UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

 

FORM 10-Q

 

[X]

QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

 

For the quarterly period endedSeptemberJune 30, 20172019.

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 Number:001-33899

 

Digital Ally, Inc.

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

 

Nevada 20-0064269

(State or other jurisdiction of
incorporation or organization)

 

(I.R.S. Employer

Identification No.)

 

9705 Loiret Blvd, Lenexa, KS 66219

(Address of principal executive offices) (Zip Code)

 

(913) 814-7774

(Registrant’s telephone number, including area code)

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:

Title of each classTrading Symbol(s)Name of exchange on which
registered
Common stock, $0.001 par valueDGLY Nasdaq Capital Market

 

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

 

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted 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 and post such files).

 

Yes [X] No [  ]

 

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

 

Large accelerated filer [  ]Accelerated filer [  ]
Non-accelerated filer [  ](Do not check if a smaller reporting company)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 is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act).

 

Yes [  ] No [X]

 

Indicate the number of shares outstanding of each of the issuer’s classes of common stock, as of the latest practicable date:

 

Class Outstanding at November 1, 2017August 14, 2019
Common Stock, $0.001 par value 6,979,73111,613,442

 

 

 

 
 

 

FORM 10-Q

DIGITAL ALLY, INC.

SEPTEMBERJUNE 30, 2017

(Unaudited)2019

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS Page(s)
   
PART I – FINANCIAL INFORMATION
Item 1. Financial Statements.  
   
Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets – September 30, 2017 (Unaudited) and December 31, 2016Item 1. Financial Statements. 3
   
Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets – June 30, 2019 (Unaudited) and December 31, 20183
Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations for the Three and NineSix Months Ended SeptemberJune 30, 20172019 and 20162018 (Unaudited) 4
   
Condensed Consolidated StatementStatements of Stockholders’ Equity (Deficit) for the NineThree and Six Months Ended SeptemberJune 30, 20172019 and 2018 (Unaudited) 5
   
Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the NineSix Months Ended SeptemberJune 30, 20172019 and 20162018 (Unaudited) 6
   
Notes to the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) 7-267-23
   
Item 2. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations. 27-5224-46
   
Item 3. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk. 5346
   
Item 4. Controls and Procedures. 5346
   
PART II - OTHER INFORMATION  
   
Item 1. Legal Proceedings. 53-5547-48
   
Item 2. Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities and Use of Proceeds. 5648
   
Item 3. Defaults Upon Senior Securities.Securities 5648
   
Item 4. Mine Safety Disclosures.Disclosures 5648
   
Item 5. Other Information. 5648
   
Item 6. Exhibits. 5648
   
SIGNATURES 5749
   
EXHIBITS 50
   
CERTIFICATIONS  

 

2
 

 

PART I – FINANCIAL INFORMATION

 

Item 1 – Financial Statements.

 

DIGITAL ALLY, INC.

CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS

SEPTEMBERJUNE 30, 20172019 AND DECEMBER 31, 20162018

 

 

September 30,

2017

 

December 31,

2016

  (Unaudited)    
 (Unaudited)    June 30, 2019 December 31, 2018 
Assets             
Current assets:                
Cash and cash equivalents $316,174  $3,883,124  $331,665  $3,598,807 
Accounts receivable-trade, less allowance for doubtful accounts of $70,000 – 2017 and 2016  1,861,009   2,519,184 
Accounts receivable-trade, less allowance for doubtful accounts of $90,000 – 2019 and $70,000 - 2018  1,612,046   1,847,886 
Accounts receivable-other  434,891   341,326   500,968   382,412 
Inventories, net  10,061,991   9,586,311   6,792,049   6,999,060 
Restricted cash  500,000    
Income tax refund receivable, current  44,603   44,603 
Prepaid expenses  451,787   402,158   429,268   429,403 
        
Total current assets  13,625,852   16,732,103   9,710,599   13,302,171 
                
Furniture, fixtures and equipment, net  778,095   873,902   182,975   247,541 
Restricted cash     500,000 
Intangible assets, net  511,141   467,176   444,982   486,797 
Operating lease right of use assets  276,338    
Income tax refund receivable  45,397   45,397 
Other assets  141,853   261,915   389,749   256,749 
        
Total assets $15,056,941  $18,835,096  $11,050,040  $14,338,655 
                
Liabilities and Stockholders’ Equity        
Liabilities and Stockholders’ Deficit        
Current liabilities:                
Accounts payable $2,732,336  $2,455,579  $1,857,620  $784,599 
Accrued expenses  1,161,985   1,542,729   1,062,234   2,080,667 
Derivative liabilities  15,729   33,076 
Capital lease obligation-current  16,866   32,792 
Deferred revenue-current  1,258,226   925,932 
Subordinated notes payable, net of discount of $117,000-2017 and $0-2016  533,000    
Secured convertible debentures, at fair value  3,183,210    
Current portion of operating lease obligations  357,498    
Contract liabilities-current  1,794,457   1,748,789 
Income taxes payable  10,143   7,048   3,933   3,689 
        
Total current liabilities  8,911,495   4,997,156   5,075,742   4,617,744 
                
Long-term liabilities:                
Secured convertible debentures, at fair value     4,000,000 
Capital lease obligation-less current portion     8,492 
Deferred revenue-long term  2,077,479   2,073,176 
Proceeds investment agreement, at fair value- less current portion  6,240,000   9,142,000 
Contract liabilities-long term  1,864,989   1,991,091 
                
Total liabilities  10,988,974   11,078,824   13,180,731   15,750,835 
                
Commitments and contingencies                
                
Stockholders’ Equity:        
Common stock, $0.001 par value; 25,000,000 shares authorized; shares issued: 7,065,249– 2017 and 5,552,449 – 2016  7,065   5,552 
Stockholder’s Deficit        
Common stock, $0.001 par value; 50,000,000 shares authorized; shares issued: 11,494,055 – 2019 and 10,445,445 – 2018  11,494   10,445 
Additional paid in capital  63,728,254   59,565,288   80,990,851   78,117,507 
Treasury stock, at cost (63,518 shares)  (2,157,226)  (2,157,226)  (2,157,226)  (2,157,226)
Accumulated deficit  (57,510,126)  (49,657,342)  (80,975,810)  (77,382,906)
Total stockholders’ equity  4,067,967   7,756,272 
Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity $15,056,941  $18,835,096 
        
Total stockholders’ deficit  (2,130,691)  (1,412,180)
        
Total liabilities and stockholders’ deficit $11,050,040  $14,338,655 

 

See Notes to Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.

 

3
 

 

DIGITAL ALLY, INC.

CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS

FOR THE THREE AND NINESIX MONTHS ENDED

SEPTEMBERJUNE 30, 20172019 AND 20162018

(Unaudited)

 

 Three months ended
September 30,
 Nine months ended
September 30,
  Three months ended June 30, Six months ended June 30, 
 2017 2016 2017 2016  2019 2018 2019 2018 
                  
Revenue:                                
Product $2,521,663  $3,836,691  $10,263,833  $11,946,100  $1,945,724  $2,993,700  $3,866,188  $4,984,813 
Service and other  461,914   502,836   1,436,106   1,182,781   601,259   569,850   1,231,591   1,050,250 
                                
Total revenue  2,983,577   4,339,527   11,699,939   13,128,881   2,546,983   3,563,550   5,097,779   6,035,063 
                                
Cost of revenue:                                
Product  1,709,046   2,235,489   6,450,570   7,487,747  $1,468,828  $1,831,615  $2,731,899  $3,080,360 
Service and other  265,918   70,467   790,691   488,708   127,343   113,468   233,328   226,842 
                
Total cost of revenue  1,974,964   2,305,956   7,241,261   7,976,455   1,596,171   1,945,083   2,965,227   3,307,202 
                                
Gross profit  1,008,613   2,033,571   4,458,678   5,152,426   950,812   1,618,467   2,132,552   2,727,861 
Selling, general and administrative expenses:                                
Research and development expense  831,573   731,077   2,495,924   2,353,081   582,905   333,760   1,045,076   773,880 
Selling, advertising and promotional expense  1,048,334   1,369,244   3,036,168   3,295,743   1,237,947   712,008   1,993,936   1,386,413 
Stock-based compensation expense  478,863   422,246   981,652   1,203,312   585,195   594,228   1,310,393   1,087,746 
General and administrative expense  1,766,538   2,752,645   5,356,439   6,772,483   1,977,123   1,415,780   4,301,663   2,890,447 
Patent litigation settlement  (6,000,000)     (6,000,000)   
                
