assets of Polarity NV,FDA in a regenerative medicine company.policy framework to help facilitate regenerative medicine therapies. The asset acquisition was subject to shareholder approval, which was received on March 10, 2017 and the transaction closed on April 7, 2017, as more fully described below. In January 2017,FDA’s stated period of enforcement discretion ended May 31, 2021. Consequently, the Company changedterminated commercial sales of SkinTE on May 31, 2021, and ceased its nameSkinTE commercial operations, and has transitioned to “PolarityTE, Inc.”

On April 7, 2017, the Company issued 7,050 shares of its newly authorized Series E Preferred Stock (the “Series E Preferred Shares”) to Dr. Denver Lough, the developer of the Company’s tissue regeneration technology who became the Company’s Chief Executive Officer, for the purchase of Polarity NV’s assets. The Series E Preferred Stock was convertible into an aggregate of 7,050,000 shares of the Company’s common stock with a fair value of approximately $104.7 million based on the closing price of the Company’s common stock as of April 7, 2017. Since the assets purchased were in-process research and development assets with no alternative future use, the total purchase price was immediately expensed as research and development - intellectual property acquired.

The Company adopted ASU 2017-01,Business Combinations (Topic 805), Clarifying the Definition of a Business, during the first quarter of fiscal 2017. In accordance with ASU 2017-01 the Company analyzed the above transaction noting that substantially all the fair value of the gross assets acquired were concentrated in a single intellectual property asset and Polarity NV had no employees on the acquisition date. The Company further considered that Polarity NV’s intellectual property did not generate any revenue and never had any employees or workforce. In December 2016, the Company established a clinical advisory board and added three members in December 2016 and three more in January 2017. Establishing the clinical advisory board and hiringstage company pursuing an IND for SkinTE. As a COOresult, there are criticalno product sales from commercial SkinTE after June 2021. The only revenues recognized subsequent to establishing a workforce that has the knowledge and experience to obtain regulatory approval of the Company’s intellectual property. Therefore, the acquisition of an intellectual property asset and no employees from Polarity NVJune 2021 for SkinTE were nominal amounts collected on April 7, 2017 did not represent the acquisition of an organized workforce with the necessary skills and experience to create outputs and, therefore, did not represent a business combination.

Discontinued Operations. On June 23, 2017, the Company sold Majesco Entertainment Company, a Nevada corporation and wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company (“Majesco Sub”) to Zift Interactive LLC (“Zift”), a Nevada limited liability company pursuant to a purchase agreement. Pursuantaccounts for product shipped prior to the termsend of the agreement, the Company sold 100%May 2021 that were not previously recognized because of the issued and outstanding shares of common stock of Majesco Sub to Zift, including all of the right, title and interest in and to Majesco Sub’s business of developing, publishing and distributing video game products through mobile and online digital downloading. Pursuant to the terms of the agreement, the Company will receive total cash consideration of approximately $100,000 ($5,000 upon signing the agreement and 19 additional monthly payments of $5,000) plus contingent consideration based on net revenuesconcerns with a fair value of $0. As of October 31, 2018, the Company has received $85,000 in cash consideration and $15,000 remains receivable and is included in prepaid expenses and other current assets.collectability.

In May 2018, the Company purchased the assets of a preclinical research sciences business and related real estate from Ibex Group, L.L.C., a Utah limited liability company, and Ibex Preclinical Research, Inc., a Utah corporation (collectively, “IBEX”). The Company acquired these assets to accelerate research and development of its TE product candidates, and now operate the business as IBEX to advance its product development and deliver preclinical research services to third parties. The business consists of a “good laboratory practices” (GLP) compliant preclinical research facility that is USDA registered and includes vivarium, operating rooms, preparation rooms, storage facilities, and surgical and imaging equipment. The real property includes two parcels in Logan, Utah, consisting of approximately 1.75 combined gross acres of land, together with the buildings, structures, fixtures, and personal property located on the real property. The aggregate purchase price was $3.8 million, of which $2.3 million was paid at closing and the balance satisfied by a promissory note payable to the Seller with an initial fair value of $1.2 million and contingent consideration with an initial fair value of approximately $0.3 million.

2. SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES

Basis of Presentation. The accompanying financial statements have been prepared in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“U.S. GAAP”).

Principles of Consolidation.Consolidation. The accompanying consolidated financial statements include the accounts of the Company and its wholly owned subsidiaries. Significant intercompany accounts and transactions have been eliminated in consolidation.

Segments.The Company’s operations are based in the United States and involve products and services which are managed separately. Accordingly, it operates in two segments: 1) regenerative medicine products and 2) contract services. The Chief Operating Decision Maker (CODM) is our Chief Executive Officer (CEO). The CODM allocates resources to and assesses the performance of each operating segment using information about its revenue and operating income (loss). Prior to the acquisition of IBEX, the Company operated in one segment.

Use of estimates.estimates. The preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of AmericaU.S. GAAP requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities or the disclosure of gain or loss contingencies at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting periods. Among the more significant estimates included in these financial statements areis the valuationextent of warrant liability, valuationprogress toward completion of derivative liability, proportional performance method,contracts with customers, stock-based compensation, the valuation allowances for deferred tax benefits, andassets, the valuation of tangiblecommon stock warrant liabilities, and intangible assets included in acquisitions.impairment of assets. Actual results could differ from those estimates.

Reclassifications.Certain reclassifications have been made to our prior period financial statements to conform with the current period presentation. On our consolidated balance sheet, we have combined the Receivable from Zift current and non-current with prepaid expenses and other current assets and other assets, respectively.

 

Segments. The Company’s operations are based in the United States and involve products and services which are managed separately. Accordingly, it operates in 2 segments: 1) regenerative medicine products and 2) contract services. The Chief Operating Decision Maker (CODM), is the Company’s Chief Executive Officer (CEO), who allocates resources to and assesses the performance of each operating segment using information about its revenue and operating income (loss).

Cash and cash equivalents.equivalents. Cash equivalents consist of highly liquid investments with original maturities of three months or less atfrom the date of purchase. At various times,As of December 31, 2021, the Company has deposits in excess of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation limit. The Company hasdid not experiencedhold any losses on these accounts.cash equivalents.

Accounts Receivable.Receivable. Accounts receivable at December 31, 2020 consists of amounts due to the Company related to the sale of the Company’s core product SkinTE and contract services. Amounts at December 31, 2021 are due from the Company’s contract services customers. Accounts that are outstanding longer than the contractual payment terms are considered past due. The Company determines its allowance for doubtful accounts by considering a number of factors, including the length of time trade accounts receivable are past due and the customer’s current ability to pay its obligation to the Company. The Company writes off accounts receivable when they become uncollectible. As of OctoberDecember 31, 2018,2021 and 2020, the Company recorded an allowance for doubtful accounts was not considered necessary.of approximately $202,000 and $174,000, respectively.

58

Accounts Payable and Accrued Expenses. The carrying amounts of accounts payable and accrued expenses approximate fair value as these accounts are largely current and short term in nature.

Inventory.Inventory. Inventory comprises raw materials, which are valued at the lower of cost or net realizable value, on a first-in, first-out basis. The Company evaluates the carrying value of its inventory on a regular basis, taking into account anticipated future sales compared with quantities on hand, and the remaining shelf life of goods on hand.hand to record an inventory reserve. The Company recorded inventory write-offs of $0.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2021, of which $0.3 million and $0.4 million were recorded in research and development and cost of sales, respectively, within the accompanying consolidated statement of operations. NaN inventory reserve was recorded as of December 31, 2021 or December 31, 2020.

Assets Held for Sale. Assets to be disposed (“disposal group”) of by sale are reclassified into assets held for sale on the Company’s consolidated balance sheet. The reclassification occurs when an agreement to sell exists, or management has committed to a plan to sell the assets within one year. Disposal groups are measured at the lower of carrying value or fair value less costs to sell and are not depreciated or amortized. The fair value of a disposal group, less any costs to sell, is assessed each reporting period it remains classified as held for sale and any remeasurement to the lower of carrying value or fair value less costs to sell is reported as an adjustment to the carrying value of the disposal group.

In November 2021, the Company committed to a plan to sell a variety of lab equipment within the regenerative medicine products reporting segment. The lab equipment has been designated as held for sale and is presented as such within the consolidated balance sheet as of December 31, 2021.

Property and Equipment.Equipment. Property and equipment isare stated at cost.cost less accumulated depreciation and amortization. Depreciation is being provided for bycomputed on the straight-line methodbasis over the estimated useful lives of the related assets, generally ranging from three to eight years. Amortization of leaseholdLeasehold improvements is provided forare amortized using the straight-line method over the shorter of the assets’ estimated useful lives or the remaining term of the lease. Maintenance and repairs are charged to operations as incurred. Upon sale or retirement of assets, the cost and related accumulated depreciation are removed from the balance sheet and the resulting gain or loss is reflected in operations.

Leases. The Company determines if an arrangement is a lease orat inception. Right-of-use (“ROU”) assets represent the life ofCompany’s right to use an underlying asset for the asset.

Capitalized Software.We capitalize certain internallease term and external costs incurredlease liabilities represent the Company’s obligation to acquire or create internal use software. Costs to create internal softwaremake lease payments arising from the lease. Finance leases are capitalized duringreported in the application development period. Capitalized software is includedconsolidated balance sheet in property and equipment and other current and long-term liabilities. The current portion of operating lease obligations are included in other current liabilities. The classification of the Company’s leases as operating or finance leases along with the initial measurement and recognition of the associated ROU assets and lease liabilities is depreciatedperformed at the lease commencement date. The measurement of lease liabilities is based on the present value of future lease payments over three years once developmentthe lease term. As the Company’s leases do not provide an implicit rate, the Company uses its incremental borrowing rate based on the information available at the lease commencement date in determining the present value of future lease payments. The ROU asset is complete.based on the measurement of the lease liability and also includes any lease payments made prior to or on lease commencement and excludes lease incentives and initial direct costs incurred, as applicable. The lease terms may include options to extend or terminate the lease when it is reasonably certain the Company will exercise any such options. Rent expense for the Company’s operating leases is recognized on a straight-line basis over the lease term. Amortization expense for the ROU asset associated with its finance leases is recognized on a straight-line basis over the term of the lease and interest expense associated with its finance leases is recognized on the balance of the lease liability using the effective interest method based on the estimated incremental borrowing rate.

The Company has lease agreements with lease and non-lease components. As allowed under ASC 842, the Company has elected not to separate lease and non-lease components for any leases involving real estate and office equipment classes of assets and, as a result, accounts for the lease and non-lease components as a single lease component. The Company has also elected not to apply the recognition requirement of ASC 842 to leases with a term of 12 months or less for all classes of assets.

Goodwill and Intangible Assets.Assets. Goodwill represents the excess acquisition costpurchase price over the fair value of net tangible and intangible assets acquired. Goodwill is not amortized, andrather the carrying amount of goodwill is subject to annualassessed for impairment testingat least annually, or between annual testsmore frequently if an event or change in circumstance occurs that would more likely than not reduce the fair value ofimpairment indicators exist.

Goodwill is tested for impairment at a reporting unit below its carrying value. In testing for goodwill impairment, the Company has the option to first assesslevel by performing either a qualitative or quantitative analysis. The qualitative analysis is an assessment of factors to determine whether the existence of events or circumstances lead to a determination that it is more likely than not that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount. If after assessing the totality of events and circumstances, the Company concludes that it is not more likely than not that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount, then performing the two-step impairment testno further testing is not required. necessary.

59

If the Company concludes otherwise, it is required to perform the two-step impairment test. The goodwill impairment testa quantitative analysis is performed at the reporting unit level by comparing the estimated fair value of a reporting unit withto its respective carrying value.amount. If the estimated fair value exceeds the carrying value, goodwill at the reporting unit levelthere is not impaired.no impairment. If the estimated fair value is less than carrying value, further analysis is necessary to determine the amount of impairment, if any, by comparing the implied fair value of the reporting unit’s goodwill to the carrying value, ofan impairment charge is recorded for the reporting unit’s goodwill.

Thedifference between the fair value of reporting units is based on widely accepted valuation techniques thatand the Company believes market participants would use, althoughcarrying value. For the valuation process requires significant judgment and often involvesyear ended December 31, 2021, the use of significant estimates and assumptions. WeCompany performed a qualitative assessment and concluded that it is more likely than not that the fair value of the IBEX reporting unit is morewas less than its carrying value. Accordingly, there was no indicationvalue which resulted in the Company also performing a quantitative analysis. The results of impairment, and furtherthe quantitative testing was not required. Adverse market or economic events could result in impairment charges in future periods.analysis showed the carrying value of the reporting unit exceeding its fair value.

Intangible assets deemed to have finite lives are amortized on a straight-line basis over their estimated useful lives, which generally range from one to eleven years. The useful life is the period over which the asset is expected to contribute directly, or indirectly, to its future cash flows. Intangible assets are reviewed for impairment when certain events or circumstances exist. For amortizable intangible assets, impairment exists when the undiscounted cash flows exceed its carrying value and an impairment charge would be recorded for the excess of the carrying value over its fair value. At least annually, the remaining useful life is evaluated. For the year ended December 31, 2021, the Company identified indicators of impairment which led the Company to perform an assessment that resulted in carrying values of the intangible assets exceeding the undiscounted cash flows.

As a result of the goodwill and intangible assets impairment analyses, the Company determined that goodwill and intangible assets of the IBEX reporting unit were fully impaired and recorded impairment charges of $0.6 million for the year ended December 31, 2021 within the Company’s contract services business segment and are included in impairment of goodwill and intangible assets within the accompanying consolidated statement of operations.

Impairment of Long-Lived Assets.Assets. The Company reviews long-lived assets, including property and equipment for impairment whenever events or changes in business circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of the assets may not be fully recoverable. Factors that the Company considers in deciding when to perform an impairment review include significant underperformance of the business in relation to expectations, significant negative industry or economic trends, and significant changes or planned changes in the use of the assets. If an impairment review is performed to evaluate a long-lived asset for recoverability, the Company compares forecasts of undiscounted cash flows expected to result from the use and eventual disposition of the long-lived asset to its carrying value. An impairment loss would be recognized when estimated undiscounted future cash flows expected to result from the use of an asset are less than its carrying amount. The impairment loss would be based on the excess of the carrying value of the impaired asset over its fair value, determined based on discounted cash flows. No impairment loss has been recognized.

Offering Costs. The Company capitalizes direct and incremental costs (i.e., consisting of legal, accounting, and other fees and costs) associated with equity financings until such financings are consummated, at which time such costs are recorded in additional paid-in capital against the gross proceeds of the equity financings. If the related equity financing is abandoned, the previously deferred offering costs will be charged to expense in the period in which the offering is abandoned.

Capitalized Software. The Company capitalizes certain internal and external costs incurred to acquire or create internal use software. Costs to create internal software are capitalized during the application development period. Capitalized software is included in property and equipment and is depreciated over three years once development is complete.

Revenue Recognition. Under ASC 606, revenue is recognized when a customer obtains control of promised goods or services, in an amount that reflects the consideration that the Company expects to receive in exchange for those goods or services. To determine revenue recognition for arrangements that an entity determines are within the scope of ASC 606, the Company performs the following five steps: (i) identify the contract(s) with a customer; (ii) identify the performance obligations in the contract; (iii) determine the transaction price; (iv) allocate the transaction price to the performance obligations in the contract; and (v) recognize revenue when (or as) the entity satisfies a performance obligation.

The Company recorded product revenues primarily from the sale of SkinTE, its regenerative tissue products. When the Company marketed its SkinTE product, it was sold to healthcare providers (customers), primarily through direct sales representatives. Product revenues consisted of a single performance obligation that the Company satisfies at a point in time. In general, the Company recognized product revenue upon delivery to the customer.

60

In the contract services segment, the Company records service revenues from the sale of its preclinical research services, which includes delivery of preclinical studies and other research services to unrelated third parties. Service revenues generally consist of a single performance obligation that the Company satisfies over time using an input method based on costs incurred to date relative to the total costs expected to be required to satisfy the performance obligation. The Company believes that this method provides an appropriate measure of the transfer of services over the term of the performance obligation based on the remaining services needed to satisfy the obligation. This requires the Company to make reasonable estimates of the extent of progress toward completion of the contract. As a result, unbilled receivables and deferred revenue are recognized based on payment timing and work completed. Generally, a portion of the payment is due upfront and the remainder upon completion of the contract, with most contracts completing in less than a year. Contract services also includes research and laboratory testing services to unrelated third parties on a contract basis. Due to the short-term nature of the services, these customer contracts generally consist of a single performance obligation that the Company satisfies at a point in time. The Company satisfies the single performance obligation and recognizes revenue upon delivery of testing results to the customer. As of December 31, 2021 and 2020, the Company had unbilled receivables of $0.5 million and $0.2 million, respectively, and deferred revenue of $0.1 million and $0.2 million, respectively. The unbilled receivables balance is included in consolidated accounts receivable. Revenue of $0.2 million was recognized during the year ended December 31, 2021 that was included in the deferred revenue balance as of December 31, 2020.