Total selling, general and administrative expenses  4,125,308   5,275,212   11,870,183   13,624,619   (1,616,830)  3,055,776   2,651,068   6,138,486 
Operating loss  (3,116,695)  (3,241,641)  (7,411,505)  (8,472,193)
                                
Operating income (loss)  2,567,642   (1,437,309)  (518,516)  (3,410,625)
                
Other income (expense)                
Interest income  1,761   5,913   10,619   22,103   5,628   684   23,612   2,300 
Interest expense  (375,048)  (776)  (536,035)  (2,438)     (152,975)     (283,203)
Change in warrant derivative liabilities  3,628   (19,075)  17,347   18,740      (310,195)     (309,306)
Change in fair value of secured convertible notes payable  (6,952)     66,790    
Loss before income tax expense  (3,493,306)  (3,255,579)  (7,852,784)  (8,433,788)
Income tax (expense) benefit            
Secured convertible debentures issuance expense     (220,312)     (220,312)
Loss on the extinguishment of secured convertible debentures           (500,000)
Change in fair value of proceeds investment agreement  (2,961,000)     (3,098,000)   
Change in fair value of secured convertible debentures     (842,783)     (829,976)
                
Loss before income tax benefit  (387,730)  (2,962,890)  (3,592,904)  (5,551,122)
Income tax benefit            
                
Net loss $(3,493,306) $(3,255,579) $(7,852,784) $(8,433,788) $(387,730) $(2,962,890) $(3,592,904) $(5,551,122)
                
Net loss per share information:                                
Basic $(0.56) $(0.61) $(1.34) $(1.59) $(0.03) $(0.42) $(0.32) $(0.78)
Diluted $(0.56) $(0.61) $(1.34) $(1.59) $(0.03) $(0.42) $(0.32) $(0.78)
                                
Weighted average shares outstanding:                                
Basic  6,249,116   5,380,855   5,851,428   5,315,646   11,305,248   7,129,260   11,124,222   7,153,219 
Diluted  6,249,116   5,380,855   5,851,428   5,315,646   11,305,248   7,129,260   11,124,222   7,153,219 

 

See Notes to Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.

 

4
 

 

DIGITAL ALLY, INC.

CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY (DEFICIT)

CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY

FOR THE NINETHREE AND SIX MONTHS ENDED SEPTEMBERJUNE 30, 20172019 AND 2018
(Unaudited)

 

 Common Stock   Additional Paid In  Treasury  Accumulated    Common Stock Additional Paid in Treasury Accumulated    
 Shares Amount Capital stock deficit Total  Shares Amount Capital stock deficit Total 
Balance, December 31, 2016  5,552,449  $5,552  $59,565,288  $(2,157,226) $(49,657,342) $7,756,272 
Balance, December 31, 2018  10,445,445  $10,445  $78,117,507  $(2,157,226) $(77,382,906) $(1,412,180)
                                                
Stock-based compensation        981,652         981,652         725,198         725,198 
Restricted common stock grant  522,000   522   (522)           522,110   522   (522)         
Restricted common stock forfeitures  (9,200)  (9)  9            (2,500)  (2)  2          
Issuance of common stock purchase warrants related to issuance of subordinated notes payable        405,895         405,895 
Issuance of common stock and warrants, net of issuance costs of $223,068  940,000   940   2,775,392         2,776,332 
Issuance of common stock upon exercise of common stock purchase warrants  60,000   60   540         600   161,000   161   515,839         516,000 
Net loss              (3,205,174)  (3,205,174)
Balance March 31, 2019  11,126,055  $11,126  $79,358,024  $(2,157,226) $(80,588,080) $(3,376,156)
                                                
Stock-based compensation        585,195         585,195 
Issuance of common stock upon exercise of common stock purchase warrants  368,000   368   1,047,632         1,048,000 
Net loss              (7,852,784)  (7,852,784)              (387,730)  (387,730)
Balance, September 30, 2017  7,065,249  $7,065  $63,728,254  $(2,157,226) $(57,510,126) $4,067,967 
                        
Balance, June 30, 2019 $11,494,055  $11,494  $80,990,851  $(2,157,226) $(80,975,810) $(2,130,691)
                        
                        
Balance, December 31, 2017  7,037,799  $7,038  $64,923,735  $(2,157,226) $(61,909,799) $863,748 
                       
Cumulative effects of adjustment for adoption of ASC 606              71,444   71,444 
Stock-based compensation        493,519         493,519 
Restricted common stock grant  84,500   84   (84)          
Restricted common stock forfeitures  (26,450)  (26)  26         —— 
Issuance of common stock purchase warrants in connection with the issuance of subordinated notes payable        47,657         47,657 
Net loss              (2,588,232)  (2,588,232)
                        
Balance, March 31, 2018  7,095,849  $7,096  $65,464,853  $(2,157,226) $(64,426,587) $(1,111,864)
                        
Stock-based compensation        594,227         594,227 
Restricted common stock grant  100,000   100   (100)         
Restricted common stock forfeitures  (3,950)   (4)  4          
Issuance of common stock purchase warrants in connection with the issuance of secured convertible debentures        1,684,251         1,684,251 
Issuance of common stock upon conversion of secured convertible debentures and accrued interest  74,276   74   185,614         185,688 
Issuance of common stock upon exercise of common stock purchase warrants  20,000   20   48,980         49,000 
Net loss              (2,962,890)  (2,962,890)
                        
Balance, June 30, 2018  7,286,175  $7,286  $67,977,829  $(2,157,226) $(67,389,477) $(1,561,588) 

 

See Notes to Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.

 

5
 

 

DIGITAL ALLY, INC.

CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS

FOR THE NINESIX MONTHS ENDED SEPTEMBERJUNE 30, 20172019 AND 20162018
(Unaudited)

 

 2017  2016  2019 2018 
          
Cash Flows From Operating Activities:        
Cash Flows from Operating Activities:        
Net loss $(7,852,784) $(8,433,788) $(3,592,904) $(5,551,122)
Adjustments to reconcile net loss to net cash flows used in operating activities:                
Depreciation and amortization  507,358   430,537   206,969   275,392 
Stock-based compensation  981,652   1,203,312 
Change in derivative liabilities  (17,347)  (18,740)
Change in fair value of secured convertible debentures  (66,790)   
Change in fair value of warrant derivative liabilities     309,306 
Loss on extinguishment of secured convertible debentures     500,000 
Secured convertible debentures issuance expense     220,312 
Change in fair value of secured convertible note payable     829,976 
Change in fair value of proceeds investment agreement  3,098,000    
Interest expense added to debenture     121,271 
Amortization of discount on subordinated note payable     47,657 
Stock based compensation  1,310,393   1,087,746 
Provision for inventory obsolescence  417,732   253,048   371,494   (437,538)
Amortization of discount on subordinated note payable  288,895    
Provision for doubtful accounts receivable     (4,997)  20,000    
Change in assets and liabilities:        
        
Change in operating assets and liabilities:        
(Increase) decrease in:                
Accounts receivable - trade  658,175   856,388   215,840   (79,575)
Accounts receivable - other  (93,565)  (147,047)  (118,556)  (118,461)
Operating lease right of use asset  224,413    
Inventories  (893,412)  (3,558)  (164,483)  1,343,445 
Prepaid expenses  (49,629)  (47,746)  135   90,640 
Other assets  120,062   24,527   (133,000)  (54,944)
Increase (decrease) in:                
Accounts payable  276,757   403,607   1,073,021   (168,117)
Accrued expenses  (380,744)  311,666   (1,018,433)  (132,429)
Lease obligation with right of use asset  (143,252)   
Income taxes payable  3,095   (3,091)  244   (6,385)
Deferred revenue  336,597   449,271 
Contract liabilities  (80,434)  200,759 
                
Net cash used in operating activities  (5,763,948)  (4,726,611)
Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities  1,269,447   (1,522,067)
                
Cash Flows from Investing Activities:                
Purchases of furniture, fixtures and equipment  (316,751)  (284,644)  (73,705)  (28,846)
Additions to intangible assets  (138,765)  (89,263)  (26,884)  (55,055)
Net cash used in investing activities  (455,516)  (373,907)
Release of cash in accordance with secured convertible note     500,000 
                
Net cash provided by (used in) investing activities  (100,589)  416,099 
Cash Flows from Financing Activities:                
Proceeds from issuance of subordinated notes payable  1,000,000    
Proceeds from issuance of common stock and warrants, net of issuance costs  2,776,332    
Proceeds from subordinated notes payable     250,000 
Proceeds from exercise of warrants  1,564,000    
Proceeds from secured convertible debentures and detachable common stock purchase warrants     6,250,000 
Principal payment on secured convertible debentures  (750,000)        (3,250,000)
Principal payment on subordinated notes payable  (350,000)        (1,008,500)
Proceeds from exercise of stock options and warrants  600   19,055 
Principal payment on proceeds investment agreement  (6,000,000)   
Proceeds from issuance of common stock and warrants     10,400 
Loss on extinguishment of secured convertible debentures     (500,000)
Secured convertible debentures issuance expense     (220,312)
Principal payments on capital lease obligation  (24,418)  (26,917)     (8,492)
        
Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities  2,652,514   (7,862)  (4,436,000)  1,523,096 
                
Net decrease in cash and cash equivalents  (3,566,950)  (5,108,380)
Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents  (3,267,142)  417,128 
Cash and cash equivalents, beginning of period  3,883,124   6,924,079   3,598,807   54,712 
        
Cash and cash equivalents, end of period $316,174  $1,815,699  $331,655  $471,840 
                
Supplemental disclosures of cash flow information:                
Cash payments for interest $166,138  $2,425  $  $172,283 
        
Cash payments for income taxes $6,906  $10,591  $5,756  $6,385 
                
Supplemental disclosures of non-cash investing and financing activities:                
        
Restricted common stock grant $522  $200  $522  $184 
        
Restricted common stock forfeitures $9  $  $2  $30 
        
Obtaining right of use asset for lease liability $500,751  $ 
        
Amounts allocated to common stock purchase warrants in connection with proceeds from secured convertible debentures $  $1,684,251 
        
Issuance of common stock upon conversion of secured convertible debentures and payment of accrued interest $  $185,688 
        
Issuance of common stock upon exercise of common stock purchase warrants accounted for as warrant liabilities $  $38,600 
        
Amounts allocated to common stock purchase warrants in connection with proceeds from subordinated notes payable $  $47,657 

 

See Notes to Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.

 

6
 

 

DIGITAL ALLY, INC.


NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Unaudited)

 

NOTE 1. NATURE OF BUSINESS AND SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES

 

Nature of Business:

 

Digital Ally, Inc. and subsidiariessubsidiary (collectively, “Digital Ally,” “Digital,” the “Company,” “we,” “ours” and “us”“Company”) produces digital video imaging and storage products for use in law enforcement, security and commercial applications. Its products are an in-car digital video/audio recorder contained in a rear-view mirror for use in law enforcement and commercial fleets; a system that provides its law enforcement customers with audio/video surveillance from multiple vantage points and hands-free automatic activation of body-worn cameras and in-car video systems; a miniature digital video system designed to be worn on an individual’s body; a weather-resistant mobile digital video recording system for use on motorcycles, ATV’s and boats; a hand-held laser speed detection device that it is offering primarily to law enforcement agencies; and cloud storage solutions. The Company has active research and development programs to adapt its technologies to other applications. It can integrate electronic, radio, computer, mechanical, and multi-media technologies to create unique solutions to address needs in a variety of other industries and markets, including mass transit, school bus, taxi cabtaxicab and the military. The Company sells its products to law enforcement agencies and other security organizations and consumer and commercial fleet operators through direct sales domestically and third-party distributors internationally.

 

The Company was originally incorporated in Nevada on December 13, 2000 as Vegas Petra, Inc. and had no operations until 2004. On November 30, 2004, Vegas Petra, Inc. entered into a Plan of Merger with Digital Ally, Inc., at which time the merged entity was renamed Digital Ally, Inc.

 

Recently Adopted Pronouncements

In February 2016, the FASB issued Accounting Standard Update (“ASU”) 2016-02,Leases(“Topic 842”). The guidance requires lessees to put most leases on their balance sheets but recognize expenses on their income statements in a manner similar to today’s accounting. Lessees initially recognize a lease liability for the obligation to make lease payments and a right-of-use asset for the right to use the underlying asset for the lease term. The lease liability is measured at the present value of the lease payments over the lease term. The right-of-use asset is measured at the lease liability amount, adjusted for lease prepayments, lease incentives received and the lessee’s initial direct costs. The standard is effective for public business entities for annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2018, and interim periods within that reporting period, which is the first quarter of 2019 for the Company.

The Company adopted the new guidance on January 1, 2019 using the optional transitional method and elected to use the package of three practical expedients which allows the Company not to reassess whether contracts are or contain leases, lease classification and whether initial direct costs qualify for capitalization. The Company has completed its assessment of the impact of the standard and determined that the only lease that the Company held was an operating lease for its office and warehouse space. Upon adoption of the standard, the Company recorded Right of Use (ROU) assets of approximately $501,000 and lease liabilities of approximately $582,000 related to it office and warehouse space operating leases. The Company also removed deferred rent of approximately $81,000 when adopting the new guidance.

Management’s Liquidity Plan

 

The Company incurred substantial operating losses in the ninesix months ended SeptemberJune 30, 20172019 and recent yearssubstantial operating losses for the year ended December 31, 2018 primarily due to reduced revenues and gross margins caused by specific product quality issues resultingcompetitors’ willful infringement of its patents, specifically the auto-activation of body-worn and in-car video systems, and by competitors’ introduction of newer products with more advanced features together with significant price cutting of their products. The Company incurred net losses of approximately $3.6 million for the six months ended June 30, 2019 and $15.5 million during the year ended December 31, 2018 and it had an accumulated deficit of $81.0 million as of June 30, 2019. During the six months ended June 30, 2019, the Company settled one of its patent infringement cases and received a lump sum payment of $6.0 million which was used to pay its obligations under its Proceeds Investment Agreement (the “PIA”), as more fully described in the significant delays in customer orders and product rework expenditures.Note 11. In addition,recent years the Company has accessed the public and private capital markets to raise funding through the issuance of debt and equity. In that regard, the Company raised $1,564,000 in the six months ended June 30, 2019 from the exercise of warrants. Additionally, the Company raised funding in the form of subordinated debt, secured debt and proceeds investment agreements totaling $16,500,000, and net proceeds of $7,324,900 from an underwritten public offering of common stock during the year ended December 31, 2018. The Company issued common stock with detachable common stock purchase warrants for $2,776,332 and raised funding from subordinated and secured debt totaling $1,608,500 during the year ended December 31, 2017. During 2016, the Company raised $4.0 million of funding in the form of convertible debentures and common stock purchase warrants. These debt and equity of approximately $300,000 on September 29, 2017, $3.0 million on August 23, 2017, $700,000 on June 30, 2017, $4.0 million in December 2016 and $11.0 million in 2015raises were utilized to fund its operations and management expects to continue this pattern until it achieves positive cash flows from operations. As of September 30, 2017,operations, although it can offer no assurance in this regard.

7

The Company retired all interest-bearing debt outstanding during the Company had an accumulated deficit of $57.5 million and has financed its recent operations primarily through debt and equity financings. During the nine months ended September 30, 2017 and year ended December 31, 2016,2018. The only long-term obligations outstanding as of June 30, 2019 are associated with the PIA that the Company incurredentered into during July 2018, as more fully described in Note 6. On August 5, 2019, the Company raised funds from the issuance of $2.78 million principal balance of convertible debentures with detachable warrants to purchase 571,248 shares of common stock with the net losses of approximately $7.85 and $12.7 million, respectively, andproceeds being used cashfor working capital purposes, as more fully described in operating activities of $5.8 million and $5.9 million, respectively. Note 15.

The $300,000 principal amount of subordinated notes payable (the “Notes”) matures on November 30, 2017Company settled its lawsuit with the PGA Tour and the remaining $350,000 principal amount maturescase was dismissed by the Plaintiff with prejudice on December 31, 2017.April 17, 2019. See Note 11, “Contingencies” for the details respecting the settlement. Additionally, the $4.0 million principal amount of 8% Secured Convertible Debentures (the “Debentures”) matures in March 2018 unlessCompany settled its lawsuit with WatchGuard on May 13, 2019 and the Debentures are converted by their holders ($5.00 per share conversion rate) before maturity. The Notes and Debentures represent current liabilities as of September 30, 2017 and will requirecase was dismissed. See Note 11, “Contingencies” for the Company to raise substantial funds to liquidate if operating results do not improve beforedetails respecting the maturity dates of such Notes and Debentures. These conditions indicate that there is substantial doubt about the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern within one year after the date that the financial statements are issued.settlement.