Any costs incurred to obtain a contract would be recognized as product is shipped.

The Company considers a significant customer to be one that comprises more than 10% of net revenues or accounts receivable. Customers that accounted for 10% or more of net revenues were as follows:

SCHEDULE OF CONCENTRATION RISK

    For the Year Ended December 31, 2021  For the Year Ended December 31, 2020 
  Segment % of Revenue  % of Revenue 
Customer A Contract Services  20%  %
Customer B Regenerative Medicine Products  13%  13%
Customer C  Contract Services  18%  41%

Customers that accounted for 10% or more of accounts receivable were as follows:

    December 31, 2021  December 31, 2020 
  Segment % of Accounts Receivable  % of Accounts Receivable 
Customer A Contract Services  31%  %
Customer B Regenerative Medicine Products  %  14%
Customer C Contract Services  %  46%
Customer F  Contract Services  17%  %
Customer G  Contract Services  12%  %

The following table contains revenues as presented in the Consolidated Statements of Operations disaggregated by services and products.

SCHEDULE OF REVENUE DISAGGREGATED BY SERVICES AND PRODUCTS

  For the Year Ended December 31, 2021  For the Year Ended December 31, 2020 
Regenerative Medicine Products        
SkinTE Products $3,076  $3,730 
         
Contract Services        
Lab Testing Services  1,877   4,454 
Preclinical Research Services  4,451   1,942 
   6,328   6,396 
Total Net Revenues $9,404  $10,126 

Research and Development Expenses. Costs incurred for research and development are expensed as incurred. Nonrefundable advance payments for goods or services that will be used or rendered for future research and development activities pursuant to executory contractual arrangements with third party research organizations are deferred and recognized as an expense as the related goods are delivered or the related services are performed.

 

61

Accruals for Clinical Trials. As part of the process of preparing its financial statements, the Company is required to estimate its expenses resulting from its obligations under contracts with vendors, clinical research organizations and consultants and under clinical site agreements in connection with conducting clinical trials. The financial terms of these contracts are subject to negotiations, which vary from contract to contract and may result in payment terms that do not match the periods over which materials or services are provided under such contracts. The Company’s objective is to reflect the appropriate expenses in its financial statements by matching those expenses with the period in which services are performed and efforts are expended. The Company accounts for these expenses according to the timing of various aspects of the expenses. The Company determines accrual estimates by taking into account discussion with applicable personnel and outside service providers as to the progress of clinical trials, or the services completed. During the course of a clinical trial, the Company adjusts its clinical expense recognition if actual results differ from its estimates. The Company makes estimates of its accrued expenses as of each balance sheet date based on the facts and circumstances known to it at that time. The Company’s clinical trial accruals are dependent upon the timely and accurate reporting of contract research organizations and other third-party vendors. Although the Company does not expect its estimates to be materially different from amounts actually incurred, its understanding of the status and timing of services performed relative to the actual status and timing of services performed may vary and may result in it reporting amounts that are too high or too low for any particular period.

Common Stock Warrant Liability. The Company accounts for common stock warrants issued as freestanding instruments in accordance with applicable accounting guidance as either liabilities or as equity instruments depending on the specific terms of the warrant agreement. Under certain change of control provisions, some warrants issued by the Company could require cash settlement which necessitates such warrants to be recorded as liabilities. Warrants classified as liabilities are remeasured at fair value each period until settled or until classified as equity.

Stock-Based Compensation. The Company measures all stock-based compensation to employees and non-employees using a fair value method and records such expense in general and administrative, research and development, and sales and marketing expenses. For stock options with graded vesting, the Company recognizes compensation expense over the service period for each separately vesting tranche of the award as though the award were in substance, multiple awards based on the fair value on the date of grant.

The fair value for options issued is estimated at the date of grant using a Black-Scholes option-pricing model. The risk-free rate is derived from the U.S. Treasury yield curve in effect at the time of the grant commensurate with the expected term of the option. The volatility factor is determined based on the Company’s historical stock prices. Forfeitures are recognized as they occur.

The fair value of restricted stock grants is measured based on the fair market value of the Company’s common stock on the date of grant and recognized as compensation expense over the vesting period of, generally, six months to three years.

Income Taxes.Taxes. The Company accounts for income taxes under the asset and liability method. Deferred tax assets and liabilities are recognized for the future tax consequences attributable to differences between the financial statement carrying amounts of existing assets and liabilities and their respective tax bases and operating loss and tax credit carryforwards. Deferred tax assets and liabilities are measured using enacted tax rates expected to apply to taxable income in the years in which those temporary differences are expected to be recovered or settled. The effect on deferred tax assets and liabilities of a change in tax rates is recognized in income in the period that includes the enactment date. The Company evaluates the potential for realization of deferred tax assets at each quarterly balance sheet date and records a valuation allowance for assets for which realization is not more likely than not.

Stock Based Compensation. The Company measures all stock-based compensation to employees usingrecognizes interest and penalties as a fair value method and records such expense in general and administrative and research and development expenses. Compensation expense for stock options with cliff vesting is recognized on a straight-line basis over the vesting periodcomponent of the award, based on the fair value of the option on the date of grant. For stock options with graded vesting, the Company recognizes compensation expense over the service period for each separately vesting tranche of the award as though the award were in substance, multiple awards.income tax expense.

62

The fair value for options issued is estimated at the date of grant using a Black-Scholes option-pricing model. The risk-free rate is derived from the U.S. Treasury yield curve in effect at the time of the grant. The volatility factor is determined based on the Company’s historical stock prices. Forfeitures are recognized as they occur.

The value of restricted stock grants is measured based on the fair market value of the Company’s common stock on the date of grant and amortized over the vesting period of, generally, six months to three years.

The accounting for non-employee options and restricted stock is similar to that of employees, however, unlike employee options and restricted stock, the measurement date is not the grant date. The measurement date is when performance is complete. Until the options or shares vest, they are re-measured (re-valued) each reporting period and the expense marked up or marked down accordingly.

Net Loss Per Share.Share. Basic net loss per share of common stock is computed by dividing net loss attributable to common stockholders by the weighted average number of shares of common stock outstanding for the period.Since Gains on warrant liabilities are only considered dilutive when the average market price of the common stock during the period exceeds the exercise price of the warrants. All common stock warrants issued participate on a one-for-one basis with common stock in the distribution of dividends, if and when declared by the Board of Directors, on the Company’s common stock. For purposes of computing earnings per share (EPS), these warrants are considered to participate with common stock in earnings of the Company. Therefore, the Company calculates basic and diluted EPS using the two-class method. Under the two-class method, net income for the period is allocated between common stockholders and participating securities according to dividends declared and participation rights in undistributed earnings. No loss was inallocated to the warrants for the years ended December 31, 2021 and 2020 as results of operations were a loss position for all periods presented, basic net loss per share iseach period and the same as diluted net loss per share since the effects of potentially dilutive securitieswarrant holders are antidilutive.

Commitments and Contingencies. We are subjectnot required to claims and litigation in the ordinary course of our business. We record a liability for contingencies when the amount is both probable and reasonably estimable. We record associated legal fees as incurred.

Accounting for Warrants.absorb losses. The Company accounts for the issuancehas issued pre-funded warrants from time to time at an exercise price of $0.001 per share. The shares of common stock purchaseinto which the pre-funded warrants issued in connection with the equity offerings in accordance with the provisions of ASC 815, Derivatives and Hedging (“ASC 815”). The Company classifies as equity any contracts that (i) require physical settlement or net-share settlement or (ii) gives the Company a choice of net-cash settlement or settlement in its own shares (physical settlement or net-share settlement). The Company classifies as assets or liabilities any contracts that (i) require net-cash settlement (including a requirement to net-cash settle the contract if an event occurs and if that event is outside the control of the Company) or (ii) gives the counterparty a choice of net-cash settlement or settlement in shares (physical settlement or net-share settlement). In addition, under ASC 815, registered common stock warrants that require the issuance of registered shares upon exercise and do not expressly preclude an implied right to cash settlementmay be exercised are accounted for as derivative liabilities. The derivative warrant liabilities were settled during the year.

Change in Fair Value of Derivatives. The Company assessed the classification of common stock purchase warrants as of the date of each offering and determined that certain instruments met the criteria for liability classification. Accordingly, the Company classified the warrants as a liability at their fair value and adjusts the instruments to fair value at each reporting period. This liability is subject to re-measurement at each balance sheet date until the warrants are exercised or expired, and any change in fair value is recognized as “change in fair value of derivatives” in the consolidated statements of operations. The fair value of the warrants has as well as other derivatives, been estimated using a Monte-Carlo or Black-Scholes valuation model. The warrants were settled during the year ended October 31, 2018.

Revenue Recognition. The Company recognizes revenue upon the shipment of products or the performance of services when each of the following four criteria is met: (i) persuasive evidence of an arrangement exists; (ii) products are delivered or services are performed; (iii) the sales price is fixed or determinable; and (iv) collectability is reasonably assured. Contract services revenue is recognized on the proportional performance method over the term of the respective service contract which requires us to make reasonable estimates of the extent of progress toward completion of the contract. Under this method, revenue is recognized according to the percentage of cost completedconsidered outstanding for the study. As a result, unbilled receivablespurposes of computing basic earnings per share because the shares may be issued for little or no consideration, are fully vested, and deferred revenue are recognized based on payment timing and work completed. As of October 31, 2018 and 2017,exercisable after the Company had unbilled receivables of $160,000 and $0 and deferred revenue of $150,000 and $0. The unbilled receivables balance is included in consolidated accounts receivable.original issuance date.

The Company has one significant customer which made up approximately 19% of 2018 consolidated revenues. The customer was in the contract services segment. The Company also has four customers which made up approximately 47% of consolidated accounts receivable as of October 31, 2018. Two of the customers were in the regenerative medicine segment and each made up 10% of the consolidated balance and two of the customers were in the contract services segment and made up 14% and 13% of the consolidated balance.

Recent Accounting Pronouncements.Pronouncements

In May 2014, the FASB issued ASU 2014-09, “Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606)”, a new accounting standard that requires recognition of revenue to depict the transfer of promised goods or services to customers in an amount that reflects the consideration to which an entity expects to be entitled in exchange for those goods or services. The FASB has also issued several updates to ASU 2014-09. The new standard supersedes U.S. GAAP guidance on revenue recognition and requires the use of more estimates and judgments than the present standards. It also requires additional disclosures regarding the nature, amount, timing and uncertainty of cash flows arising from contracts with customers. Topic 606 is effective for our fiscal year 2019 beginning on November 1, 2018 and the Company plans to adopt using the full retrospective approach. As of October 31, 2018, the Company has completed and documented an assessment of the impact of the new revenue standard on its contracts with customers with an expected immaterial impact to the financial statements.

In February 2016, FASB issued ASU No. 2016-02,Leases (Topic 842), which supersedes FASB ASC Topic 840,Leases (Topic 840)and provides principles for the recognition, measurement, presentation and disclosure of leases for both lessees and lessors. The new standard requires lessees to apply a dual approach, classifying leases as either finance or operating leases based on the principle of whether or not the lease is effectively a financed purchase by the lessee. This classification will determine whether lease expense is recognized based on an effective interest method or on a straight-line basis over the term of the lease, respectively. A lessee is also required to record a right-of-use asset and a lease liability for all leases with a term of greater than twelve months regardless of classification. Leases with a term of twelve months or less will be accounted for similar to existing guidance for operating leases. The standard is effective for annual and interim periods beginning after December 15, 2018, with early adoption permitted upon issuance. When adopted, the Company expects this guidance to have a material impact on its consolidated balance sheet.

In AugustJune 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-15,No. 2016-13, Statement of Cash Flows - Classification of Certain Cash Receipts and Cash PaymentsFinancial Instruments-Credit Losses (Topic 326), which addresses eight specific cash flow issues withrequires entities to measure all expected credit losses for financial assets held at the objective of reducingreporting date based on historical experience, current conditions, and reasonable and supportable forecasts. This replaces the existing diversity in practice in how certain cash receiptsincurred loss model and cash payments are presented and classified inis applicable to the statementmeasurement of cash flows. Thecredit losses on financial assets measured at amortized cost. This standard iswas effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017,2019, including interim periods within those fiscal years. Earlyyears with early adoption permitted. In November 2019, the FASB issued ASU No. 2019-10, Financial Instruments—Credit Losses (Topic 326), Derivatives and Hedging (Topic 815) and Leases (Topic 842): Effective Dates, which defers the effective date of Topic 326. As a smaller reporting company, Topic 326 will now be effective for the Company beginning January 1, 2023. As such, the Company plans to adopt this ASU beginning January 1, 2023. The Company is permitted, including adoptioncurrently evaluating the impact that the standard will have on its consolidated financial statements and related disclosures.

In August 2020, the FASB issued ASU No. 2020-06, Debt—Debt with Conversion and Other Options (Subtopic 470-20) and Derivatives and Hedging—Contracts in Entity’s Own Equity (Subtopic 815-40): Accounting for Convertible Instruments and Contracts in an Entity’s Own Equity (ASU 2020-06). ASU 2020-06 simplifies the accounting for certain financial instruments with characteristics of liabilities and equity, including convertible instruments and contracts in an entity’s own equity. Those instruments that do not have a separately recognized embedded conversion feature will no longer recognize a debt issuance discount related to such a conversion feature and would recognize less interest expense on a periodic basis. It also removes from ASC 815-40-25-10 certain conditions for equity classification and amends certain guidance in ASC Topic 260 on the computation of EPS for convertible instruments and contracts in an entity’s own equity. An entity can use either a full or modified retrospective approach to adopt the ASU’s guidance. As a smaller reporting company, the Company is required to adopt this ASU for the fiscal year beginning January 1, 2024, with early adoption permitted for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2020, and interim period.periods within those fiscal years. The Company is currently assessing the impact and timing of adoption of this ASU.

In May 2021, the FASB issued ASU No. 2021-04, Earnings Per Share (Topic 260), Debt— Modifications and Extinguishments (Subtopic 470-50), Compensation—Stock Compensation (Topic 718), and Derivatives and Hedging— Contracts in Entity’s Own Equity (Subtopic 815-40) (ASU 2021-04). ASU 2021-04 updates current accounting guidance for modifications or exchanges of freestanding equity-classified written call options that remain equity-classified after modification or exchange as an exchange of the original instrument for a new instrument. The ASU specifies that the effects of modifications or exchanges of freestanding equity-classified written call options that remain equity after modification or exchange should be recognized depending on the substance of the transaction, whether it be a financing transaction to raise equity (topic 340), to raise or modify debt (topic 470 and 835), or other modifications or exchanges. If the modification or exchange does not fall under topics 340, 470, or 835, an entity may be required to account for the effects of such modifications or exchanges as dividends which should adjust net income (or loss) in the basic EPS calculation. The Company is required to apply the amendments within this ASU prospectively to modifications or exchanges occurring on or after the effective date of the amendment. The Company plans to adopt this ASU on January 1, 2022. The Company does not expect the adoption of the new guidance to have a significant impact on its consolidated financial statements and related disclosures.

Recently Adopted Accounting Pronouncements

In December 2019, the FASB issued ASU 2019-12, Simplifying the Accounting for Income Taxes, which simplifies the accounting for income taxes by removing certain exceptions to the current guidance, and improving the consistent application of and simplification of other areas of the guidance. The Company adopted this standard prospectively on January 1, 2021. The adoption of this update isASU did not expected to have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements and related disclosures.

63

In January 2017, the FASB issued ASU No. 2017-04,Intangibles - Goodwill and Other (Topic 350): Simplifying the Accounting for Goodwill Impairment.ASU No. 2017-04 removes Step 2 of the goodwill impairment test, which requires a hypothetical purchase price allocation. A goodwill impairment will now be the amount by which a reporting unit’s carrying value exceeds its fair value, not to exceed the carrying amount of goodwill. This standard will be applied prospectively and is effective for the Company beginning November 1, 2020. Early adoption is permitted for annual and interim goodwill impairment testing dates after January 1, 2017. The Company is currently evaluating the impact this standard will have on its financial statements.3. LIQUIDITY AND GOING CONCERN

In May 2017, the FASB issued ASU 2017-09,Compensation-Stock Compensation (Topic 718): Scope of Modification Accounting. ASU 2017-09 provides clarity and reduces both (1) diversity in practice and (2) cost and complexity when applying the guidance in Topic 718, to a change to the terms or conditions of a share-based payment award. The amendments in ASU 2017-09 should be applied prospectively to an award modified on or after the adoption date. This ASU is effective for fiscal years, and interim periods within those years, beginning after December 15, 2017.. The Company does not believe the adoption of this standard will have a significant impact on its financial statements.

In June 2018, the FASB issued ASU 2018-07,Compensation – Stock Compensation (Topic 718): Improvements to Nonemployee Share-based Payment Accounting. The standard expands the scope of Topic 718 to include share-based payments issued to nonemployees for goods or services, simplifying the accounting for share-based payments to nonemployees by aligning it with the accounting for share-based payments to employees, with certain exceptions. The standard is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018, including interim periods within those fiscal years with early adoption permitted, including adoption in an interim period. The Company does not believe the adoption of this standard will have a significant impact on its financial statements given the limited number of nonemployee stock-based awards outstanding.

3. LIQUIDITY

The Company has experienced recurring losses and cash outflows from operating activities. For the year ended OctoberAs of December 31, 2018, the Company’s net loss and cash used in operating activities were $65.4 million and $28.5 million, respectively. On April 12, 2018,2021, the Company completed a public offeringhad an accumulated deficit of 2,335,937 shares$508.4million. As of the Company’s common stock, par value $0.001 per share, at an offering price of $16.00 per share resulting in net proceeds of approximately $34.6 million, after deducting offering expenses payable byDecember 31, 2021, the Company (see Note 10).

On June 7, 2018, the Company completed an underwritten offering of 2,455,882 shares of the Company’s common stock, par value $0.001 per share, at an offering price of $23.65 per share resulting in net proceeds of approximately $58.0 million, after deducting offering expenses payable by the Company (see Note 11).

Based upon the current status of our product development and commercialization plans, we believe that our existinghad cash and cash equivalents of $19.4million. The Company has been funded historically through sales of equity and debt.

These financial statements have been prepared on a going concern basis, which assumes the Company will be adequatecontinue to satisfy our capital needsrealize its assets and settle its liabilities in the normal course of business. The Company’s significant operating losses raise substantial doubt regarding the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern for at least the next 12 monthsone year from the date of filing. We anticipate needing substantialissuance of these consolidated financial statements. The financial statements do not include any adjustments relating to the recoverability and classification of recorded asset amounts or amounts of liabilities that might result from the outcome of this uncertainty. The Company is a clinical stage biotechnology company that has historically incurred losses and negative cash flows. Consequently, the future success of the Company depends on its ability to attract additional financingcapital and, ultimately, on its ability to continue clinical deployment and commercialization of our leadsuccessfully complete the regulatory approval process for its product, SkinTE, development of our other product candidates, and scaling the manufacturing capacity for our products and product candidates, and prepare for commercial readiness. Wedevelop future profitable operations. The Company will continue to pursue fundraising opportunities when available, butseek additional capital through equity offerings or debt financing. However, such financing may not be available in the future on terms favorable to us,terms, if at all. If adequate financing is not available, we may be required to delay, reduce the scope of, or eliminate one or more of our product development programs. We plan to meet our capital requirements primarily through issuances of equity securities, debt financing, revenue from product sales and future collaborations. Failure to generate revenue or raise additional capital would adversely affect our ability to achieve our intended business objectives.

4. IBEX ACQUISITION

On March 2, 2018, the Company, along with its wholly owned subsidiary, Utah CRO Services, Inc., a Nevada corporation (“Acquisition Co.”), entered into agreements with Ibex Group, L.L.C., a Utah limited liability company, and Ibex Preclinical Research, Inc., a Utah corporation (collectively, the “Seller” or “IBEX”) for the purchase of the assets and rights to the Seller’s preclinical research and contract services business and related real estate. The Company acquired this preclinical biomedical research facility in order to accelerate research and development of PolarityTE pipeline products. The business consists of a “good laboratory practices” (GLP) compliant preclinical research facility, including vivarium, operating rooms, preparation rooms, storage facilities, and surgical and imaging equipment. The real property includes two parcels in Cache County, Utah, consisting of approximately 1.75 combined gross acres of land, together with the buildings, structures, fixtures, and personal property located on the real property. The above was accounted for as a business combination.

The acquisition closed on May 3, 2018. The aggregate purchase price was $3.8 million, of which $2.3 million was paid at closing and the balance satisfied by a promissory note payable to the Seller with an initial fair value of $1.2 million (see Note 9, for a description of the promissory note) and contingent consideration with an initial fair value of approximately $0.3 million. During the year ended October 31, 2018, the Company recorded approximately $38,000 of direct and incremental costs associated with acquisition-related activities. These costs were incurred primarily for banking, legal, and professional fees associated with the IBEX acquisition. These costs were recorded in general and administrative expenses in the consolidated statement of operations.

During the year ended October 31, 2018, IBEX contributed approximately $831,000 to net revenues and approximately $331,000 to gross profit.

Purchase Price Allocation

The following table summarizes the purchase price allocation for the IBEX acquisition (in thousands):

Equipment $430 
Land and buildings  2,000 
Intangible assets  1,057 
Goodwill  278 
Accrued property taxes  (9)
Aggregate purchase price $3,756 
Less: Promissory note to seller  1,220 
Contingent consideration  278 
Cash paid at closing $2,258 

As part of the acquisition of IBEX, the Company recorded a contingent consideration liability of $0.3 million in current liabilities in the condensed consolidated balance sheets. The contingent consideration represents the estimated fair value of future payments due to the Seller of IBEX based on IBEX’s revenue generated from studies quoted prior to but completed after the transaction. Contingent consideration is initially recognized at fair value as purchase consideration and subsequently remeasured at fair value through earnings. The initial fair value of the contingent consideration was based on the present value of estimated future cash flows using a 20% discount rate. The contingent consideration is the payment of 15% of the actual revenues received for work on any study initiated within 18 months following the closing of the purchase on the basis of certain specific customer prospects that received service proposals prior to the closing, provided that the total payments will not exceed $650,000. The subsequent increase in fair value of contingent consideration from acquisition to October 31, 2018 of approximately $20,000 was recognized in general and administrative expense in the Company’s consolidated statement of operations for the year ended October 31, 2018. The excess of the fair value of purchase consideration over the fair values of identifiable assets and liabilities acquired is recorded as goodwill, including the value of the assembled workforce.

Disclosure of pro-forma revenues and earnings attributable to the acquisition is excluded because it is impracticable to obtain complete historical financial records for IBEX Preclinical Research, Inc.

The following table shows the valuation of the individual identifiable intangible assets acquired along with their estimated remaining useful lives (in thousands):

  Approximate Fair Value  Remaining Useful Life (in years)
Non-compete agreement $410  4
Customer contracts and relationships  534  7 to 8
Trade names and trademarks  101  10 to 11
Backlog  12  Less than 1
Total intangible assets $1,057   

5. 4. FAIR VALUE

In accordance withASC 820, Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures, financial instruments were measured at fair value using a three-level hierarchy which maximizes use of observable inputs and minimizes use of unobservable inputs:

Level 1: Observable inputs such as quoted prices in active markets for identical instrumentsinstruments.
Level 2: Quoted prices for similar instruments that are directly or indirectly observable in the marketmarket.
Level 3: Significant unobservable inputs supported by little or no market activity. Financial instruments whose values are determined using pricing models, discounted cash flow methodologies, or similar techniques, for which determination of fair value requires significant judgment or estimation.

In connection with the offering of Units in September 2017 (see Note 10), the Company issued warrants to purchase an aggregate of 322,727 shares of common stock. These warrants were exercisable at $30.00 per share and expire in two years. The warrants were liabilities pursuant to ASC 815. The warrant agreement provided for an adjustment to the number of common shares issuable under the warrant or adjustment to the exercise price, including but not limited to, if: (a) the Company issues shares of common stock as a dividend or distribution to holders of its common stock; (b) the Company subdivides or combines its common stock (i.e., stock split); or (c) the Company issues new securities for consideration less than the exercise price. Under ASC 815, warrants that provide for down-round exercise price protection are recognized as derivative liabilities.

The Series F Preferred Shares contained an embedded conversion feature that was not clearly and closely related to the identified host instrument and, as such, was recognized as a derivative liability measured at fair value. The Company classified these derivatives on the consolidated balance sheet as a current liability.

As noted in Note 10, both the warrants and the Series F Preferred Shares were exchanged for common stock on March 6, 2018.

The fair value of the bifurcated embedded conversion feature was estimated to be approximately $7.2 million and $9.3 million, respectively, at March 5, 2018 and October 31, 2017 as calculated using the Monte Carlo simulation with the following assumptions:

  Series F Conversion Feature 
  March 5, 2018  October 31, 2017 
Stock price $20.05  $25.87 
Exercise price $27.50  $27.50 
Risk-free rate  2.2%  1.6%
Volatility  88.2%  96.0%
Term  1.5   1.9 

The fair value of the warrant liability was estimated to be approximately $2.5 million and $4.3 million, respectively, at March 5, 2018 and October 31, 2017 as calculated using the Monte Carlo simulation with the following assumptions:

  Warrant Liability 
  March 5, 2018  October 31, 2017 
Stock price $20.05  $25.87 
Exercise price $30.00  $30.00 
Risk-free rate  2.2%  1.6%
Volatility  88.2%  96.0%
Term  1.5   1.9 

Financial instruments measured at fair value are classified in their entirety based on the lowest level of input that is significant to the fair value measurement. There were no transfers within the hierarchy for any of the periods presented.

The fair value hierarchy of financial instruments, measured at fair value on a recurring basis on the consolidated balance sheets as of October 31, 2018 and 2017 is as follows (in thousands):

  Fair Value Measurement as of October 31, 2018 
  Level 1  Level 2  Level 3  Total 
Liabilities                
Contingent consideration $  $  $235  $235 
Total $  $  $235  $235 

  Fair Value Measurement as of October 31, 2017 
  Level 1  Level 2  Level 3  Total 
Liabilities                
Warrant liability $  $  $4,256  $4,256 
Derivative liability        9,246   9,246 
Total $  $  $13,502  $13,502 

The following table sets forth the changes in the estimated fair value for ourof the Company’s financial assets and liabilities measured on a recurring basis by level within the fair value hierarchy (in thousands):

SCHEDULE OF FAIR VALUE OF FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS MEASURED ON RECURRING BASIS

  Level 1  Level 2  Level 3  Total 
  December 31, 2021 
  Level 1  Level 2  Level 3  Total 
Liabilities            
Common stock warrant liability $  $  $6,844  $6,844 
Total $  $  $6,844  $6,844 

  Level 1  Level 2  Level 3  Total 
  December 31, 2020 
  Level 1  Level 2  Level 3  Total 
Liabilities            
Common stock warrant liability $  $  $5,975  $5,975 
Total $  $  $5,975  $5,975 

The Company assesses its long-lived assets, including property, plant, and equipment, ROU assets, intangible assets, and goodwill, at fair value on a non-recurring basis. The Company reviews the carrying amounts of such assets when events indicate that their carrying amounts may not be recoverable. Any resulting impairment would require that the asset be recorded at its fair value. During the year ended December 31, 2021, the Company recognized an impairment charge of $0.6 million related to definite-lived intangible assets and goodwill and $0.4 million related to property and equipment. As of each measurement date, the fair value of goodwill, intangibles and property and equipment was determined utilizing Level 3 classified contingent consideration (in thousands) which is included in other current liabilities:inputs. Fair values of goodwill and intangibles and property and equipment was determined based on a market approach and income approach, respectively. See Note 8 and Note 15 for additional details.

  Contingent Consideration 
Fair value – October 31, 2017 $ 
IBEX acquisition – May 3, 2018 $278 
Change in fair value  20 
Earned and paid in cash  (30)
Earned and moved to accounts payable  (33)
Fair value - October 31, 2018 $235 

 

F-1364
 

The following table presents the change in fair value of the liability classified common stock warrants for the year ended December 31, 2021 (in thousands):

SCHEDULE OF FAIR VALUE OF LIABILITY CLASSIFIED COMMON STOCK WARRANTS

  Fair Value at December 31, 2020  Initial Fair Value at Issuance  (Gain) Loss Upon Change in Fair Value  Liability Reduction Due to Exercises  Fair Value at December 31, 2021 
Warrant liabilities                    
February 14, 2020 issuance $328  $  $(37) $  $291 
December 23, 2020 issuance  5,647      3,556   (8,964)  239 
January 14, 2021 issuance     8,629   (5,284)     3,345 
January 25, 2021 issuance(1)(1)    6,199   (3,230)     2,969 
Total
 $5,975  $14,828  $

(4,995

) $(8,964) $6,844 

(1)Concurrent with the issuance of the January 25, 2021 warrants, upon the exercise of the December 23, 2020 warrants, an inducement loss of $5.2 million was recorded as the fair value of the initial warrant liability for the new warrants of $6.2 million exceeded the gross proceeds received upon sale of the new warrants of approximately $1.0 million

The following table presents the change in fair value of the liability classified common stock warrants for the year ended December 31, 2020 (in thousands):

  Initial Fair Value at Issuance  Liability Reduction Due to Exercises  (Gain) Loss Upon Change in Fair Value  Fair Value at December 31, 2020 
Warrant liabilities                
February 14, 2020 issuance $11,677  $(8,265) $(3,084) $328 
December 23, 2020 issuance  5,477      170   5,647 
Total $17,154  $(8,265) $(2,914) $5,975 

65

The Company uses the Monte Carlo valuation model to determine the fair value of the liability classified warrants issued during 2021 and 2020. Input assumptions for these freestanding instruments are as follows:

SCHEDULE OF FAIR VALUE ASSUMPTIONS OF WARRANTS LIABILITY

For the Year Ended December 31, 2021
Stock price$0.59 - 1.21
Exercise price$0.10 - 1.38
Risk-free rate0.42 - 1.27 %
Volatility99.0103.9 %
Remaining term (years)4.0 - 5.9

For the Year Ended December 31, 2020
Stock price$0.65 - 1.69
Exercise price$0.10 - 2.80
Risk-free rate0.36 - 1.51 %
Volatility93.4 99.7 %
Remaining term (years)5.0 - 7.0

5. PREPAID EXPENSES AND OTHER CURRENT ASSETS

The following table presents the major components of prepaid expenses and other current assets (in thousands):

SCHEDULE OF PREPAID EXPENSE AND OTHER CURRENT ASSETS

  December 31, 2021  December 31, 2020 
Other current receivable $67  $306 
Short term deposit  150    
Prepaid insurance  239   201 
Prepaid expenses  445   485 
Deferred offering costs  694    
Total prepaid expenses and other current assets $1,595  $992 

6. PROPERTY AND EQUIPMENT, NET

The following table presents the components of property and equipment, net (in thousands):

SCHEDULE OF PROPERTY AND EQUIPMENT, NET

 October 31, 2018 October 31, 2017  December 31, 2021  December 31, 2020 
Machinery and equipment $8,134  $2,418  $8,502  $12,232 
Land and buildings 2,000    2,000   2,000 
Computers and software 1,337 211   1,129   1,240 
Leasehold improvements 1,137    2,107   2,107 
Construction in progress 1,587    133   87 
Furniture and equipment  566  30   123   148 
Total property and equipment, gross 14,761 2,659   13,994   17,814 
Accumulated depreciation  (1,834)  (486)  (7,071)  (7,264)
Total property and equipment, net $12,927 $2,173  $6,923  $10,550 

The Company sold SkinTE under Section 361 of the Public Health Service Act in 2020 and into 2021 and, after the Company’s decision to file an IND under Section 351 of that Act, under an enforcement discretion position stated by the FDA in a regenerative medicine policy framework to help facilitate regenerative medicine therapies. The FDA’s stated period of enforcement discretion ended May 31, 2021. Consequently, the Company terminated commercial sales of SkinTE on May 31, 2021, and ceased its SkinTE commercial operations. As a result, there are no product sales from commercial SkinTE after June 2021 and the Company has eliminated or reduced costs associated with commercial sale of SkinTE.

66

The Company evaluated the future use of its commercial property and equipment and recorded an impairment charge of approximately $0.4 million during the year ended December 31, 2021. The impairment charges occurred within the Company’s regenerative medicine products business segment and are included in restructuring and other charges within the accompanying consolidated statement of operations for the year ended December 31, 2021. There were 0 other impairment charges recorded for the year ended December 31, 2021. See Note 15.