 

The Company will needhave to restore positive operating cash flows and profitability over the next twelve monthsyear and/or raise additional capital to fund operations, accommodate the potential liquidity needs to retire the Debentures at their maturity,its operational plans, meet its customary payment obligations and otherwise execute its business plan. There can be no assurance that it will be successful in restoring positive cash flows and profitability, or that it can raise additional financing if and when needed, and obtain it on terms acceptable or favorable to the Company.

 

ManagementThe Company has implemented aan enhanced quality control function that is tasked with the detectionprogram to detect and correction ofcorrect product issues before they result in significant rework expenditures affecting the Company’sits gross margins.margins and has seen progress in that regard. In addition, the Company has undertakenundertook a number of cost reduction initiatives in 2018, including a reduction of its workforce by approximately 40%, restructuring its direct sales force and reducingcutting other selling, general and administrative costs. The Company has introduced a new full high definition in-car video system (DVM-800 HD), which is intended to help it regain market share and improve revenues in its law enforcement division. The Company has increased its addressable market to non-law enforcement customers and obtained significant new non-law enforcement contracts in 2017,2018, which contracts include recurring revenue overduring the 2017period 2019 to 2019 period. Management2020. The Company believes that its quality control, headcount reduction and cost cutting initiatives, introduction of the DVM-800 HD for law enforcement and expansion to non-law enforcement sales channels and new product introduction will eventually restore positive operating cash flows and profitability, during the next year, although it can offer no assurances in this regard.

In addition to the initiatives described above, the Board of Directors continues to conduct its review of a full range of strategic alternatives to best position the Company for the future, including, but not limited to, monetizing its patent portfolio and related patent infringement litigation against Axon Enterprise, Inc. (“Axon,” formerly Taser International, Inc.), the sale of all or certain assets, properties or groups of properties or individual businesses or merger or combination with another company. The result of this review may also include the continued implementation of the Company’s plan also includes raisingbusiness plan. The August 5, 2019 issuance of $2.78 million principal balance of convertible notes was part of this strategic alternatives review. While such funding addressed the Company’s near-term liquidity needs, it continues to consider strategic alternatives to address longer-term liquidity needs and operational issues. There can be no assurance that any additional capital if required. The Company has demonstrated its ability to raise new debttransactions or equity capital in recent years and believes that it could raise additional capital during the next 12 months if required, but again can offer no assurances infinancings will result from this regard. process.

Based on the uncertainties described above, the Company believes its business plan does not alleviate the existence of substantial doubt about its ability to continue as a going concern within one year afterfrom the date thatof the issuance of these condensed consolidated interim financial statements in this Report.statements.

7

 

The following is a summary of the Company’s Significant Accounting Policies:

 

Basis of Consolidation:

 

The accompanying financial statements include the consolidated accounts of Digital Ally and its wholly-owned subsidiaries,subsidiary, Digital Ally International, Inc., MP Ally, LLC, Medical Devices Ally, LLC and Digitaldeck, LLC. All intercompany balances and transactions have been eliminated during consolidation.

 

The Company formed Digital Ally International, Inc. during August 2009 to facilitate the export sales of its products. In addition, Medical Devices Ally, LLC was formed in July 2014, MP Ally, LLC was formed in July 2015, and Digitaldeck, LLC was formed in June 2017, all of which have been inactive since formation.

 

Fair Value of Financial Instruments:

 

The carrying amounts of financial instruments, including cash and cash equivalents, accounts receivable and accounts payable approximate fair value because of the short-term nature of these items. The Company accounts for its derivative liabilities and its secured convertible debenturesproceeds investment agreement on a fair value basis.

 

Revenue Recognition:

 

RevenuesThe Company applies the provisions of Accounting Standards Codification (ASC) 606-10,Revenue from Contracts with Customers, and all related appropriate guidance. The Company recognizes revenue under the salecore principle to depict the transfer of control to its customers in an amount reflecting the consideration to which it expects to be entitled. In order to achieve that core principle, the Company applies the following five-step approach: (1) identify the contract with a customer, (2) identify the performance obligations in the contract, (3) determine the transaction price, (4) allocate the transaction price to the performance obligations in the contract, and (5) recognize revenue when a performance obligation is satisfied.

8

The Company considers customer purchase orders, which in some cases are governed by master sales agreements, to be the contracts with the customer. In situation where sales are to a distributor, the Company had concluded its contracts are with the distributor as the Company holds a contract bearing enforceable rights and obligations only with the distributor. As part of part of its consideration for the contract, the Company evaluates certain factors including the customers’ ability to pay (or credit risk). For each contract, the Company considers the promise to transfer products, each of which is distinct, to be the identified performance obligations. In determining the transaction price, the Company evaluates whether the price is subject to refund or adjustment to determine the net consideration to which it expects to be entitled. As the Company’s standard payment terms are recordedless than one year, it has elected the practical expedient under ASC 606-10-32-18 to not assess whether a contract has a significant financing component. The Company allocates the transaction price to each distinct product based on its relative standalone selling price. The product price as specified on the purchase order is considered the standalone selling price as it is an observable input which depicts the price as if sold to a similar customer in similar circumstances. Revenue is recognized when control of the product is shipped, title and risk of loss has transferred to the purchaser,customer (i.e. when the Company’s performance obligations is satisfied), which typically occurs at shipment. Further in determining whether control has been transferred, the Company considers if there is a present right to payment terms are fixed or determinable and payment is reasonably assured.legal title, along with risks and rewards of ownership having transferred to the customer. Customers do not have a right to return the product other than for warranty reasons for which they would only receive repair services or replacement product. The Company has also elected the practical expedient under ASC 340-40-25-4 to expense commissions for product sales when incurred as the amortization period of the commission asset the Company would have otherwise recognized is less than one year.

 

The Company sells its products and services to law enforcement and commercial customers in the following manner:

 

 Sales to domestic customers are made direct to the end customer (typically a law enforcement agency or a commercial customer) through its sales force, which is composed of its employees. Revenue is recorded when the product is shipped to the end customer.
   
 Sales to international customers are made through independent distributors who purchase products from the Company at a wholesale price and sell to the end user (typically law enforcement agencies or a commercial customer) at a retail price. The distributor retains the margin as its compensation for its role in the transaction. The distributor generally maintains product inventory, customer receivables and all related risks and rewards of ownership. RevenueAccordingly, upon application of steps one through five above, revenue is recorded when the product is shipped to the distributor consistent with the terms of the distribution agreement.
   
 Repair parts and services for domestic and international customers are generally handled by its inside customer service employees. Revenue is recognized upon shipment of the repair parts and acceptance of the service or materials by the end customer.

 

Sales taxes collected on products sold are excluded from revenues and are reported as an accrued expenseexpenses in the accompanying balance sheets until payments are remitted.

 

Service and other revenue is comprised of revenues from extended warranties, repair services, cloud revenue and software revenue. Revenue is recognized upon shipment of the product and acceptance of the service or materials by the end customer for repair services. Revenue for extended warranty, cloud service or other software-based are treated as deferred revenue and recognizedproducts is over the term of the contractedcontract warranty or service periodperiod. A time-elapsed method is used to measure progress because the Company transfers control evenly over the contractual period. Accordingly, the fixed consideration related to these revenues is generally recognized on a straight-line method.

8

Extended warranties are offered on selected products and when a customer purchases an extended warranty the associated proceeds are treated as deferred revenue and recognizedbasis over the contract term, ofas long as the extended warranty on a straight-line method.other revenue recognition criteria have been met.

 

Contracts with some of the Company’s customers contain multiple performance obligations that are distinct and accounted for separately. The transaction price is allocated to the separate performance obligations on a relative standalone selling price (“SSP”). The Company determined SSP for all the performance obligations using observable inputs, such as standalone sales and historical pricing. SSP is consistent with the Company’s overall pricing objectives, taking into consideration the type of service being provided. SSP also reflects the amount the Company would charge for the performance obligation if it were sold separately in a standalone sale. Multiple element arrangements consistingperformance obligations consist of product, software, cloud subscriptions and extended warranties are offered to our customers. Revenue arrangements with multiple deliverables are divided into separate units and revenue is allocated using the relative selling price method based upon vendor-specific objective evidence of selling price or third-party evidence of the selling prices if vendor-specific objective evidence of selling prices does not exist. If neither vendor-specific objective evidence nor third-party evidence exists, management uses its best estimate of selling price. The majority of the Company’s allocations of arrangement consideration under multiple element arrangements are performed using vendor-specific objective evidence by utilizing prices charged to customers for deliverables when sold separately. warranties.