Depreciation and amortization expense for property and equipment, including assets acquired under capitalfinancing leases for the years ended October 31, 2018 and 2017 iswas as follows (in thousands):

SCHEDULE OF DEPRECIATION AND AMORTIZATION EXPENSE

  For the Years Ended October 31, 
  2018  2017 
General and administrative expense:        
Continuing operations $223  $1 
Discontinued operations     11 
   223   12 
Research and development expense:        
Continuing operations  1,171   431 
Total depreciation expense $1,394  $443 
  2021  2020 
  For the Year Ended December 31, 
  2021  2020 
General and administrative expense $739  $1,533 
Research and development expense  1,913   1,541 
Total depreciation and amortization expense $2,652  $3,074 

7. LEASES

The Company leases facilities and certain equipment under noncancelable leases that expire at various dates through November 2024. These leases require monthly lease payments that may be subject to annual increases throughout the lease term. Certain of these leases may include options to extend or terminate the lease at the election of the Company. These optional periods have not been considered in the determination of the right-of-use-assets or lease liabilities associated with these leases as the Company did not consider it reasonably certain it would exercise the options.

Operating Leases

On December 27, 2017, the Company entered into a commercial lease agreement with Adcomp LLC, a Utah limited liability company, pursuant to which the Company leased approximately 178,528 rentable square feet of warehouse, manufacturing, office, and lab space in Salt Lake City, Utah from the landlord. The initial term of the lease is five years and it expires on November 30, 2022. The Company has a one-time option to renew for an additional five years. The initial base rent under this lease is $98,190 per month ($0.55 per sq. ft.) for the first year of the initial lease term and increases 3.0% per annum thereafter. Because the rate implicit in the lease is not readily determinable, the Company has used an incremental borrowing rate of 10% to determine the present value of the lease payments.

Effective July 15, 2018, the Company entered into a commercial lease agreement with Salt Lake City Corporation, pursuant to which the Company leased approximately 44,695 rentable square feet of office space at 123 Wright Brothers Drive in Salt Lake City, Utah. The initial term of the lease was two years and provided the option to extend the term for an additional five years by agreement of the parties. The initial base rent under this lease was $39,108 per month for the first year of the initial lease term and increased by 3.0% thereafter. Because the rate implicit in the lease is not readily determinable, the Company determined an incremental borrowing rate of 9% to determine the present value of the lease payments. On January 11, 2019, the lease was amended to extend the initial lease term to September 30, 2020. The Company did not exercise the option to extend the lease term and the lease expired September 30, 2020.

In April 2019, the Company entered into an operating lease to obtain 6,307 square feet of manufacturing, laboratory, and office space. The lease provided for monthly lease payments subject to annual increases and had an expiration date in April 2024. During the third quarter of 2020, the Company initiated a business analysis to determine the long-term strategy of the remote facility and cost to remain operational. During the fourth quarter of 2020, it was determined that the Company would cease operations and vacate the facility. As a result, the Company determined that the approved plan to vacate the lease represented a triggering event requiring the long-lived assets attributable to the disposal group be assessed for impairment. Given the facts and circumstances, the Company determined that the carrying value of the related assets of the disposal group were not recoverable. As a result, the carrying values of $1.2 million were reduced to $0 as of December 31, 2020. During the second quarter of 2021, the Company terminated the lease effective June 30, 2021. The Company recorded a net gain on termination of $0.3 million which was included in restructuring and other charges on the consolidated statement of operations.

67

In November 2021, the Company entered into an operating lease to obtain office equipment with Pacific Office Automation, Inc. The initial term of the lease is three years and it expires on November 2024. The initial base rent under this lease is $3,983 per month for the entire lease term and includes a cash incentive of $0.1 million. Because the rate implicit in the lease is not readily determinable, the Company has used an incremental borrowing rate of 7.42% to determine the present value of the lease payments.

Financing Leases

In November 2018 and April 2019, the Company entered into financing leases primarily for laboratory equipment used in research and development activities. The financing leases have remaining terms that range from 3 to 28 months as of December 31, 2021 and include options to purchase equipment at the end of the lease. Because the rate implicit in the lease is not readily determinable, the Company has used an incremental borrowing rate of 10% to determine the present value of the lease payments for these leases.

In the fourth quarter of 2021, management recorded $0.2 million in charges related to the abandonment of finance lease right of use assets. The charges were recorded within the Company’s regenerative medicine products business segment and are included in general and administrative expenses within the accompanying consolidated statement of operations.

As of December 31, 2021, the maturities of operating and finance lease liabilities were as follows (in thousands):

SCHEDULE OF OPERATING AND FINANCE LEASE LIABILITIES

Year ending December 31: Operating leases  Finance leases 
2022 $1,185  $377 
2023  48   316 
2024  42   42 
Total lease payments  1,275   735 
Less:        
Imputed interest  (63)  (68)
Total $1,212  $667 

Supplemental balance sheet information related to leases was as follows (in thousands):

SCHEDULE OF SUPPLEMENTAL BALANCE SHEET INFORMATION RELATED TO FINANCE AND OPERATING LEASES

Finance leases

  December 31, 2021  December 31, 2020 
Finance lease right-of-use assets included within property and equipment, net $461  $1,301 
         
Current finance lease liabilities included within other current liabilities $329  $556 
Non-current finance lease liabilities included within other long-term liabilities  338   711 
Total $667  $1,267 
Total finance lease liabilities $667  $1,267 

Operating leases

  December 31, 2021  December 31, 2020 
Current operating lease liabilities included within other current liabilities $1,169  $1,485 
Operating lease liabilities – non-current  43   1,476 
Total $1,212  $2,961 
Total operating lease liabilities $1,212  $2,961 

68

The components of lease expense were as follows (in thousands):

SUMMARY OF COMPONENTS OF LEASE EXPENSE

  2021  2020 
  For the Year Ended December 31, 
  2021  2020 
Operating lease costs included within operating costs and expenses $1,511  $2,428 
Finance lease costs:        
Amortization of right of use assets $617  $698 
Interest on lease liabilities  99   151 
Total $716  $849 

Supplemental cash flow information related to leases was as follows (in thousands):

SCHEDULE OF SUPPLEMENTAL CASH FLOW INFORMATION RELATED TO LEASES

  2021  2020 
  For the Year Ended December 31, 
  2021  2020 
Cash paid for amounts included in the measurement of lease liabilities:      
Operating cash out flows from operating leases $1,596  $2,070 
Operating cash out flows from finance leases $99  $151 
Financing cash out flows from finance leases $555  $508 
Lease liabilities arising from obtaining right-of-use assets:        
Operating leases $42  $ 
Remeasurement of operating lease liability due to lease modification/termination $386  $154 

As of December 31, 2021, the weighted average remaining operating lease term is 1.0 years and the weighted average discount rate used to determine the operating lease liability was 9.96%. The weighted average remaining finance lease term is 2.0 years and the weighted average discount rate used to determine the finance lease liability was 9.63%.

8. INTANGIBLE ASSETS AND GOODWILL

In March 2022, the Company reached a non-binding understanding with an unrelated third party that contemplates the sale of IBEX and the real property used in the operation of IBEX. The potential sale is subject to a number of contingencies. Even though the proposed sale may not materialize, the Company is exploring its options with respect to IBEX, which is likely to result in curtailed operation of the business or some other disposition in 2022. For the year ended December 31, 2021, the Company performed an impairment review and concluded that goodwill and intangible assets were impaired. This resulted in the Company writing off the goodwill and intangible assets.

Intangible assets, net, consist of the following (in thousands):

SCHEDULE OF INTANGIBLE ASSETS

 October 31, 2018 October 31, 2017  December 31, 2021  December 31, 2020 
Non-compete agreement $410  $  $  $410 
Customer contracts and relationships 534       534 
Trade names and trademarks 101       101 
Backlog  12        12 
Total intangible assets, gross 1,057       1,057 
Accumulated amortization  (100)        (515)
Total intangible assets, net $957 $  $  $542 

Amortization expense for the years ended December 31, 2021 and December 31, 2020 was approximately $0.2 million for each period.

Changes to goodwill during the year ended OctoberDecember 31, 2018 was approximately $100,000.2021 were as follows:

SCHEDULE OF CHANGES GOODWILL

  Total 
Balance – December 31, 2020 $278 
Impairment charge to goodwill  (278)
Balance – December 31, 2021 $ 

The future amortization of these intangible assets is expected to be as follows (in thousands):

Year ended October 31, 2019 $195 
Year ended October 31, 2020  189 
Year ended October 31, 2021  189 
Year ended October 31, 2022  138 
Year ended October 31, 2023  87 
Thereafter  159 
  $957 

F-1469
 

The changes in the carrying amount of goodwill for fiscal year 2018 is as follows (in thousands):

  

Regenerative

Medicine

  

Contract

Services

  Total 
October 31, 2017 $  $  $ 
Additions due to acquisitions and current year acquisitions’ purchase price adjustments (1)     278   278 
October 31, 2018         $278 

(1)On May 3, 2018, the Company acquired the preclinical research and contract services business and related real estate from IBEX L.L.C.

8. 9. ACCOUNTS PAYABLE AND ACCRUED EXPENSES

The following table presents the major components of accounts payable and accrued expenses (in thousands):

SCHEDULE OF ACCOUNTS PAYABLE AND ACCRUED EXPENSES

 October 31, 2018 October 31, 2017  December 31, 2021  December 31, 2020 
Accounts payable $2,007  $441  $173  $1,193 
Salaries and other compensation  933   574   722   1,129 
Other accruals  792   369 
Legal and accounting  631   555   1,082   241 
Accrued severance  111   330 
Benefit plan accrual  102   659 
Clinical trials  161    
Accrued offering costs  400    
Other  364   596 
Total accounts payable and accrued expenses $4,363  $1,939  $3,115  $4,148 

Salaries10. OTHER CURRENT LIABILITIES

The following table presents the major components of other current liabilities (in thousands):

SCHEDULE OF OTHER CURRENT LIABILITIES

  December 31, 2021  December 31, 2020 
Current finance lease liabilities $329  $556 
Current operating lease liabilities  1,169   1,485 
Other  22   65 
Total other current liabilities $1,520  $2,106 

11. STOCK-BASED COMPENSATION

2020, 2019 and 2017 Equity Incentive Plans

2020 Plan

On October 25, 2019, the Company’s Board of Directors (the “Board”) approved the Company’s 2020 Stock Option and Incentive Plan (the “2020 Plan”). The 2020 Plan became effective on December 19, 2019, the date approved by the stockholders. The 2020 Plan provides for the grant of incentive stock options, nonqualified stock options, restricted stock, restricted stock units, stock appreciation rights, unrestricted stock awards, dividend equivalent rights, and cash-based awards to the Company’s employees, officers, directors, and consultants. The Board designated the Compensation Committee of the Board the administrator of the 2020 Plan, including determining which eligible participants will receive awards, the number of shares of common stock subject to the awards and the terms and conditions of such awards. Up to 7,191,917 shares of common stock are issuable pursuant to awards under the 2020 Plan. No grants of awards may be made under the 2020 Plan after the later of December 19, 2029, or the tenth anniversary of the latest material amendment of the 2020 Plan and no grants of incentive stock options may be made after October 25, 2029. The 2020 Plan provides that effective on January 1 of each year the number of shares of common stock reserved and available for issuance under the 2020 Plan shall be cumulatively increased by the lesser of 4% of the number of shares of common stock issued and outstanding on the immediately preceding December 31 or such lesser number of shares as determined by the 2020 plan administrator. As of December 31, 2021, the Company had 153,927 shares available for future issuances under the 2020 Plan.

2019 Plan

On October 5, 2018, the Company’s Board approved the Company’s 2019 Equity Incentive Plan (the “2019 Plan”). The 2019 Plan provides for the grant of incentive stock options, nonqualified stock options, restricted stock, restricted stock units, stock appreciation rights and other compensation includes accrued payroll expense, accrued bonus,types of stock-based awards to the Company’s employees, officers, directors, and estimated employer 401K plan contributions.

9. LONG TERM NOTE PAYABLE

In connection withconsultants. The Board designated the IBEX Acquisition, described in Note 4,Compensation Committee of the Board the administrator of the 2019 Plan, including determining which eligible participants will receive awards, the number of shares of common stock subject to the awards and the terms and conditions of such awards. Up to 3,000,000 shares of common stock are issuable pursuant to awards under the 2019 Plan. Unless earlier terminated by the Board, the 2019 Plan shall terminate at the close of business on October 5, 2028. As of December 31, 2021, the Company issued a promissory note payable tohad 1,361 shares available for future issuances under the Seller with an initial fair value of $1.22 million. The promissory note has a principal balance of $1,333,333 and bears interest at a rate of 3.5% interest per annum. Principal and interest are payable in five equal installments beginning on November 3, 2018 and continuing on each six-month anniversary thereafter (“Payment Date”). The promissory note may be prepaid by the Company at any time and becomes due and payable at the earlier of the maturity date of November 3, 2020 or upon an event of default, which includes failure to pay any installment on each Payment Date, breach of any negative covenants, insolvency or bankruptcy. Upon the occurrence of an event of default, the promissory note will bear an accelerated interest rate of 7% per annum from the date of the event of default.2019 Plan.

The Company initially recognized the promissory note at its fair value, using an estimated market rate of interest for the Company, which was higher than the promissory note’s stated rate. The result of imputing a market rate of interest resulted in an initial discount to the principal balance of approximately $113,000, which is being amortized to interest expense over the term of the promissory note using the effective interest method. The unamortized debt discount was $78,000 at October 31, 2018. Amortization of debt discount of $35,000 was included in interest expense for the year ended October 31, 2018.

10. PREFERRED SHARES AND COMMON SHARES

Common Stock Issuance

On April 12, 2018, the Company completed a public offering of 2,335,937 shares of the Company’s common stock, par value $0.001 per share, at an offering price of $16.00 per share resulting in net proceeds of approximately $34.6 million, after deducting offering expenses payable by the Company.

On June 7, 2018, the Company completed an underwritten offering of 2,455,882 shares of the Company’s common stock, par value $0.001 per share, at an offering price of $23.65 per share resulting in net proceeds of approximately $58.0 million, after deducting offering expenses payable by the Company.

F-1570
 

 

Exchange of 100% of Outstanding Series F Preferred Stock Shares and Warrants

On September 20, 2017, the Company sold an aggregate of $17,750,000 worth of units of the Company’s securities (the “Units”) to accredited investors at a purchase price of $2,750 per Unit. Each Unit consisted of (i) one share of the Company’s newly authorized 6% Series F Convertible Preferred Stock, par value $0.001 per share (the “Series F Preferred Shares”), convertible into one hundred (100) shares of the Company’s common stock, and (ii) a two-year warrant to purchase up to 322,727 shares of the Company’s common stock, at an exercise price of $30.00 per share.

The Series F Preferred Shares were convertible into shares of the Company’s common stock based on a conversion calculation equal to the stated value of the Series F Preferred Shares, plus all accrued and unpaid dividends, if any, on such Series F Preferred Shares, as of such date of determination, divided by the conversion price. The stated value of each Series F Preferred Share was $2,750 and the initial conversion price was $27.50 per share, each subject to adjustment for stock splits, stock dividends, recapitalizations, combinations, subdivisions or other similar events.

On the two-year anniversary of the initial issuance date, any Series F Preferred Shares outstanding and not otherwise already converted, would, at the option of the holder, either (i) automatically convert into common stock of the Company at the conversion price then in effect or (ii) be repaid by the Company based on the stated value of such outstanding Series F Preferred Shares.

The warrants issued in connection with the Series F Preferred Shares were determined to be liabilities pursuant to ASC 815. The warrant agreement provided for an adjustment to the number of common shares issuable under the warrant or adjustment to the exercise price, including but not limited to, if: (a) the Company issued shares of common stock as a dividend or distribution to holders of its common stock; (b) the Company subdivided or combined its common stock (i.e., stock split); or (c) the Company issues new securities for consideration less than the exercise price. Under ASC 815, warrants that provide for down-round exercise price protection are recognized as derivative liabilities.

The conversion feature within the Series F Preferred Shares was determined to not be clearly and closely related to the identified host instrument and, as such, was recognized as a derivative liability measured at fair value pursuant to ASC 815.

The initial fair value of the warrants and bifurcated embedded conversion feature, estimated to be approximately $4.3 million and $9.3 million, respectively, was deducted from the gross proceeds of the Unit offering to arrive at the initial discounted carrying value of the Series F Preferred Shares. The resulting discount to the aggregate stated value of the Series F Preferred Shares of approximately $13.6 million was recognized as accretion using the effective interest method similar to preferred stock dividends, over the two-year period prior to optional redemption by the holders.

On March 6, 2018, the Company entered into separate exchange agreements (the “Exchange Agreements”) with holders (each a “Holder”, and collectively the “Holders”) of 100% of the Company’s outstanding Series F Preferred Shares, and the Company’s warrants to purchase shares of the Company’s common stock issued in connection with the Series F Preferred Shares (such “Warrants” and Series F Preferred Shares collectively referred to as the “Exchange Securities”) to exchange the Exchange Securities and unpaid dividends on the Series F Preferred Shares for common stock (the “Exchange”).

The Exchange resulted in the following issuances: (A) all outstanding Series F Preferred Shares were converted into 972,070 shares of restricted common stock at an effective conversion price of $18.26 per share of common stock (the closing price of Common Stock on the NASDAQ Capital Market on February 26, 2018); (B) the right to receive 6% dividends underlying Series F Preferred Shares was terminated in exchange for 31,321 shares of restricted common stock; (C) 322,727 Warrants to purchase common stock were exchanged for 151,871 shares of restricted common stock; and (D) the Holders of the Warrants relinquished any and all other rights pursuant to the Warrants, including exercise price adjustments.

As part of the Exchange, the Holders also relinquished all other rights related to the issuance of the Exchange Securities, the respective governing agreements and certificates of designation, including any related dividends, adjustment of conversion and exercise price, and repayment option. The existing registration rights agreement with the holders of the Series F Preferred Shares was also terminated and the holders of the Series F Preferred Shares waived the obligation of the Company to register the common shares issuable upon conversion of Series F Preferred Shares or upon exercise of the warrants, and waived any damages, penalties and defaults related to the Company failing to file or have declared effective a registration statement covering those shares.

The exchange of all outstanding Series F Preferred Shares, and the holders’ right to receive 6% dividends, for common stock of the Company was recognized as follows:

Fair market value of 1,003,393 shares of common stock issued at $20.05 (Company’s closing stock price on March 5, 2018) in exchange for Series F Preferred Shares and accrued dividends $20,117,990 
Carrying value of Series F Preferred Shares at March 5, 2018, including dividends  (5,898,274)
Carrying value of bifurcated conversion option at March 5, 2018  (7,162,587)
Deemed dividend on Series F Preferred Shares exchange $7,057,129 

As the Warrants were classified as a liability, the exchange of the Warrants for common shares was recognized as a liability extinguishment. As of March 5, 2018, the fair market value of the 151,871 common shares issued in the Exchange was $3,045,034 and the fair value of the common stock warrant liability was $2,525,567 resulting in a loss on extinguishment of warrant liability of $519,467 during the year ended October 31, 2018.

The Company recognized accretion of the discount to the stated value of the Series F Preferred Shares of approximately $1,290,000 during the year ended October 31, 2018, as a reduction of additional paid-in capital and an increase in the carrying value of the Series F Preferred Shares. The accretion is presented in the Statement of Operations as a deemed dividend, increasing net loss to arrive at net loss attributable to common stockholders.

Preferred Stock Conversion and Elimination

On February 6, 2018, 15,756 shares of Series B Convertible Preferred Stock (“Series B Preferred Shares”) were converted into 262,606 shares of common stock.

On March 6, 2018, the Company received conversion notices (in accordance with original terms) from holders of 100% of the outstanding shares of Series A Convertible Preferred Stock (the “Series A Preferred Shares”), Series B Preferred Shares and Series E Convertible Preferred Stock (the “Series E Preferred Shares”) and issued an aggregate of 7,945,250 shares of common stock to such holders.

The shares of Series E Preferred Stock were held by Dr. Denver Lough, the Company’s Chief Executive Officer. On March 6, 2018, the Company entered into a new registration rights agreement (the “Lough Registration Rights Agreement”) with Dr. Lough, pursuant to which the Company agreed to file a registration statement to register the resale of 7,050,000 shares of Common Stock issued upon conversion of the Series E Preferred Shares within six months, to cause such registration statement to be declared effective by the Securities and Exchange Commission as promptly as possible following its filing and, with certain exceptions set forth in the Lough Registration Rights Agreement, to maintain the effectiveness of the registration statement until all of such shares have been sold or are otherwise able to be sold pursuant to Rule 144 under the Securities Act without restriction. Any sales of shares under the registration statement were subject to certain limitations as specified with more particularity in the Lough Registration Rights Agreement. In April 2018, Dr. Lough entered into a lock up agreement for 180 days, which prohibited him from selling any shares that may be registered until October 2018. The registration statement was not filed as of October 31, 2018. Dr. Lough has not made a demand for filing a registration statement and the Company does not propose to file a registration statement at the present time.

On March 7, 2018, the Company filed a Certificate of Elimination with the Secretary of State of the State of Delaware terminating the Company’s Series A, Series B, Series C, Series D, Series E and Series F Preferred Stock. As a result, the Company has 25,000,000 shares of authorized and unissued preferred stock as of October 31, 2018 with no designation as to series.

Convertible preferred stock activity for the year ended October 31, 2018 consisted of the following:

  

Shares

Outstanding -

October 31, 2017

    Year to Date 2018 -Preferred Stock Conversions and Series F Exchange  Year to Date 2018 - Common Stock Shares Issued 
Series A  3,146,671     (3,146,671)  713,036 
Series B  47,689     (47,689)  794,820 
Series C  2,578     (2,578)  59,950 
Series D  26,667     (26,667)  44,445 
Series E  7,050     (7,050)  7,050,000 
Series F  6,455     (6,455)  972,070 
Total  3,237,110     (3,237,110)  9,634,321 

There was no convertible preferred stock outstanding as of October 31, 2018. Convertible preferred stock as of October 31, 2017 consisted of the following (in thousands, except share amounts):

  

Shares

Authorized

  

Shares Issued and

Outstanding

  

Net Carrying

Value

  

Aggregate

Liquidation

Preference

  

Common Shares

Issuable Upon

Conversion

 
Series A  8,830,000   3,146,671  $769  $2,140   713,245 
Series B  54,250   47,689   4,020      794,806 
Series C  26,000   2,578   201      59,953 
Series D  170,000   26,667   312      44,445 
Series E  7,050   7,050   104,693      7,050,000 
Series F  6,455   6,455   4,541   17,750   645,455 
Other authorized, unissued  15,906,245             
Total  25,000,000   3,237,110  $114,536  $19,890   9,307,904 

11. STOCK-BASED COMPENSATION

In the years ended October 31, 2018 and 2017, the Company recorded stock-based compensation expense related to restricted stock awards and stock options as follows (in thousands):

  For the Years Ended October 31, 
  2018  2017 
General and administrative expense:        
Continuing operations $31,982  $14,869 
Discontinued operations     1,118 
   31,982   15,987 
Research and development expense:        
Continuing operations  6,322   1,758 
         
Sales and marketing expense:        
Continuing operations  517    
Total stock-based compensation expense $38,821  $17,745 

Incentive Compensation Plans

2017 Plan

On December 1, 2016, the Company’s Board of Directors (the “Board”) approved the Company’s 2017 Equity Incentive Plan (the “2017 Plan”). The purpose of the 2017 Plan is to promote the success of the Company and to increase stockholder value by providing an additional means through the grant of awards to attract, motivate, retain and reward selected employees, consultants and other eligible persons. The 2017 Plan provides for the grant of incentive stock options, nonqualified stock options, restricted stock, restricted stock units, stock appreciation rights and other types of stock-based awards to the Company’s employees, officers, directors, and consultants. The Board designated the Compensation Committee of the Board will administerthe administrator of the 2017 Plan, including determining which eligible participants will receive awards, the number of shares of common stock subject to the awards and the terms and conditions of such awards. Up to 7,300,000 (increased from 3,450,000 in October 2017) shares of common stock are issuable pursuant to awards under the 2017 Plan. Unless earlier terminated by the Board, the 2017 Plan shall terminate at the close of business on December 1, 2026.2026. As of OctoberDecember 31, 2018,2021, the Company had approximately 65,01538,814 shares available for future issuances under the 2017 Plan.

A summary of the Company’s employee and non-employee stock option activity is presented below:

2016 PlanSCHEDULE OF SHARE-BASED COMPENSATION, STOCK OPTIONS, ACTIVITY

  Number of Shares  Weighted- Average Exercise Price 
Outstanding – December 31, 2020  4,794,567  $10.03 
Granted  1,476,731  $1.25 
Exercised(1)  (2,500) $1.10 
Forfeited  (495,996) $8.63 
Outstanding – December 31, 2021  5,772,802  $7.91 
Options exercisable, December 31, 2021  4,734,311  $9.32 

(1)The number of exercised options includes shares withheld on behalf of employees to satisfy minimum statutory tax withholding requirements.

During the years ended December 31, 2021 and 2020, the estimated weighted-average grant-date fair value of options granted was $0.91 for both periods. The intrinsic value of options exercised for the years ended December 31, 2021 and 2020 was $0 for both periods. During the years ended December 31, 2021 and 2020, the estimated total grant-date fair value of options vested was $2.6 million and $8.4 million, respectively.

The aggregate intrinsic value of options outstanding and exercisable at December 31, 2021 was $0. The weighted average remaining contractual term of options outstanding and exercisable at December 31, 2021 was 6.15 years. As of December 31, 2021, there was approximately $0.3 million of unrecognized compensation cost related to stock option awards, which is expected to be recognized over a remaining weighted-average vesting period of 1.5 years.

Employee Stock Purchase Plan (ESPP)

In the fiscal year ended October 31, 2016,May 2018, the Company adopted the 2016Employee Stock Purchase Plan an omnibus equity incentive plan administered by the Company’s board of directors, or by one or more committees of directors appointed by the Board, pursuant to which the(“ESPP”). The Company may issue up to 4,000,000has initially reserved 500,000 shares of the Company’s common stock for purchase under equity-linked awards to certain officers, employees, directorsthe ESPP. The initial offering period began January 1, 2019, and consultants. The 2016 Plan permitsended on June 30, 2019, with the grantfirst purchase date. Subsequent offering periods will automatically commence on each January 1 and July 1 and will have a duration of stock options, including incentive stock optionssix months ending with a purchase date June 30 and nonqualifiedDecember 31 of each year. On each purchase date, ESPP participants will purchase shares of common stock options, stock appreciation rights, restricted shares, restricted share units, cash awards, or other awards, whether at a fixedprice per share equal to 85% of the lesser of (1) the fair market value per share of the common stock on the offering date or variable price, upon(2) the passagefair market value of time, the occurrence of one or more events, orcommon stock on the satisfaction of performance criteria or other conditions, or any combination thereof.purchase date. As of OctoberDecember 31, 2018,2021, the Company had 3,333,336264,478 shares available for future issuances under the 2016 Plan.ESPP.

2014 Plan

InStock-based compensation related to the fiscal year ended October 31, 2015,ESPP for the Company adopted the 2014 Plan, an omnibus equity incentive plan administered by the Company’s board of directors, or by one or more committees of directors appointed by the Board, pursuant to which the Company may issue up to 2,250,000 shares of the Company’s common stock under equity-linked awards to certain officers, employees, directors and consultants. The 2014 Plan permits the grant of stock options, including incentive stock options and nonqualified stock options, stock appreciation rights, restricted shares, restricted share units, cash awards, or other awards, whether at a fixed or variable price, upon the passage of time, the occurrence of one or more events, or the satisfaction of performance criteria or other conditions, or any combination thereof. As of October 31, 2018, the Company had approximately 1,927,453 shares available for future issuances under the 2014 Plan.

Stock Options

Employee stock-option activity in the fiscal years ended OctoberDecember 31, 20182021 and 2017:

  

Number of

shares

  

Weighted-Average

Exercise Price

 
Outstanding, October 31, 2016  383,210  $5.74 
Granted  3,482,000  $6.29 
Exercised  (268,847) $4.84 
Forfeited  (70,833) $6.42 
Outstanding - October 31, 2017  3,525,530  $6.34 
Granted  2,638,769  $23.55 
Exercised  (161,810) $4.31 
Forfeited  (217,984)  21.89 
Outstanding - October 31, 2018  5,784,505  $13.68 
Options exercisable, October 31, 2018  3,505,407  $8.53 
Weighted-average grant date fair value of options granted during the year ended October 31, 2018     $17.56 

Non-employee stock option activity in the fiscal year ended October 31, 20182020 was $40,000 and 2017:

  

Number of

shares

  

Weighted-Average

Exercise Price

 
Outstanding - October 31, 2016    $ 
Granted  293,000  $19.61 
Outstanding - October 31, 2017  293,000  $19.61 
Granted  3,000  $18.63 
Outstanding - October 31, 2018  296,000  $19.60 
Options exercisable - October 31, 2018  174,625  $17.65 

Stock options are generally granted to employees or non-employees at exercise prices equal to the fair market value of the Company’s stock of the day prior to the grant. Stock options generally vest over one to three years and have a term of five to ten years. The total fair value of employee options granted during$64,000, respectively. During the year ended OctoberDecember 31, 2018 was approximately $46.3 million. The grant date fair value2021 a total of non-employee options granted during101,900 shares of common stock were purchased at a weighted-average purchase price of $0.54 for total proceeds of $0.1 million pursuant to the ESPP. During the year ended OctoberDecember 31, 2018 was approximately $39,000. The intrinsic value2020 a total of options outstanding97,445 shares of common stock were purchased at October 31, 2018 was $33.7a weighted-average purchase price of $0.76 for total proceeds of $0.1 million. The intrinsic value of options exercised during the fiscal year ended October 31, 2018 was $1.8 million. The weighted average remaining contractual term of outstanding

71

Stock Options and exercisable options at October 31, 2018 was 8.7 years and 8.3 years, respectively.ESPP Valuation

The fair value of each option grant and ESPP purchase right is estimated on the date of grant using the Black-Scholes option-pricing model with the following range of assumptions forassumptions:

SCHEDULE OF SHARE-BASED PAYMENT AWARD, STOCK OPTIONS, VALUATION ASSUMPTIONS

  For the Year Ended December 31, 
  2021  2020 
Option grants        
Risk free annual interest rate  0.3% - 1.2 %   0.2% - 1.7 % 
Expected volatility  97.9% - 104.7 %   94.3% - 100.9 % 
Expected term of options (years)  4.64.7   4.44.6 
Assumed dividends      
ESPP        
Risk free annual interest rate  0.1% - 0.2 %   0.2% - 1.6 % 
Expected volatility  98.4% - 125.2 %   100.5% - 143.2 % 
Expected term of options (years)  0.5   0.5 
Assumed dividends      

Restricted Stock

A summary of the Company’s employee and non-employee restricted stock activity is presented below:

SCHEDULE OF SHARE-BASED COMPENSATION, RESTRICTED STOCK ACTIVITY

Number of shares
Unvested - December 31, 20203,468,969
Granted5,769,593
Vested(1)(3,480,366)
Forfeited(594,511)
Unvested – December 31, 20215,163,685

(1)The number of vested restricted stock units and awards includes shares that were withheld on behalf of employees to satisfy the minimum statutory tax withholding requirements.

The weighted-average per share grant-date fair value of restricted stock granted during the years ended October 31:

   October 31, 
   2018   2017 
Risk free annual interest rate  2.0%-3.2%   1.6%-2.3 % 
Expected volatility  80.9%-96.5%   71.7%-86.5 % 
Expected term of options (years)  5.0-6.0   5.0-6.0 
Assumed dividends      

The fair value of employeeDecember 31, 2021 and non-employee stock option grants is recognized over the vesting period of, generally, one to three years. As of October 31, 2018, there2020 was approximately $22.4 million of unrecognized compensation cost related to non-vested employee$0.73 and non-employee stock option awards, which is expected to be recognized over a remaining weighted-average vesting period of 0.8 years.

Restricted-stock activity for employees and non-employees in the fiscal year ended October 31, 2018:

  

Number of

shares

  

Weighted-Average

Grant-Date
Fair Value

 
Unvested, October 31, 2016  274,829  $6.00 
Granted  1,057,500  $4.80 
Vested  (1,105,197) $4.47 
Unvested - October 31, 2017  227,132  $7.83 
Granted  712,034  $25.27 
Vested  (242,819) $11.74 
Forfeited  (22,387) $20.62 
Unvested - October 31, 2018  673,960  $24.52 

$1.18 per share, respectively. The total fair value of restricted stock vested during the yearyears ended OctoberDecember 31, 20182021 and 2020 was approximately $2.9 million.$4.7 million and $9.0 million, respectively.

The value of restricted stock grants is measured based on the fair market value of the Company’s common stock on the date of grant and recognized over the vesting period of, generally, six months to three years. As of OctoberDecember 31, 2018,2021, there was approximately $11.9$1.3 million of unrecognized compensation cost related to unvested restricted stock awards, which is expected to be recognized over a remaining weighted-average vesting period of 1.22.3 years.