The Company’s multiple element arrangementsperformance obligations may include future in-car or body-worn camera devices to be delivered at defined points within a multi-year contract, and in those arrangements, the Company allocates total arrangement consideration over the life of the multi-year contract to future deliverables using management’s best estimate of selling price. The Company has not utilized third-party evidence

Contract liabilities consist of selling price.deferred revenue and include payments received in advance of performance under the contract and are reported separately as current liabilities and non-current liabilities in the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets. Such amounts consist of extended warranty contracts, prepaid cloud services and prepaid installation services and are generally recognized as the respective performance obligations are satisfied. Total contract liabilities consist of the following:

  June 30, 2019  December 31, 2018 
Contract liabilities, current $1,794,457  $1,748,789 
Contract liabilities, non-current  1,864,989   1,991,091 
         
Total contract liabilities $3,659,446  $3,739,880 

9

 

Sales returns and allowances aggregated $12,390$37,978 and $61,673$34,227 for the three months ended SeptemberJune 30, 20172019 and 2016,2018, respectively, and $(15,195)$112,237 and $263,663$54,246 for the ninesix months ended SeptemberJune 30, 20172019 and 2016,2018, respectively. Obligations for estimated sales returns and allowances are recognized at the time of sales on an accrual basis. The accrual is determined based upon historical return rates adjusted for known changes in key variables affecting these return rates. A customer paid under a sales transaction in March 2017 that had been accrued to be returned at December 31, 2016, whichrates

Revenues for six month ended June 30, 2019 and 2018 were derived from the caused the negative sales returns for the nine months ended September 30, 2017.following sources

  Six months ended June 30, 
  2019  2018 
DVM-800 $1,979,681  $2,860,907 
DVM-250 Plus  427,343   366,351 
FirstVu HD  735,222   642,665 
EVO  62,942    
DVM-100 & DVM-400  6,765   64,401 
DVM-750  72,549   213,935 
VuLink  73,919   133,001 
Repair and service  734,332   627,874 
Cloud service revenue  349,337   326,741 
Other service revenue  94,430   95,635 
Laser Ally  19,130   22,530 
Accessories and other revenues  542,129   681,023 
  $5,097,779  $6,035,063 

 

Use of Estimates:

 

The preparation of the condensed consolidated financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amount of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from those estimates.

 

Cash and cash equivalents:

 

Cash and cash equivalents include funds on hand, in bank and short-term investments with original maturities of ninety (90) days or less.

 

Cash and cash equivalents that are restricted as to withdrawal or use under the terms of the secured convertible debentures are presented as restricted cash separate from cash and cash equivalents on the accompanying balance sheet.

Accounts Receivable:

 

Accounts receivable are carried at original invoice amount less an estimate made for doubtful receivables based on a review of all outstanding amounts on a weekly basis. The Company determines the allowance for doubtful accounts by regularly evaluating individual customer receivables and considering a customer’s financial condition, credit history, and current economic conditions. Trade receivables are written off when deemed uncollectible. Recoveries of trade receivables previously written off are recorded when received.

10

 

A trade receivable is considered to be past due if any portion of the receivable balance is outstanding for more than thirty (30) days beyond terms. No interest is charged on overdue trade receivables.

 

Inventories:

 

Inventories consist of electronic parts, circuitry boards, camera parts and ancillary parts (collectively, “components”), work-in-process and finished goods, and are carried at the lower of cost (First-in, First-out Method) or market value. The Company determines the estimate for the reserve for slow moving or obsolete inventories by regularly evaluating individual inventory levels, projected sales and current economic conditions.

 

9

Furniture, fixtures and equipment:

 

Furniture, fixtures and equipment is stated at cost net of accumulated depreciation. Additions and improvements are capitalized while ordinary maintenance and repair expenditures are charged to expense as incurred. Depreciation is recorded by the straight-line method over the estimated useful life of the asset, which ranges from twothree to ten years. Amortization expense on capitalized leases is included with depreciation expense.

 

Intangible assets:

 

Intangible assets include deferred patent costs and license agreements. Legal expenses incurred in preparation of patent application have been deferred and will be amortized over the useful life of granted patents. Costs incurred in preparation of applications that are not granted will be charged to expense at that time. The Company has entered into several sublicense agreements under which it has been assigned the exclusive rights to certain licensed materials used in its products. These sublicense agreements generally require upfront payments to obtain the exclusive rights to such material. The Company capitalizes the upfront payments as intangible assets and amortizes such costs over their estimated useful life on a straight-line method.

 

Secured convertible debentures:Leases:

The Company determines if an arrangement contains a lease at inception. For arrangements where the Company is the lessee, the Company will evaluate whether to account for the lease as an operating or finance lease. Operating leases are included in the right of use assets (ROU) and operating lease liabilities on the condensed consolidated balance sheet as of June 30, 2019. Finance leases would be included in furniture, fixtures and equipment, net and long-term debt and finance lease obligations on the condensed balance sheet. The Company had an operating lease for office and warehouse space at June 30, 2019 but no financing leases.

ROU assets and lease liabilities are recognized based on the present value of the future minimum lease payments over the lease term at commencement date. The Company uses its incremental borrowing rate based on the information available at the commencement date in determining the operating lease liabilities if the operating lease does not provide an implicit rate. Lease terms may include the option to extend when Company is reasonably certain that the option will be exercised. Lease expense for operating leases is recognized on a straight-line basis over the lease term

The Company elected to apply the short-term lease measurement and recognition exemption in which ROU assets and lease liabilities are not recognized for short term leases.

Proceeds investment agreement:

 

The Company has elected to record its Debenturesproceeds investment agreement at its fair value. Accordingly, the Debenturesproceeds investment agreement will be marked-to-market at each reporting date with the change in fair value reported as a gain (loss) in the statementCondensed Consolidated Statement of operations.Operations. All issuance costs related to the Debenturesproceeds investment agreement were expensed as incurred in the statementCondensed Consolidated Statement of operations.Operations.

 

Long-Lived Assets:

 

Long-lived assets such as property, plantfurniture, fixtures and equipment and purchased intangible assets subject to amortization are reviewed for impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of an asset may not be recoverable. If circumstances require a long-lived asset or asset group be tested for possible impairment, the Company first compares undiscounted cash flows expected to be generated by that asset or asset group to its carrying value. If the carrying value of the long-lived asset or asset group is not recoverable on an undiscounted cash flow basis, an impairment is recognized to the extent that the carrying value exceeds its fair value. Fair value is determined through various valuation techniques, including discounted cash flow models, quoted market values and third-party appraisals, as considered necessary.

 

11

Warranties:

 

The Company’s products carry explicit product warranties that extend up to two years from the date of shipment. The Company records a provision for estimated warranty costs based upon historical warranty loss experience and periodically adjusts these provisions to reflect actual experience. Accrued warranty costs are included in accrued expenses. Extended warranties are offered on selected products and when a customer purchases an extended warranty the associated proceeds are treated as deferred revenuecontract liabilities and recognized over the term of the extended warranty.

 

Shipping and Handling Costs:

 

Shipping and handling costs for outbound sales orders totaled $11,858$13,158 and $26,077$20,317 for the three months ended SeptemberJune 30, 20172019 and 2016,2018, respectively, and $51,949$31,578 and $72,296$34,284 for the ninesix months ended SeptemberJune 30, 20172019 and 2016,2018, respectively. Such costs are included in selling, general and administrative expenses in the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations.

 

Advertising Costs:

 

Advertising expense includes costs related to trade shows and conventions, promotional material and supplies, and media costs. Advertising costs are expensed in the period in which they are incurred. The Company incurred total advertising expense of approximately $346,935$510,792 and $615,586$111,677 for the three months ended SeptemberJune 30, 20172019 and 2016,2018, respectively, and $617,264$634,807 and $936,998$191,246 for the ninesix months ended SeptemberJune 30, 20172019 and 2016,2018, respectively. The increase was primarily attributable to our sponsorship of a NASCAR race in May 2019 and other related sponsorship opportunities. Such costs are included in selling, general and administrative expenses in the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations.

10

 

Income Taxes:

 

Deferred taxes are provided for by the liability method in which deferred tax assets are recognized for deductible temporary differences and operating loss and tax credit carryforwards and deferred tax liabilities are recognized for taxable temporary differences. Temporary differences are the differences between the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and their tax basis. Deferred tax assets are reduced by a valuation allowance when, in the opinion of management, it is more likely than not that some portion or all the deferred tax assets will not be realized. Deferred tax assets and liabilities are adjusted for the effects of changes in tax laws and rates on the date of enactment.