Stock-Based Compensation Expense

Total stock-based compensation expense related to stock options, restricted stock awards, and ESPP was as follows (in thousands):

SCHEDULE OF SHARE-BASED COMPENSATION RELATED TO RESTRICTED STOCK AWARDS AND STOCK OPTIONS

  For the Year Ended December 31, 
  2021  2020 
General and administrative expense $4,097  $5,879 
Research and development expense  1,146   943 
Sales and marketing expense  357   436 
Total stock-based compensation expense $5,600  $7,258 

 

F-2072
 

 

12. INCOME TAXESSALE OF COMMON STOCK, WARRANTS AND PRE- FUNDED WARRANTS

On February 14, 2020, the Company completed an underwritten offering of 10,638,298 shares of its common stock and warrants to purchase 10,638,298 shares of common stock. Each common share and warrant were sold together for a combined public purchase price of $2.35 before underwriting discount and commission. The exercise price of each warrant was $2.80 per share, the warrants were exercisable immediately, and will expire February 12, 2027. On November 19, 2020, the Company reduced the exercise price of the warrants from $2.80 per share to $0.10 per share effective November 20, 2020. As of December 31, 2020, 10,073,298 of these warrants were exercised into shares of common stock for proceeds of $1.0 million. As the warrants could require cash settlement in certain scenarios, they were classified as liabilities and were initially recorded at an estimated fair value of $11.7 million upon issuance. The total proceeds from the offering were first allocated to the liability classified warrants, based on their fair values, with the residual $12.0 million allocated to the common stock. Issuance costs allocated to the common stock of $1.3 million were recorded as a reduction to paid-in capital. The Company measured the fair value of the liability classified warrants using the Monte Carlo simulation model at issuance, upon change in exercise price, and at December 31, 2020 using the following inputs:

SCHEDULE FOR MEASUREMENT OF FAIR VALUE OF WARRANTS

  February 14, 2020  November 20, 2020  December 31, 2020 
Stock price $1.69  $0.92  $0.68 
Exercise price $2.80  $0.10  $0.10 
Risk-free rate  1.51%  0.53%  0.52%
Volatility  93.4%  99.4%  98.9%
Remaining term (years)  7.0   6.2   6.1 

On December 23, 2020, the Company completed a registered direct offering of 5,450,000 shares of its common stock, par value $0.001 per share, pre-funded warrants to purchase up to 5,238,043 shares of common stock and accompanying common warrants to purchase up to 10,688,043 shares of common stock. Each share of common stock and pre-funded warrant was sold together with a warrant. The combined offering price of each common stock share and accompanying warrant was $0.7485 and for each pre-funded warrant and accompanying warrant was $0.7475. The pre-funded warrants had an exercise price of $0.001 each and were exercised in full in January 2021. Each warrant was exercisable for one share of the Company’s common stock at an exercise price of $0.624 per share. The warrants were immediately exercisable and expire five years from the date of issuance. The holder of the warrants could not exercise any portion of the warrants to the extent that the holder would own more than 4.99% of the outstanding common stock immediately after exercise, which percentage could be changed at the holder’s election to a lower percentage at any time or to a higher percentage not to exceed 9.99% upon 61 days’ notice to the Company. The Company also issued to designees of the placement agent for the registered direct offering warrants to purchase up to 6.0% of the aggregate number of common stock shares and pre-funded warrants sold in the offering (or warrants to purchase up to 641,283 shares of common stock). The placement agent warrants have substantially the same terms as the warrants, except that the placement agent warrants have an exercise price equal to 125% of the purchase price per share (or $0.9356 per share). The net proceeds to the Company from the offering were $7.2 million, after offering expenses payable by the Company.

As the common stock warrants and placement agent common stock warrants could each require cash settlement in certain scenarios, the common stock warrants and placement agent common stock warrants were classified as liabilities upon issuance and were initially recorded at estimated fair values of $5.2 million and $0.3 million, respectively. Since the pre-funded warrants did not contain the same cash settlement provision, these warrants are classified as a component of stockholders’ equity within additional paid-in-capital. The pre-funded warrants are equity classified because they meet characteristics of the equity classification criteria. The total proceeds from the offering were first allocated to the liability classified warrants, based on their fair values, with the residual $2.5 million allocated on a relative fair value basis to the common stock and pre-funded common stock warrants. Issuance costs allocated to the equity classified pre-funded common stock warrants and common stock of $0.3 million were recorded as a reduction to paid-in capital. Issuance costs allocated to the liability classified warrants of $0.5 million were recorded as an expense. The Company measured the fair value of the accompanying common warrants and placement agent warrants using the Monte Carlo simulation model at issuance and again at December 31, 2020 using the following inputs:

73

Accompanying common warrants:

  December 23, 2020  December 31, 2020 
Stock price $0.65  $0.68 
Exercise price $0.62  $0.62 
Risk-free rate  0.38%  0.36%
Volatility  99.7%  96.2%
Remaining term (years)  5.0   5.0 

Placement agent warrants:

  December 23, 2020  December 31, 2020 
Stock price $0.65  $0.68 
Exercise price $0.94  $0.94 
Risk-free rate  0.38%  0.36%
Volatility  99.7%  96.2%
Remaining term (years)  5.0   5.0 

The following table summarizes warrant activity for the year ended December 31, 2020.

SUMMARY OF WARRANT ACTIVITY

Transaction Outstanding December 31, 2019Warrants Issued  Warrants Exercised  Outstanding December 31, 2020 
February 14, 2020 common warrants - 10,638,298   10,073,298   565,000 
December 23, 2020 common warrants - 10,688,043      10,688,043 
December 23, 2020 placement agent warrants - 641,283      641,283 
Total - 21,967,624   10,073,298   11,894,326 

The Company measured the fair value of the liability-classified warrants issued during 2020 as of December 31, 2021 using the Monte Carlo simulation model using the following inputs:

February 14, 2020 Warrants December 31, 2021 
Stock price $0.59 
Exercise price $0.10 
Risk-free rate  1.27%
Volatility  102.0%
Remaining term (years)  5.1 

December 23, 2020 Warrants December 31, 2021 
Stock price $0.59 
Exercise price $0.94 
Risk-free rate  1.11%
Volatility  103.9%
Remaining term (years)  4.0 

On January 14, 2021, the Company completed a registered direct offering of 6,670,000 shares of its common stock, par value $0.001 per share, pre-funded warrants to purchase up to 2,420,910 shares of common stock and accompanying common warrants to purchase up to 9,090,910 shares of common stock (the “January 14 Warrants”). Each share of common stock and pre-funded warrant was sold together with a warrant. The combined offering price of each common stock share and accompanying warrant was $1.10 and for each pre-funded warrant and accompanying warrant was $1.099. The pre-funded warrants had an exercise price of $0.001 each and were exercised in full in January 2021. Each January 14 Warrant is exercisable for one share of the Company’s common stock at an exercise price of $1.20 per share. The January 14 Warrants are immediately exercisable and will expire five years from the date of issuance. The holder of the January 14 Warrants may not exercise any portion of such warrants to the extent that the holder would own more than 4.99% of the outstanding common stock immediately after exercise, which percentage may be changed at the holder’s election to a lower percentage at any time or to a higher percentage not to exceed 9.99% upon 61 days’ notice to the Company. The Company also issued to designees of the placement agent warrants to purchase 6.0% of the aggregate number of common stock shares and pre-funded warrants sold in the offering (or warrants to purchase up to 545,455 shares of common stock). The placement agent warrants have substantially the same terms as the warrants, except that the placement agent warrants have an exercise price equal to 125% of the purchase price per share (or $1.375 per share). The net proceeds to the Company from the offering were $9.2 million, after direct offering expenses of $0.8 million payable by the Company.

74

As the January 14 Warrants and placement agent common stock warrants could each require cash settlement in certain scenarios, the January 14 Warrants and placement agent common stock warrants were classified as liabilities upon issuance and were initially recorded at estimated fair values of $8.1 million and $0.5 million, respectively. Since the pre-funded warrants did not contain the same cash settlement provision, these warrants are classified as a component of stockholders’ equity within additional paid-in-capital. The pre-funded warrants were equity classified because they met characteristics of the equity classification criteria. The total proceeds from the offering were first allocated to the liability classified warrants, based on their fair values, with the residual $1.4 million allocated on a relative fair value basis to the common stock and pre-funded common stock warrants. Issuance costs allocated to the equity classified pre-funded common stock warrants and common stock of $0.1 million were recorded as a reduction to paid-in capital. Issuance costs allocated to the liability classified warrants of $0.7 million were recorded as an expense. The Company measured the fair value of the accompanying January 14 Warrants and placement agent warrants using the Monte Carlo simulation model at issuance and at December 31, 2021 using the following inputs:

Accompanying common warrants:

  January 14, 2021  December 31, 2021 
Stock price $1.21  $0.59 
Exercise price $1.20  $1.20 
Risk-free rate  0.49%  1.12%
Volatility  100.1%  103.0%
Remaining term (years)  5.0   4.0 

Placement agent warrants:

  January 14, 2021  December 31, 2021 
Stock price $1.21  $0.59 
Exercise price $1.38  $1.38 
Risk-free rate  0.49%  1.12%
Volatility  99.3%  103.0%
Remaining term (years)  5.0   4.0 

 On January 22, 2021, the Company entered into a letter agreement with the holder of warrants to exercise the warrants and purchase 10,688,043 shares of common stock at an exercise price of $0.624 per share that were issued to the holder in the registered direct offering that closed on December 23, 2020. Under the letter agreement the holder agreed to exercise the 10,688,043 warrants in full and the Company agreed to issue and sell to the holder common warrants to purchase up to 8,016,033 shares of the Company’s common stock, par value $0.001 per share, at a price of $0.125 (the “January 25 Warrants”). Each January 25 Warrant is exercisable for one share of Common Stock at an exercise price of $1.20 per share. The January 25 Warrants are immediately exercisable and will expire five years from the date of issuance. A holder may not exercise any portion of the January 25 Warrants to the extent that the holder would own more than 4.99% of the outstanding common stock immediately after exercise, which percentage may be changed at the holder’s election to a lower percentage at any time or to a higher percentage not to exceed 9.99% upon 61 days’ notice to the Company. The Company also issued to designees of the placement agent, warrants to purchase 6.0% of the aggregate number of common stock shares and pre-funded warrants sold in the offering (or warrants to purchase up to 480,962 shares of common stock). The placement agent warrants have substantially the same terms as the new warrants. The 10,688,043 warrants issued on December 23, 2020, were exercised on January 22, 2021, and closing of the offering occurred on January 25, 2021. The Company received gross proceeds of approximately $6.7 million from the exercise of the existing warrants and gross proceeds of approximately $1.0 million from the sale of the new warrants.

75

Immediately prior to the exercise of the existing 10,688,043 liability classified common stock warrants, a remeasurement loss of $3.6 million was recorded. The Company measured the fair value of the common stock warrants using the Monte Carlo simulation model on January 22, 2021, using the following inputs:

  January 22, 2021 
Stock price $1.05 
Exercise price $0.62 
Risk-free rate  0.43%
Volatility  99.4%
Remaining term (years)  4.9 

As the new January 25 Warrants and placement agent common stock warrants could each require cash settlement in certain scenarios, the new January 25 Warrants and placement agent common stock warrants were classified as liabilities upon issuance and were initially recorded at estimated fair values of $5.8 million and $0.4 million, respectively. Cash issuance costs of $0.1 million were recorded as an expense. The Company measured the fair value of the accompanying January 25 Warrants and placement agent common stock warrants using the Monte Carlo simulation model at issuance and at December 31, 2021, using the following inputs:

Accompanying new common stock warrants:

  January 25, 2021  December 31, 2021 
Stock price $1.02  $0.59 
Exercise price $1.20  $1.20 
Risk-free rate  0.42%  1.13%
Volatility  99.0%  103.0%
Remaining term (years)  5.0   4.1 

Placement agent warrants:

  January 22, 2021  December 31, 2021 
Stock price $1.05  $0.59 
Exercise price $1.20  $1.20 
Risk-free rate  0.44%  1.12%
Volatility  99.6%  103.0%
Remaining term (years)  5.0   4.1 

The following table summarizes warrant activity for the year ended December 31, 2021.

  Outstanding December 31, 2020  Warrants Issued  Warrants Exercised  Outstanding December 31, 2021 
Transaction                
February 14, 2020 common warrants  565,000      (25,500)  539,500 
December 23, 2020 common warrants  10,688,043      (10,688,043)   
December 23, 2020 placement agent warrants  641,283         641,283 
December 23, 2020 pre-funded warrants  5,238,043      (5,238,043)   
January 14, 2021 common warrants     9,090,910      9,090,910 
January 14, 2021 placement agent warrants     545,455      545,455 
January 14, 2021 pre-funded warrants     2,420,910   (2,420,910)   
January 25, 2021 common warrants     8,016,033      8,016,033 
January 22, 2021 placement agent warrants     480,962      480,962 
Total  17,132,369   20,554,270   (18,372,496)  19,314,143 

76

Pursuant to an Equity Purchase Agreement dated as of December 5, 2019 (the “Purchase Agreement”) that the Company entered into with Keystone Capital Partners, LLC (“Keystone”), Keystone agreed to purchase up to $25.0 million of shares of our common stock, subject to certain limitations, at our direction from time to time during the 36-month term of the Purchase Agreement. In anticipation of the “at the market” equity offering program described below, the Company provided notice to Keystone of its decision to terminate the Purchase Agreement, which was effective on March 26, 2021.

On March 30, 2021, the Company entered into a sales agreement (“Sales Agreement”) with an investment banking firm to sell shares of common stock having aggregate sales proceeds of up to $50.0 million, from time to time, through an “at the market” equity offering program under which the investment banking firm would act as sales agent for a fee equal to 4% of gross proceeds sold in the offering with a minimum payment of $400,000 if the Sales Agreement was terminated within one year. As of December 31, 2021, no common stock had been sold. The Sales Agreement continues until the earlier of the date shares having aggregate sales proceeds of $50.0 million are sold or the date either party terminates the Sales Agreement by giving three days’ prior notice to the other party. On February 28, 2022, the Company exercised its right to terminate the Sales Agreement and was obligated to make a one-time payment to the investment banking firm of $400,000. See Note 21 for additional details.

13. NET LOSS PER SHARE ATTRIBUTABLE TO COMMON STOCKHOLDERS

The following tables present reconciliations for the numerators and denominators of basic and diluted net loss per share:

SCHEDULE OF EARNINGS PER SHARE, BASIC AND DILUTED

Numerator: 2021  2020 
  For the Year Ended December 31, 
Numerator: 2021  2020 
Net loss, primary $(30,187) $(42,854)
Gain from change in fair value of warrant liabilities     2,914 
Net loss, diluted $(30,187) $(45,768)

Numerator: 2021  2020 
  For the Year Ended December 31, 
Denominator: 2021  2020 
Basic weighted average number of common shares(1)  80,014,014   38,779,316 
Potentially dilutive effect of warrants     588,074 
Diluted weighted average number of common shares  80,014,014   39,367,390 

 

(1)In December 2020 and January 2021, the Company sold pre-funded warrants to purchase up to 5,238,043 and 2,420,910 shares of common stock, respectively. The shares of common stock associated with the pre-funded warrants are considered outstanding for the purposes of computing earnings per share prior to exercise because the shares may be issued for little or no consideration, are fully vested, and are exercisable after the original issuance date. The pre-funded warrants sold in December 2020 and January 2021 were exercised in January 2021and included in the denominator for the period of time the warrants were outstanding.

The following outstanding potentially dilutive shares have been excluded from the calculation of diluted net loss per share for the periods presented due to their anti-dilutive effect:

SCHEDULE OF ANTI-DILUTIVE POTENTIAL SHARES OUTSTANDING ACTIVITY

  For the Year Ended December 31, 
  2021  2020 
Stock options  5,772,802   4,794,567 
Restricted stock  5,163,685   3,468,969 
Common stock warrants  19,314,143    

77

14. DEBT

PPP Loan

On April 12, 2020, our subsidiary PolarityTE MD, Inc. (the “Borrower”) entered into a promissory note evidencing an unsecured loan in the amount of $3,576,145 made to it under the Paycheck Protection Program (the “Loan”). The Paycheck Protection Program (or “PPP”) was established under the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (the “CARES Act”) and is administered by the U.S. Small Business Administration. The Loan to the Borrower was made through KeyBank, N.A., a national banking association (the “Lender”). The interest rate on the Loan is 1.00%. Beginning seven months from the date of the Loan the Borrower is required to make 24 monthly payments of principal and interest in the amount of $150,563. The promissory note evidencing the Loan contains customary events of default relating to, among other things, payment defaults, making materially false and misleading representations to the SBA or Lender, or breaching the terms of the Loan documents. The occurrence of an event of default may result in the repayment of all amounts outstanding, collection of all amounts owing from the Borrower, or filing suit and obtaining judgment against the Borrower. Under the terms of the CARES Act, PPP loan recipients can apply for and be granted forgiveness for all or a portion of a loan granted under the PPP. On October 15, 2020, the Borrower applied to the Lender for forgiveness of the PPP Loan in its entirety based on the Borrower’s use of the PPP Loan for payroll costs, rent, and utilities. In June of 2021, the Company received notice of forgiveness of the PPP Loan in whole and the Lender was paid by the SBA, including all accrued unpaid interest. The Company recorded the forgiveness of $3.6 million of principal and accrued interest, which were included in gain on extinguishment of debt on the consolidated statement of operations for the year ended December 31, 2021.

On September 17, 2021, the Company received notice from the Lender that the SBA is continuing to review the PPP Loan. As part of this review, the SBA requested documents that the Company is required to maintain but may not have been required to submit with its application for the PPP Loan. These documents included an affiliation worksheet showing the relationship between the Company and Borrower and affiliated subsidiaries, documents showing the use of the PPP Loan proceeds, documents showing the calculation of the loan amount requested in the Company’s loan application, federal tax returns, and documents showing employee compensation information. The Company submitted the documents to the SBA through the Lender on September 28, 2021. There has been no additional communication from the SBA as of December 31, 2021.

15. RESTRUCTURING

In the second quarter of 2020, management approved several actions as part of a restructuring plan designed to improve operational efficiency and financial results. Management approved a reduction in force, which affected 40 of the 126 employees in the regenerative medicine business segment, or approximately 31.7% of that workforce. The Company did not make any change in the workforce of its contract services segment. Total severance expense recorded for the year ended December 31, 2020 was $1.0 million. All severance was paid during 2020. Included in the restructuring plan, management recorded $1.5 million of asset abandonments within the Company’s regenerative medicine business segment related to the restructuring.

In the fourth quarter of 2020, management recorded $0.9 million in write-downs related to the abandonment of certain production assets and leasehold improvements and $0.4 million in charges related to the abandonment of right of use assets. The charges were recorded within the Company’s regenerative medicine business segment and are included in restructuring and other charges in the accompanying consolidated statement of operations.

As discussed in Note 6, the Company decided to file an IND in the second half of 2021, cease commercial sales of SkinTE by May 31, 2021, and wind down its SkinTE commercial operations. As a result, management approved several actions as part of a restructuring plan. Costs associated with the restructuring plan were included in restructuring and other charges on the consolidated statement of operations.

The following table presents the components of incremental restructuring costs and gains associated with the cessation of commercial operations and wind down on SkinTE commercial operation (in thousands):

SCHEDULE OF RESTRUCTURING COSTS AND GAINS

  Year Ended  Year Ended 
  December 31, 2021  December 31, 2020 
Property and equipment impairment and disposal $425  

$

2,443

 
Employee severance and benefit arrangements  390   

1,025

 
Modification of employee stock options  187   

 
Net gain on lease termination(1)  (324)   
Abandonment of ROU assets     

366

 
Net restructuring costs $678  

$

3,834

 

(1)During the second quarter of 2021 and effective June 30, 2021, the Company terminated a lease which included manufacturing, laboratory, and office space. The Company recorded a net gain on termination of $0.3 million.

78

16. COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

Contingencies

Securities Class Action and Derivative Lawsuits

On September 24, 2021, a class action complaint alleging violations of the Federal securities laws was filed in the United States District Court, District of Utah, by Marc Richfield against the Company and certain officers of the Company, Case No. 2:21-cv-00561-BSJ. The Court subsequently appointed a Lead Plaintiff and ordered the Lead Plaintiff to file an amended Complaint by February 7, 2022, which was extended to February 21, 2022. The Lead Plaintiff filed an amended complaint on February 21, 2022, against the Company, two current officers of the Company, and three former officers of the Company (the “Complaint”). The Complaint alleges that during the period from January 30, 2018, through November 9, 2021, the defendants made or were responsible for, disseminating information to the public through reports filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission and other channels that contained material misstatements or omissions in violation of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and Rule 10b-5 adopted thereunder. Specifically, the Complaint alleges that the defendants misrepresented or failed to disclose that: (i) the Company’s product, SkinTE, was improperly registered as a 361 HCT/P under Section 361 of the Public Health Service Act and that, as a result, the Company’s ability to commercialize SkinTE as a 361 HCT/P was not sustainable because it was inevitable SkinTE would need to be registered under Section 351 of the Public Health Service Act; (ii) the Company characterized itself as a commercial stage company when it knew sales of SkinTE as a 361 HCT/P were unsustainable and that, as a result, it would need to file an IND and become a development stage company; (iii) issues arising from an FDA inspection of the Company’s facility in July 2018, were not resolved even though the Company stated they were resolved; and (iv) the IND for SkinTE was deficient with respect to certain chemistry, manufacturing, and control items, including items identified by the FDA in July 2018, and as a result it was unlikely that the FDA would approve the IND in the form it was originally filed. The Company believes the allegations in the Complaint are without merit, and intends to defend the litigation, vigorously. At this early stage of the proceedings, we are unable to make any prediction regarding the outcome of the litigation.

On October 25, 2021, a stockholder derivative complaint alleging violations of the Federal securities laws was filed in the United States District Court, District of Utah, by Steven Battams against the Company, each member of the Board of directors, and two officers of the Company, Case No. 2:21-cv-00632-DBB (the “Stockholder Derivative Complaint”). The Stockholder Derivative Complaint alleges that the defendants made, or were responsible for, disseminating information to the public through reports filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission and other channels that contained material misstatements or omissions in violation of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and Rule 10b-5 adopted thereunder. Specifically, the Stockholder Derivative Complaint alleges that the defendants misrepresented or failed to disclose that: (i) the IND for the Company’s product, SkinTE, filed with the FDA was deficient with respect to certain chemistry, manufacturing, and control items; (ii) as a result, it was unlikely that the FDA would approve the IND in its current form; (iii) accordingly, the Company had materially overstated the likelihood that the SkinTE IND would obtain FDA approval; and (iv) as a result, the public statements regarding the IND were materially false and misleading. The parties have stipulated to stay the Stockholder Derivative Complaint until (1) the dismissal of the Complaint described above, (2) denial of a motion to dismiss the Complaint, or (3) notice is given that any party is withdrawing its consent to the stipulated stay of the Stockholder Derivative Complaint proceeding. At this early stage of the proceedings the Company is unable to make any prediction regarding the outcome of the litigation.

Other Matters

In the ordinary course of business, the Company may become involved in lawsuits, claims, investigations, proceedings, and threats of litigation relating to intellectual property, commercial arrangements, employment, regulatory compliance, and other matters. Except as noted above, at December 31, 2021, the Company was not party to any legal or arbitration proceedings that may have significant effects on its financial position or results of operations. No governmental proceedings are pending or, to the Company’s knowledge, contemplated against the Company. The Company is not a party to any material proceedings in which any director, member of senior management or affiliate of the Company’s is either a party adverse to the Company or its subsidiaries or has a material interest adverse to the Company or its subsidiaries.

Commitments

The Company has entered into employment agreements with key executives that contain severance terms and change of control provisions.

On September 2, 2020, Arches Research, Inc., a subsidiary of PolarityTE, Inc. (“Arches”) entered into two agreements with Co-Diagnostics, Inc. (“Co-Diagnostics”). The COVID-19 Laboratory Services Agreement between the parties provided that Arches would perform specimen testing services for customers referred by Co-Diagnostics to Arches. Co-Diagnostics would arrange all logistics for delivering specimens to Arches for COVID-19 testing for those customers of Co-Diagnostics electing to use the service. Arches would bill Co-Diagnostics for the testing services and Co-Diagnostics would manage all customer billing. The Rental Agreement for LGC Genomics Oktopure Extraction Machine between Arches and Co-Diagnostics provided that Co-Diagnostics would make available to Arches the Oktopure high throughput extraction machine that Arches will use to perform COVID-19 testing. The term of the rental agreement was 12 months and required Arches to use Co-Diagnostics tests exclusively in the machine. In the second quarter of 2021, the rental agreement was amended to remove the minimum monthly purchase obligation of reagents and was replaced by a $3,300 monthly rental fee. The COVID-19 Laboratory Services Agreement could be canceled by the Company at any time by providing 60 days written notice, and the Rental Agreement could be canceled at any time by written notice given within 60 days after termination of the Laboratory Services Agreement. On May 27, 2021, the Company gave written notice to Co-Diagnostics of termination of the COVID-19 Laboratory Services Agreement, so the last day of that agreement was July 26, 2021, and no longer in effect on July 27, 2021. On July 27, 2021, the Company gave written notice to Co-Diagnostics of termination of the Rental Agreement, so the last day of that agreement was July 29, 2021.

79

On June 25, 2021, the Company entered into a statement of work with a contract research organization to provide services for a proposed clinical trial described as a multi-center, prospective, randomized controlled trial evaluating the effects of SkinTE in the treatment of full-thickness diabetic foot ulcers at a cost of approximately $6.5 million consisting of $3.1 million of service fees and $3.4 million of estimated costs. The estimate increased $1.4 million from the $5.1 million estimated at September 30, 2021, due to additional costs expected for longer trial subject follow up (6 months versus 3 months) and a corresponding increase in trial subject visits. In July 2021 the Company prepaid 10% of the total cost recited in the original work order, or $0.5 million, which will be applied to payment of the final invoice under the work order. Over the approximately three-year term of the clinical trial the service provider shall submit to the Company for payment invoices on a monthly basis for units of work stated in the work order that are completed and billable expenses incurred. During the year ended December 31, 2021, the Company received invoices for work performed and expenses incurred totaling $0.4 million. Either party may terminate the agreement without cause on 60 days’ notice to the other party.

17. CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS

On August 21, 2019, the Company and Dr. Denver Lough, a principal shareholder and former officer and director, signed a settlement terms agreement that provides, in part, that the Company pay to Dr. Lough $1,500,000 in cash on October 1, 2019 and an additional $1,500,000 in cash in equal monthly installments beginning November 1,2019 and ending April 1, 2021. In addition, the Company agreed to award to Dr. Lough 200,000 restricted stock units that vest in 18 equal monthly installments beginning October 1, 2019. As of December 31, 2021, the Company has no remaining liability related to future cash payments under the agreement. The fair value of the restricted stock units was $0.8 million and was fully expensed upon Dr. Lough’s termination.

In October 2018, the Company entered into an office lease covering approximately 7,250 square feet of rental space in the building located at 40 West 57th Street in New York City. The lease is for a term of three years. The annual lease rate is $60 per square foot. Initially the Company would occupy and pay for only 3,275 square feet of space, and the Company was not obligated under the lease to pay for the remaining 3,975 square feet covered by the lease unless it elected to occupy that additional space. The Company believes the terms of the lease were very favorable to it, and the Company obtained the favorable terms through the assistance of Peter A. Cohen, a director, which he provided so that the company he owns, Peter A. Cohen, LLC (“Cohen LLC”), could sublease a portion of the office space. The lease expired on October 31, 2021. The Company recognized $182,000 and $250,000 of sublease income for the years ended December 31, 2021 and 2020, respectively. The sublease income is included in other income, net in the statement of operations. As of December 31, 2021, and December 31, 2020, there were 0 significant amounts due from the related party under this agreement.

18. SEGMENT REPORTING

Reportable segments are presented in a manner consistent with the internal reporting provided to the chief operating decision maker (CODM), the Chief Executive Officer of the Company. The CODM allocates resources to and assesses the performance of each segment using information about its revenue and operating income (loss). The Company’s operations involve products and services which are managed separately. Accordingly, it operates in 2 segments: 1) regenerative medicine products and 2) contract services.

80

Certain information concerning the Company’s segments is presented in the following tables (in thousands):

SCHEDULE OF SEGMENT INFORMATION

  2021  2020 
  For the Year Ended December 31, 
  2021  2020 
Net revenues:        
Reportable segments:        
Regenerative medicine products $3,076  $3,730 
Contract services  6,328   6,396 
Total net revenues $9,404  $10,126 
         
Net income/(loss):        
Reportable segments:        
Regenerative medicine products $(29,568) $(42,815)
Contract services  (619)  (39)
Total net loss $(30,187) $(42,854)

  December 31, 2021  December 31, 2020 
Identifiable assets employed:        
Reportable segments:        
Regenerative medicine products $25,344  $36,858 
Contract services  5,834   8,652 
Total assets $31,178  $45,510 

19. EMPLOYEE BENEFIT PLAN

The Company’s 401(k) Plan is a deferred salary arrangement under Section 401(k) of the Internal Revenue Code. Under the 401(k) Plan, participating employees (full-time employees with the Company for one year) may defer a portion of their pre-tax earnings, up to the IRS annual contribution limit ($19,500 for calendar year 2021). The Company contributes 3% of employee’s eligible earnings. The Company recorded contribution expense related to its 401(k) Plan of $0.3 million and $0.2 million for the years ended December 31, 2021 and 2020, respectively.

20. INCOME TAXES

The Company calculates its provision for federal and state income taxes based on current tax law. The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (tax reform) was enacted on December 22, 2017 (“Enactment Date”), and has several key provisions impacting accounting for and reporting of income taxes. The most significant provision reduces the U.S. corporate statutory tax rate from 35% to 21% beginning on January 1, 2018. Although most provisions of tax reform are not effective until 2018, the Company is required to record the effect of a change in tax law as of the Enactment Date on its deferred tax assets. As the Company maintains a full valuation allowance against its deferred tax assets, there is no income tax expense recorded related to this change other than the Federal AMT credit which are refundable due to the passage of tax reform. As of the Enactment Date, the Company estimated that its deferred tax asset and related valuation allowance were each reduced by approximately $2.6 million.

In accordance with Staff Accounting Bulletin 118 (“SAB 118”), income tax effects of the Tax Act may be refined upon obtaining, preparing, or analyzing additional information during the measurement period and such changes could be material. During the measurement period, provisional amounts may be adjusted for the effects, if any, of interpretative guidance issued after December 31, 2017, by U.S. regulatory and standard-setting bodies. While we are able to make reasonable estimates of the impact of the reduction in corporate rate and the deemed repatriation transition tax, the final impact of the Tax Act may differ from these estimates, due to, among other things, changes in our interpretations and assumptions, additional guidance that may be issued by the I.R.S., and actions we may take. We are continuing to gather additional information to determine the final impact.

Due to the Company’s history of losses and uncertainty of future taxable income, a valuation allowance sufficient to fully offset net operating losses and other deferred tax assets has been established. The valuation allowance will be maintained until sufficient positive evidence exists to support a conclusion that a valuation allowance is not necessary. The issuance of the Series E Preferred Stock in connection with its original acquisition of the PolarityTE, Inc., a Nevada corporation in April 2017, will likely result in limitations on the utilization of the Company’s net operating loss carryforwards under IRS section 382. The effect of this is being analyzed now.