 

The Company applies the provisions of the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) No. 740 - Income Taxes that provides a framework for accounting for uncertainty in income taxes and provided a comprehensive model to recognize, measure, present, and disclose in its financial statements uncertain tax positions taken or expected to be taken on a tax return. It initially recognizes tax positions in the financial statements when it is more likely than not the position will be sustained upon examination by the tax authorities. Such tax positions are initially and subsequently measured as the largest amount of tax benefit that is greater than 50% likely of being realized upon ultimate settlement with the tax authority assuming full knowledge of the position and all relevant facts. Application requires numerous estimates based on available information. The Company considers many factors when evaluating and estimating its tax positions and tax benefits, and it recognized tax positions and tax benefits may not accurately anticipate actual outcomes. As it obtains additional information, the Company may need to periodically adjust its recognized tax positions and tax benefits. These periodic adjustments may have a material impact on its Condensed consolidated statementsStatements of operations.Operations.

 

The Company’s policy is to record estimated interest and penalties related to the underpayment of income taxes as income tax expense in the condensed consolidated statements of operations. There was no interest expense related to the underpayment of estimated taxes during the ninesix months ended SeptemberJune 30, 20172019 and 2016.2018. There have beenwere no penalties in the ninesix months ended SeptemberJune 30, 20172019 and 2016.2018.

 

The Company is subject to taxation in the United States and various states. As of SeptemberJune 30, 2017,2019, the Company’s tax returns filed for 2013, 2014,2015, 2016, and 20152017 and to be filed for 20162018 are subject to examination by the relevant taxing authorities. With few exceptions, as of SeptemberJune 30, 2017,2019, the Company is no longer subject to Federal, state, or local examinations by tax authorities for years before 2013.2015.

 

Research and Development Expenses:

 

The Company expenses all research and development costs as incurred. Development costs of computer software to be sold, leased, or otherwise marketed are subject to capitalization beginning when a product’s technological feasibility has been established and ending when a product is available for general release to customers. In most instances, the Company’s products are released soon after technological feasibility has been established. Costs incurred subsequent to achievement of technological feasibility were not significant, and software development costs were expensed as incurred during the ninesix months ended SeptemberJune 30, 20172019 and 2016.2018.

12

 

Common Stock Purchase Warrants:

 

The Company has common stock purchase warrants that are accounted for as liabilities under the caption of derivative liabilities on the consolidated balance sheet and recorded at fair value due to the warrant agreements containing anti-dilution provisions. The change in fair value being recorded in the consolidated statement of operations.

The Company has common stock common stock purchase warrants that are accounted for as equity based on their relative fair value and are not subject to re-measurement.

 

Stock-Based Compensation:

 

The Company grants stock-based compensation to its employees, board of directors and certain third-party contractors. Share-based compensation arrangements may include the issuance of options to purchase common stock in the future or the issuance of restricted stock, which generally are subject to vesting requirements. The Company records stock-based compensation expense for all stock-based compensation granted based on the grant-date fair value. The Company recognizes these compensation costs on a straight-line basis over the requisite service period of the award.

11

 

The Company estimates the grant-date fair value of stock-based compensation using the Black-Scholes valuation model. Assumptions used to estimate compensation expense are determined as follows:

 

 Expected term is determined using the contractual term and vesting period of the award;
   
 Expected volatility of award grants made in the Company’s plan is measured using the weighted average of historical daily changes in the market price of the Company’s common stock over the period equal to the expected term of the award;
   
 Expected dividend rate is determined based on expected dividends to be declared;
   
 Risk-free interest rate is equivalent to the implied yield on zero-coupon U.S. Treasury bonds with a maturity equal to the expected term of the awards; and
   
 Forfeitures are accounted for as they occur.

 

Segments of Business:

 

Management has determined that its operations are comprised of one reportable segment: the sale of digital audio and video recording and speed detection devices. For the three and ninesix months ended SeptemberJune 30, 20172019 and 2016,2018, sales by geographic area were as follows:

 

 Three Months Ended September 30,  Nine Months Ended September 30,  Three Months Ended June 30,  Six Months Ended June 30, 
 2017 2016 2017 2016  2019 2018 2019 2018 
Sales by geographic area:                                
United States of America $2,747,053   3,512,075  $11,373,569  $11,974,469  $2,477,717  $3,386,146  $4,992,059  $5,824,934 
Foreign  236,524   827,452   326,370   1,154,412   69,266   177,404   105,720   210,129 
 $2,983,577  $4,339,527  $11,699,939  $13,128,881                 
 $2,546,983  $3,563,550  $5,097,779  $6,035,063 

 

Sales to customers outside of the United States are denominated in U.S. dollars. All Company assets are physically located within the United States.

 

Reclassification of Prior Year Presentation:Recent Accounting Pronouncements

 

Certain prior year amounts have been reclassified for consistency withThere were no new material accounting pronouncements that were applicable to the current year presentation. These reclassifications had no effect on the reported results of operations.

Recent Accounting Pronouncements:

In May 2014, the FASB issued Accounting Standard Update (“ASU”) No. 2014-09,“Revenue from Contracts with Customers”(“ASU 2014-09”), which requires an entity to recognize the amount of revenue to which it expects to be entitledCompany for the transfer of promised goods or services to customers. ASU 2014-09 will replace most existing revenue recognition guidance in U.S. GAAP when it becomes effective. The standard is effective for interim and annual periods beginning after December 15, 2017 and permits the use of either the retrospective or cumulative effect transition method. The Company has selected the cumulative effect transition method and is currently evaluating the guidance to determine the impact on retained earnings but it does not expect the adoption to have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements and footnote disclosures.

In July 2015, the FASB issued ASU 2015-11, Inventory (Topic 330):Simplifying the Measurement of Inventory. The amendments in the ASU require entities that measure inventory using the first-in, first-out or average cost methods to measure inventory at the lower of cost and net realizable value. Net realizable value is defined as estimated selling price in the ordinary course of business less reasonably predictable costs of completion, disposal and transportation. The Company adopted this new standard on January 1, 2017 and such adoption did not have any impact on its consolidated financial statements.

12

In November 2015, the FASB issued ASU 2015-17,Income Taxes (Topic 740): Balance Sheet Classification of Deferred Taxes. This ASU simplifies the presentation of deferred income taxes by eliminating the requirement for entities to separate deferred tax liabilities and assets into current and noncurrent amounts in classified balance sheets. Instead, it requires deferred tax assets and liabilities be classified as noncurrent in the balance sheet. The Company adopted this new standard on January 1, 2017 and such adoption did not have any impact on its consolidated financial statements.

In February 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-02,Leases (Topic 842). The objective of ASU 2016-02 is to recognize lease assets and lease liabilities by lessees for those leases classified as operating leases under previous U.S. GAAP. ASU 2016-02 is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018, including interim periods within those fiscal years. Early adoption of ASU 2016-02 is permitted. The Company is evaluating the effects adoption of this guidance will have on its consolidated financial statements.

In March 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-09,Compensation-Stock Compensation (Topic 718). The objective of ASU 2016-09 is to reduce the complexity of certain aspects of the accounting for employee share-based payment transactions. As a result of this ASU, there are changes to minimum statutory withholding requirements, accounting for forfeitures, and accounting for income taxes. The Company adopted this new standard on January 1, 2017 and elected to account for forfeitures as they occur and has resulted in a credit to stock-based compensation of $256,167 relative to forfeitures during the ninesix months ended SeptemberJune 30, 2017.2019.

In August 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-15,Clarification on Classification of Certain Cash Receipts and Cash Payments on the Statement of Cash Flows, to create consistency in the classification of eight specific cash flow items. This standard is effective for calendar-year SEC registrants beginning in 2018. The Company is evaluating the effects adoption of this guidance will have on its consolidated financial statements.

In November 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-18,Statement of Cash Flows - Restricted Cash (Topic 230), which amends the existing guidance relating to the disclosure of restricted cash and restricted cash equivalents on the statement of cash flows. ASU 2016-18 is effective for the fiscal year beginning after December 15, 2017, and interim periods within that fiscal year, and early adoption is permitted. The Company is evaluating the impact of adoption of ASU 2016-18 on its Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows.