The provision (benefit) for income taxes for the years ended October 31, 2018 and 2017 consisted of the following (in thousands):

SCHEDULE OF COMPONENTS OF INCOME TAX EXPENSE (BENEFIT)

 For the Year Ended December 31, 
 2018  2017  2021  2020 
Current:                
Federal $(302) $  $  $ 
State             
Deferred:                
Federal  (11,561)  (2,679)  (5,484)  (593)
State  (475)  (304)  605   (79)
Impact of change in effective tax rates on deferred taxes      
Change in: valuation allowance  12,036   2,983 
 $(302) $ 
Change in valuation allowance  4,879   672 
Total provision (benefit) for income taxes $0  $0 

81

The difference between income taxes computed at the statutory federal rate and the provision for income taxes for 2018 and 2017 related to the following (in thousands, except percentages):

SCHEDULE OF STATUTORY FEDERAL RATE AND PROVISION FOR INCOME TAX

 For the Year Ended December 31, 
 2018  2017  2021 2020 
 Amount  

Percent of

Pretax Income

  Amount  

Percent of

Pretax Income

  Amount  Percent of Pretax Loss  Amount  Percent of Pretax Loss 
Tax (benefit) at federal statutory rate $(22,325)  34% $(44,283)  34% $(6,340)  21% $(8,999)  21%
State income taxes, net of federal income taxes  (475)  (1)%  (304)  -%  605   (2)%  (79)  %
Effect of warrant liability  (1,120)  2%  (74)  -%  215   (1)%  (209)  1%
Effect of other permanent items  30   -%  (82)  -%  16   %  65   %
Effect of Acquisition of intangible assets     -%  35,595   (27)%
Effect of stock compensation     -%  3,147   (3)%  238   (1)%  9,032   (21)%
Change in valuation allowance  12,036   (18)%  2,983   (2)%  4,879   (16)%  672   (2)%
Reduction of NOL’s due to Section 382 Limitations  11,552   (17)%  3,018   (2)%
Other  387   (1)%  (482)  1%
 $(302)  % $   -% $0   % $0   %

The components of deferred income tax assets (liabilities) were as follows (in thousands):

SCHEDULE OF DEFERRED TAX ASSETS AND LIABILITIES

 October 31,  2021  2020 
 2018  2017  December 31, 
Impairment of development costs $7  $ 
 2021  2020 
Leases $17  $132 
Depreciation and amortization  (546)  95   (38)  (784)
Compensation expense not deductible until options are exercised  10,529   4,553   8,343   9,494 
All other temporary differences  382   248   430   488 
Net operating loss carry forward  8,455   3,158 
Net operating loss carry forwards  47,223   41,766 
Less valuation allowance  (18,827)  (8,054)  (55,975)  (51,096)
Deferred tax asset (liability) $  $  $  $ 

Realization of deferred tax assets, including those related to net operating loss carryforwards, are dependent upon future earnings, if any, of which the timing and amount are uncertain. Accordingly, the net deferred tax assets have been fully offset by a valuation allowance. Based upon the Company’s current operating results management cannot conclude that it is more likely than not that such assets will be realized.

Utilization of the net operating loss carryforwards may be subject to a substantial annual limitation due to the “change in ownership” provisions of the Internal Revenue Code. The annual limitation may result in the expiration of net operating loss carryforwards before utilization. Due to the change in tax law, all losses post 2018 will have an unlimited carryforward period (but can only utilize 80% max per year). All prior net operating losses still have the same carryforward limit of 20 years. The net operating loss carryforwards available for income tax purposes at OctoberDecember 31, 20182021 amounts to approximately $37.8$185.8 million. Of this amount, $38.4 million will expire between 2038 and expires between 20372039 and 2038 for federal income taxes, and approximately $20.4$147.4 million will have an indefinite life. Approximately $195.7 million for state income taxes which primarily expires between 2032 and 2033.will begin to expire starting in 2034.

The Company files income tax returns in the U.S. and various statesstates. As of OctoberDecember 31, 2017,2021, the Company had no0 unrecognized tax benefits, which would impact its tax rate if recognized. As of OctoberDecember 31, 2018,2021, the Company had no0 accrual for the potential payment of penalties. As of OctoberDecember 31, 2018,2021, the Company was not subject to any U.S. federal, and state tax examinations. The Company’s U.S. federal tax returns have been examined for tax years through 2011 with the results of such examinations being reflected in the Company’s results of operations as of October 31, 2013. The Company does not anticipate any significant changes in its unrecognized tax benefits over the next 12 months.

13. LOSS PER SHARE

21. SUBSEQUENT EVENTS

The following outstanding potentially dilutive

On March 30, 2021, the Company entered into a sales agreement (“Sales Agreement”) with an investment banking firm to sell shares have been excludedof common stock having aggregate sales proceeds of up to $50.0 million, from time to time, through an “at the calculation of diluted net loss per share formarket” equity offering program under which the periods presented dueinvestment banking firm would act as sales agent. By written notice given by the Company to their anti-dilutive effect:

  October 31, 
  2018  2017 
Shares issuable upon conversion of preferred stock     9,307,904 
Shares issuable upon exercise of warrants     322,727 
Shares issuable upon exercise of stock options  6,080,505   3,818,530 
Non-vested shares under restricted stock grants  673,960   227,132 

14. COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

Contingencies

On June 26, 2018, a class action complaint alleging violationsthe investment banking company on February 28, 2022, the Company exercised its right to terminate the Sales Agreement and the “at the market” equity offering program. As of the Federal securities laws was filed indate of termination, no common stock had been sold under the United States District Court, District of Utah, by Jose Moreno againstSales Agreement and all previously deferred offering costs will be immediately expensed. Upon such termination the Company and two directors of the Company, Case No. 2:18-cv-00510-JNP (the “Moreno Complaint”). On July 6, 2018,was obligated to make a similar complaint was filed in the same court against the same defendants by Yedid Lawi, Case No. 2:18-cv-00541-PMW (the “Lawi Complaint”). Both the Moreno Complaint and Lawi Complaint allege that the defendants made or were responsible for, disseminating informationone-time payment to the public through reports filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission and other channels that contained material misstatements or omissions in violationinvestment banking firm of Sections 10 and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 adopted thereunder. Specifically, both complaints allege that the defendants misrepresented the status of one of the Company’s patent applications while touting the unique nature of the Company’s technology and its effectiveness. Plaintiffs are seeking damages suffered by them and the class consisting of the persons who acquired the publicly-traded securities of the Company between March 31, 2017, and June 22, 2018. Plaintiffs have filed motions to consolidate and for appointment as lead plaintiff. On November 28, 2018, the Court consolidated theMorenoandLawi cases under the captionIn re PolarityTE, Inc. Securities Litigation(the “Consolidated Securities Litigation”), and requested the appointment of the plaintiff inLawi as the lead plaintiff. An order for appointment of the lead plaintiff has not been entered. After the lead plaintiff is appointed, the plaintiff will have 60 days to file an amended complaint. The Company believes the allegations in the Moreno Complaint and Lawi Complaint are without merit, and intends to defend the litigation, vigorously. The Company expects its first response will be to file a motion to dismiss after the first to occur of the plaintiff filing an amended complaint or the period for filing an amended complaint expires. At this early stage of the proceedings the Company is unable to make any prediction regarding the outcome of the litigation.$400,000.

In November 2018, a shareholder derivative lawsuit was filed in the United States District Court, District of Utah, with the captionMonther v. Lough, et al., case no. 2:18-cv-00791-TC, alleging violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, breach of fiduciary duty, and unjust enrichment on the part of certain officers and directors based on the facts and circumstances recited in the Consolidated Securities Litigation. On November 26, 2018, the court issued an order staying all proceedings until after the disposition of motions to dismiss the Consolidated Securities Litigation.

On February 26, 2015, a complaint for patent infringement was filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas by Richard Baker, an individual residing in Australia, against Microsoft, Nintendo, a former subsidiary of the Company, and a number of other game publisher defendants. The complaint alleged that the Zumba Fitness Kinect game infringed plaintiff’s patents in motion tracking technology. The plaintiff represented himself pro se in the litigation and sought monetary damages in the amount of $1.3 million. The case was subsequently transferred to the Western District of Washington. On June 16, 2017, final judgment was entered in favor of the defendants finding that the accused products did not literally infringe the asserted patent and that plaintiff was barred from pursing infringement under the doctrine of equivalents due to prosecution history estoppel. The plaintiff appealed that decision to the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. On April 9, 2018, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the judgment of the District Court for the Western District of Washington. On May 7, 2018, the plaintiff filed a petition for panel rehearing and rehearing en banc by the Court of Appeals. The petition for rehearing was denied on June 8, 2018. The plaintiff subsequently filed a petition for a writ of certiorari with the Supreme Court of the United States, which was denied in November 2018. Consequently, this matter has been finally resolved without liability to the Company.

In the ordinary course of business, we may become involved in lawsuits, claims, investigations, proceedings, and threats of litigation relating to intellectual property, commercial arrangements, regulatory compliance, and other matters. Except as noted above, at October 31, 2018, we were not party to any legal or arbitration proceedings that may have significant effects on our financial position or results of operations. No governmental proceedings are pending or, to our knowledge, contemplated against us. We are not a party to any material proceedings in which any director, member of senior management or affiliate of ours is either a party adverse to us or our subsidiaries or has a material interest adverse to us or our subsidiaries.

F-2382
 

Commitments

On March 16, 2022, the Company completed a registered direct offering of (i) 3,000.000435 shares of Series A Convertible Preferred Stock, par value $0.001 per share (“Series A”); (ii) 2,000.00029 shares of Series B Convertible Preferred Stock, par value $0.001 per share (“Series B,” and together with the Series A, the “Preferred Stock”); and (iii) warrants to purchase up to 16,393,445 shares of common stock (“Common Warrants”). The shares of Preferred Stock have a stated value of $1,000 per share and are convertible, following the date of the issuance thereof, into an aggregate of 9,836,067 shares of common stock of the Company upon the conversion of Series A and into an aggregate of 6,557,378 shares of common stock of the Company upon the conversion of Series B, at a conversion price of $0.305 per share each. Each Common Warrant has an exercise price of $0.35 per share and will become exercisable six months after the original issuance date and will expire two yearsfollowing the original issuance. The Company leases facilities and certain equipment under noncancelable leases that expire at various dates through November 2022. Leases are classified as capital leases when the termsissued to designees of the lease transfer substantially allplacement agent for the risk and rewards of ownership to the lease. Other leases are classifiedregistered direct offering as operating leases.

Property and equipment under capital leases are initially recorded at the lower of asset fair value or the present valuepart of the minimum lease payments onplacement agent’s compensation warrants to purchase up to 819,672 shares of common stock at an exercise price of $0.38125 per share. The Company expects to realize net proceeds of approximately $4,485,000 from the consolidated balance sheet. offering after deducting offering expenses. On March 17, 2022, the holder of the Series B converted the shares to 6,557,378 shares of common stock of the Company. On March 29, 2022, the holder of the Series A converted the shares to 9,836,067 shares of common stock of the Company.

The corresponding liability to the lessor is includedinvestor in the balance sheet asforgoing offering is a capital lease obligation. Lease payments under capital leases are treated as debt-service payments and recognized as a reductionholder of the capital lease obligationJanuary 14 Warrants and an increaseJanuary 25 Warrants described in interest expense.

The following schedule summarizesNote 12, above. Concurrent with the future minimum lease payments for operating and capital leases at October 31, 2018 (in thousands):

  Operating leases  Capital leases 
Year ended October 31, 2019 $1,887  $61 
Year ended October 31, 2020  1,895   52 
Year ended October 31, 2021  1,481   49 
Year ended October 31, 2022  1,323   36 
Year ended October 31, 2023  111    
Thereafter      
  $6,697  $198 

Rent expense for the years ended October 31, 2018 and 2017 was $1.4 million and $222,000, respectively.

The Company has entered into employment agreements with key executives that contain severance terms and change of control provisions.

15. CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS

In October 2018,offering, the Company entered into an office lease covering approximately 7,250 square feet of rental spacea Warrant Amendment Agreement with the investor pursuant to which, in the building located at 40 West 57th Street in New York City. The lease is for a term of three years. The annual lease rate is $60 per square foot. Initially the Company will occupy and pay for only 3,275 square feet of space, and the Company is not obligated under the lease to payconsideration for the remaining 3,975 square feet covered by the lease unless we elect to occupy that additional space. Comparable annual lease rates for similar office spaceinvestor’s purchase of $5 million of securities in the area range between $67 and $110 per square foot. The Company believes the terms of the lease are very favorable to us, and the Company obtained these favorable terms through the assistance of Peter A. Cohen, a director, which he provided so that the company he owns, Peter A. Cohen, LLC (“Cohen LLC”), could sublease a portion of the office space.

Initially, the Company is using three offices and two work stations in the office and share common areas representing approximately 2,055 square feet. Cohen LLC is using approximately 1,220 square feet. The monthly lease payment for 3,275 square feet is $16,377. Of this amount $6,103 is allocated pro rata to Cohen LLC based on square footage occupied. Additional lease charges for operating expenses and taxes are allocated under the sublease based on the ratio of rent paid by the Company and Cohen LLC to total rent.

Cohen LLC identified two associated entities that may wish to occupy an additional 2,753 square feet of space in the office. Under the terms of the sublease Cohen LLC can add this additional space to the 1,220 square feet occupied, which would bring the total space occupied by us and Cohen LLC to 6,028 square feet. Because a portion of the additional space subleased to Cohen LLC is less private and attractive,offering, the Company agreed to reduce the overall annual lease rate forexercise price of the Cohen LLC spaceJanuary 14 Warrants and January 25 Warrants to $58.60$0.35 per square foot, which meansshare, effective upon the Company will be paying an annual lease rate forconsummation of the spaceoffering, and confirmation by the Company uses of $62.70. Assuming Cohen LLC subleasesplacement agent that the additional office space, our annual lease paymentinvestor satisfied the purchase commitment. Pursuant to the lessor wouldWarrant Amendment Agreement, the January 14 Warrants and January 25 Warrants will not be $361,680, and Cohen LLC would payexercisable at the adjusted price until the date that is six months after the consummation of this offering. Except for these amendments, no other changes have been made to the January 14 Warrants and January 25 Warrants. The Company $232,830 underis currently assessing the sublease. Sublease income and amounts due from the related party for the year ended and as of October 31, 2018 were de minimis.

In August 2018 David Seaburg was elected by the Board of Directors to serve as a directorimpact of the Company. Subsequently the Company entered into a written consulting agreement with Mr. Seaburg pursuantwarrant exercise price reduction to which he will provide investor relations and other services to the Company over a period of two years for a fee consisting of (i) quarter-annual cash payment of $10,000, (ii) 60,000 restricted stock units issued under the Company equity incentive plan that vest in four equal installments every six months during the term of the agreement subject to continued service, and (iii) an annual award under the Company equity incentive plan of options exercisable over a term of 10 years to purchase common stock in number equal to the number of shares of common stock with a value of $150,000 at the time of the award based on a Black-Scholes calculation. As of the year ended October 31, 2018, the Company has made no payments to Mr. Seaburg for consulting services. The total value of Mr. Seaburg’s agreement is approximately $1.7 million, which will be recognized as expense over the 24-month consulting period. Approximately $324,221 was recognized as expense during the year ended October 31, 2018.its consolidated financial statements.

83

16. DISCONTINUED OPERATIONS

On June 23, 2017, the Company sold Majesco Entertainment Company, a Nevada corporation and wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company (“Majesco Sub”) to Zift Interactive LLC (“Zift”), a Nevada limited liability company pursuant to a purchase agreement. The results of operations from the discontinued business for the years ended October 31, 2018 and 2017 are as follows (in thousands):

  For the Years Ended 
  October 31, 
  2018  2017 
Revenues $  $558 
Expenses     1,007 
Loss from discontinued operations $  $(449)
         
Gain on sale of discontinued operations $  $100 

The cash flows from the discontinued business for the years ended October 31, 2018 and 2017 are as follows (in thousands):

  For the Years Ended October 31, 
  2018  2017 
CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES        
Net loss from discontinued operations $  $(349)
Adjustments to reconcile net loss from discontinued operations to net cash used in discontinued operating activities:        
Depreciation and amortization     11 
Stock based compensation expense     1,118 
Amortization of capitalized software development costs and license fees     50 
Gain on sale of Majesco Sub     (100)
Changes in operating assets and liabilities:        
Accounts receivable     113 
Accounts payable and accrued expenses     (810)
Net cash provided by discontinued operating activities $  $33 
         
CASH FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES        
Cash received from sale of Majesco Sub $60  $25 
Net cash provided by discontinued investing activities $60  $25 

17. SEGMENT REPORTING

The Company’s operations involve products and services which are managed separately. Accordingly, it operates in two segments: 1) regenerative medicine and 2) contract services.

Certain information concerning our segments for the years ended October 31, 2018 and 2017 is presented in the following table (in thousands):

  For the Years Ended October 31, 
  2018  2017 
Net Revenues:        
Reportable Segments:        
Regenerative medicine $689  $ 
Contract services  874    
Total net revenues $1,563  $ 
         
Net loss:        
Reportable Segments:        
Regenerative medicine $(65,219) $(130,480)
Contract services  (222)   
Discontinued operations     (349)
Total net loss $(65,441) $(130,829)

  As of
October 31, 2018
  As of
October 31, 2017
 
Identifiable assets employed:        
Reportable segments:        
Regenerative medicine $82,512  $20,152 
Contract services  5,330    
Discontinued operations      
Total assets $87,842  $20,152 

18. SUBSEQUENT EVENTS

On January 11, 2019, the Board approved an amendment to the Restated Bylaws of the Company changing the Company’s fiscal year end from October 31 to December 31. The change in fiscal year is effective December 31, 2018, and the Company will file an Annual Report on Form 10-K for the two-month transition period ended December 31, 2018.