In May 2017, the FASB issued ASU 2017-09,Stock Compensation (Topic 718)-Scope of Modification Accounting, to provide guidance on determining which changes to terms and conditions of share-based payment awards require an entity to apply modification accounting under Topic 718. The ASU is effective for annual periods beginning after December 15, 2017, and interim periods within those annual periods. The Company is evaluating the effects adoption of this guidance will have on its consolidated financial statements.

 

NOTE 2. BASIS OF PRESENTATION

 

The condensed consolidated financial statements have been prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States for interim financial information and with the instructions to Form 10-Q and Article 108 of Regulation S-X. Accordingly, they do not include all the information and footnotes required by generally accepted accounting principles in the United States for complete financial statements. In the opinion of management, all adjustments (consisting of normal recurring accruals) considered necessary for a fair presentation have been included. Operating results for the nine-monththree and six-month period ended SeptemberJune 30, 20172019 are not necessarily indicative of the results that may be expected for the year ending December 31, 2017.2019.

 

The balance sheet at December 31, 20162018 has been derived from the audited financial statements at that date but does not include all the information and footnotes required by generally accepted accounting principles in the United States for complete financial statements.

 

For further information, refer to the financial statements and footnotes included in the Company’s annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2016.2018.

13

 

NOTE 3. CONCENTRATION OF CREDIT RISK AND MAJOR CUSTOMERS

 

Financial instruments that potentially subject the Company to concentrations of credit risk consist of accounts receivable. Sales to domestic customers are typically made on credit and the Company generally does not require collateral while sales to international customers require payment before shipment or backing by an irrevocable letter or credit. The Company performs ongoing credit evaluations of its customers’ financial condition and maintains an allowance for estimated losses. Accounts are written off when deemed uncollectible and accounts receivable are presented net of an allowance for doubtful accounts. The allowance for doubtful accounts totaled $90,000 as of June 30, 2019 and $70,000 as of September 30, 2017 and December 31, 2016.2018.

13

 

The Company uses primarily a network of unaffiliated distributors for international sales and employee-based direct sales force for domestic sales. No international distributor individually exceeded 10% of total revenues for the nine months ended September 30, 2017 or September 30, 2016. No individualand no customer receivable balance exceeded 10% of total accounts receivable as of Septemberfor the six months ended June 30, 2017 or September 30, 2016.2019 and 2018

 

The Company purchases finished circuit boards and other proprietary component parts from suppliers located in the United States and on a limited basis from Asia. Although the Company obtains certain of these components from single source suppliers, it generally owns all tooling and management has located alternative suppliers to reduce the risk in most cases to supplier problems that could result in significant production delays. The Company has not historically experienced significant supply disruptions from any of its principal vendors and does not anticipate future supply disruptions. The Company acquires most of its components on a purchase order basis and does not have long-term contracts with its suppliers.

 

NOTE 4. INVENTORIES

 

Inventories consisted of the following at SeptemberJune 30, 20172019 and December 31, 2016:2018:

 

 

September 30,

2017

 

December 31,

2016

  June 30, 2019 December 31, 2018 
Raw material and component parts $4,828,517  $4,015,170  $4,903,170  $4,969,786 
Work-in-process  141,900   355,715   256,910   351,451 
Finished goods  7,509,227   7,215,346   5,291,233   4,965,594 
        
Subtotal  12,479,644   11,586,231   10,451,313   10,286,831 
Reserve for excess and obsolete inventory  (2,417,653)  (1,999,920)  (3,659,264)  (3,287,771)
        
Total $10,061,991  $9,586,311  $6,792,049  $6,990,060 

 

Finished goods inventory includes units held by potential customers and sales agents for test and evaluation purposes. The cost of such units totaled $711,024$141,609 and $634,059$115,456 as of SeptemberJune 30, 20172019 and December 31, 2016,2018, respectively.

 

NOTE 5. FURNITURE, FIXTURES AND EQUIPMENT

 

Furniture, fixtures and equipment consisted of the following at SeptemberJune 30, 20172019 and December 31, 2016:2018:

 

 

Estimated

Useful Life

 September 30,
2017
 December 31,
2016
  

Estimated

Useful Life

 June 30, 2019 December 31, 2018 
Office furniture, fixtures and equipment 3-10 years $881,874  $1,074,533  3-10 years $821,453  $802,681 
Warehouse and production equipment 3-5 years  509,292   643,250  3-5 years  537,471   526,932 
Demonstration and tradeshow equipment 2-5 years  426,582   451,750  2-5 years  466,394   426,582 
Leasehold improvements 2-5 years  160,198   153,828  2-5 years  163,171   160,198 
Rental equipment 1-3 years  93,137   60,354  1-3 years  126,163   124,553 
          
Total cost    2,071,083   2,383,715     2,114,652   2,040,946 
Less: accumulated depreciation and amortization  (1,292,988)  (1,509,813)    (1,931,677)  (1,793,405)
          
Net furniture, fixtures and equipment   $778,095  $873,902    $182,975  $247,541 

 

Depreciation and amortization of furniture, fixtures and equipment aggregated $412,558$63,506 and $399,950$101,252 for the ninethree months ended SeptemberJune 30, 20172019 and 2016,2018, respectively, and $138,272 and $217,802 for the six months ended June 30, 2019 and 2018, respectively.

 

14
 

 

NOTE 6. SECURED CONVERTIBLE DEBENTURES, SUBORDINATED NOTES PAYABLE, AND CAPITAL LEASEDEBT OBLIGATIONS

 

2016 Secured Convertible Debentures. Secured Convertible DebenturesProceeds investment agreement is comprised of the following:

 

  

September 30,

2017

  

December 31,

2016

 
Secured convertible debentures, at fair value $3,183,210  $4,000,000 
Less: Current maturities of secured convertible debentures, at fair value  (3,183,210)   
Secured convertible debentures, at fair value-long-term $  $4,000,000 
  June 30, 2019  December 31, 2018 
2018 Proceeds Investment Agreement, at fair value $6,240,000  $9,142,000 
Less: Current portion  -   - 
2018 Proceeds investment agreement at fair value-less current portion $6,240,000  $9,142,000 

 

2018 Proceeds Investment Agreement.

On December 30, 2016,July 31, 2018, the Company entered into a Proceeds Investment Agreement (the “PIA”) with Brickell Key Investments LP (“BKI”), pursuant to which BKI funded an aggregate of $500,000 (the “First Tranche”) to be used (i) to fund the Company’s litigation proceedings relating to the infringement of certain patent assets listed in the PIA and (ii) to repay the Company’s existing debt obligations and for certain working capital purposes set forth in the PIA. Pursuant to the PIA, BKI was granted an option to provide the Company with an additional $9.5 million, at BKI’s sole discretion (the “Second Tranche”). On August 21, 2018, BKI exercised its option on the Second Tranche for $9.5 million which completed the $10 million funding.

Pursuant to the PIA and in consideration for the $10.0 million in funding, the Company agreed to assign to BKI (i) 100% of all gross, pre-tax monetary recoveries paid by any defendant(s) to the Company or its affiliates agreed to in a private placementsettlement or awarded in judgment in connection with the patent assets, plus any interest paid in connection therewith by such defendant(s) (the “Private Placement”“Patent Assets Proceeds”), up to the minimum return (as defined in the Agreement) and (ii) if BKI has not received its minimum return by the earlier of a liquidity event (as defined in the Agreement) and July 31, 2020, then the Company agreed to assign to BKI 100% of the Patent Asset Proceeds until BKI has received an amount equal to the minimum return on $4.0 million.

Pursuant to the PIA, the Company granted BKI (i) a senior security interest in the Patent Assets, the claims (as defined in the Agreement) and the Patent Assets Proceeds until such time as the minimum return is paid, in which case, the security interest on the patent assets, the claims and the Patent Assets Proceeds will be released, and (ii) a senior security interest in all other assets of the Company until such time as the minimum return is paid on $4.0 million, in principalwhich case, the security interest on such other assets will be released.

The security interest is enforceable by BKI if the Company is in default under the PIA which would occur if (i) the Company fails, after five (5) days’ written notice, to pay any due amount payable to BKI under the PIA, (ii) the Company fails to comply with any provision of the DebenturesPIA Agreement or any other agreement or document contemplated under the PIA, (iii) the Company becomes insolvent or insolvency proceedings are commenced (and not subsequently discharged) with respect to the Company, (iv) the Company’s creditors commence actions against the Company (which are not subsequently discharged) that affect material assets of the Company, (v) the Company, without BKI’s consent, incurs indebtedness other than immaterial ordinary course indebtedness up to $500,000, (vi) the Company fails, within five (5) business days following the closing of the second tranche, to fully satisfy its obligations to certain holders of the Company’s senior secured convertible promissory notes listed in the PIA Agreement and fails to obtain unconditional releases from such holders as to the Company’s obligations to such holders and the security interests in the Company held by such holders or (vii) there is an uncured non-compliance of the Company’s obligations or misrepresentations by the Company under the PIA.

Under the PIA, the Company issued BKI a warrant to purchase up to 465,712 shares of the Company’s common stock, warrantspar value $0.001 per share (the “Warrants”“PIA Warrant”), at an exercise price of $2.60 per share provided that the holder of the PIA Warrant will be prohibited from exercising the PIA Warrant if, as a result of such exercise, such holder, together with its affiliates, would own more than 4.99% of the total number of shares of the Company’s common stock outstanding immediately after giving effect to two institutional investors.such exercise. However, such holder may increase or decrease such percentage to any other percentage not in excess of 9.99%, provided that any increase in such percentage shall not be effective until 61 days after such notice to the Company. The DebenturesPIA Warrant is exercisable for five years from the date of issuance and Warrantsis exercisable on a cashless exercise basis if there is no effective registration statement. No contractual registration rights were issued pursuant to a Securities Purchase Agreement (the “Purchase Agreement”) between the Company and the purchasers’ signatory thereto (the “Holders”). The Private Placement resulted in gross proceeds of $4.0 million before placement agent fees and other expenses associated with the transaction totaling $281,570, which was expensed as incurred.given.

 

The Company elected to account for the DebenturesPIA on the fair value basis. Therefore, the Company determined the fair value of the Debentures utilizing Monte Carlo simulation modelsPIA and PIA Warrants which yielded an estimated fair valuevalues of $4.0 million for the DebenturesPIA including their embedded derivatives as of the origination date. No value was allocated toand the detachable PIA Warrants as of the origination date because of the relative fair value of the convertible note including its embedded derivative features approximated the gross proceeds of the financing transaction. The Company made principal payments of $750,000 on August 24, 2017 against the Debentures. The change in the fair value of the Debentures between December 31, 2016 and September 30, 2017 was $(66,790) and was reflected as income in the Condensed Statement of Operations.follows:

 

Prior to the maturity date, the Debentures bear interest at 8% per annum with interest payable in cash quarterly in arrears on the first business day of each calendar quarter following the issuance date. The Debentures rank senior to the Company’s existing and future indebtedness and are secured by substantially all tangible and certain intangible assets of the Company.

The Debentures are convertible at any time six months after their date of issue at the option of the holders into shares of the Company’s common stock at $5.00 per share (the “Conversion Price”). The Debentures mature on March 30, 2018. The Warrants are exercisable to purchase up to an aggregate of 800,000 shares of the Company’s common stock commencing on the date of issuance at an exercise price of $5.00 per share (the “Exercise Price”). The Warrants will expire on the fifth anniversary of their date of issuance. The Conversion Price and Exercise Price are subject to adjustment upon stock splits, reverse stock splits, and similar capital changes.

The Company has the right, subject to certain limitations, to redeem the Debenture with 30 days advance notice with the redemption amount determined as the sum of (a) 112% of the then outstanding principal amount of the Debenture, (b) accrued but unpaid interest and (c) all liquidated damages and other amounts due in respect of the Debenture, if any.

Additionally, if following the six-month anniversary of the Original Issue Date, the VWAP (volume weighted average price), for each of any ten (10) consecutive trading days exceeds $7.50 per share, the Company has the right, subject to certain limitations, to provide written notice to the Holders to cause them to convert all or part of the then outstanding principal amount of the Debenture plus accrued but unpaid interest.

Upon the occurrence of an event of default, the Debentures bear interest at 18% per annum and a Holder may require the Company to redeem all or a portion of its Debenture. The Company has agreed to maintain a cash balance of $500,000 while the Debentures are outstanding, which is reflected as restricted cash in the accompanying balance sheet. The Holders have agreed to beneficial conversion limitation that effectively blocks either Holder from converting the Debenture or exercising the Warrant to the extent that such conversion or exercise would result in the Holder being the beneficial owner in excess of 4.99% (or, upon election of purchaser, 9.99%), which beneficial ownership limitation may be increased or decreased up to 9.99% upon notice to the Company, provided that any increase in such limitation will not be effective until 61 days following notice to the Company.

Proceeds investment agreement $9,067,513 
Common stock purchase warrants  932,487 
Gross cash proceeds $10,000,000 

 

15
 

 

During the ninesix months ended SeptemberJune 30, 2017,2019, the Company was required to make payments totaling $750,000 to the holderssettled its patent infringement litigation with WatchGuard and it received a lump-sum payment of the Debentures resulting from the repayment provisions of the Debentures relative to additional capital raises.

Subordinated Notes Payable. Subordinated notes payable is comprised of the following:

  

September 30,

2017

  

December 31,

2016

 
Subordinated notes payable, at par $650,000  $ 
Unamortized discount  (117,000)   
         
Total subordinated notes payable $533,000  $ 

On June 30, 2017, the Company,$6.0 million as further described in two separate transactions, borrowed an aggregate of $700,000 under two unsecured notes payable to private, third-party lenders. The loans were funded on June 30, 2017 and both were represented by promissory notes (the “Notes”) that bore interest at the rate of 8% per annumNote 11. In accordance with principal and accrued interest payable on or before their maturity date of September 30, 2017. The Notes were unsecured and subordinated to all existing and future senior indebtedness, as such term is defined in the Notes. The Company granted the lenders warrants (the “Warrants”) exercisable to purchase a total of 200,000 shares of its common stock at an exercise price of $3.65 per share until June 29, 2022. The Company allocated $288,895 of the proceeds of the Notes to additional paid-in-capital, which represented the grant date relative fair value of the Warrants for 200,000 common shares issued to the lenders. The discount was amortized to interest expense ratably over the terms of the Note. On September 30, 2017,PIA, the Company obtained an extensionremitted the $6.0 as a principal payment toward its minimum return payment obligations under the PIA. The Company recorded the receipt of the maturity date of one of the Notes to December 31, 2017. The Company paid the second Note in full in August 2017.

On September 29, 2017, the Company borrowed $300,000 under an unsecured note payable with a private, third party lender (also referred to$6,000,000 settlement as the “Note”). The loan is represented by a promissory note that bears interest at 8% per annum and is payable in cash on or before the maturity date. The Note is due and payable in full on November 30, 2017 and may be prepaid without penalty at any time. The Note is unsecured and subordinated to all existing and future senior indebtedness, as such term is definedPatent litigation settlement income in the Note. The Company issued warrants to the lender exercisable to purchase 100,000 sharesaccompanying condensed consolidated statement of common stock for $2.75 per share until September 30, 2022. The Company allocated $117,000 of the proceeds of the Note to additional paid-in-capital, which represented the grant date relative fair value of the warrants issued to the lender. The discount will be amortized to interest expense ratably over the terms of the note.operations.

 

The discount amortized to interest expense totaled $288,895 and $-0- forfollowing represents activity in the ninePIA during the six months ended SeptemberJune 30, 2017, and 2016, respectively.2019:

 

Capital Leases. Future minimum lease payments under non-cancelable capital leases having terms in excess of one year are as follows:

Year ending December 31:   
    
2017 (period from October 1, 2017 to December 31, 2017) $8,575 
2018  8,574 
Total future minimum lease payments  17,149 
Less amount representing interest  283 
Present value of minimum lease payments  16,866 
Less current portion  16,866 
Capital lease obligations, less current portion $ 

16

Assets under capital leases are included in furniture, fixtures and equipment as follows:

  September 30,
2017
  December 31,
2016
 
Office furniture, fixtures and equipment $250,843  $382,928 
Less: accumulated amortization  (208,353)  (294,895)
Net furniture, fixtures and equipment $42,490  $88,033 
Beginning balance as of January 1, 2019 $9,142,000 
Repayment of obligation  (6,000,000)
     
Change in the fair value during the period  3,098,000 
Ending balance as of June 30, 2019 $6,240,000 

 

NOTE 7. FAIR VALUE MEASUREMENT

 

In accordance with ASC Topic 820 —Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures (“ASC 820”), the Company utilizes the market approach to measure fair value for its financial assets and liabilities. The market approach uses prices and other relevant information generated by market transactions involving identical or comparable assets, liabilities or a group of assets or liabilities, such as a business.

 

ASC 820 utilizes a fair value hierarchy that prioritizes the inputs to valuation techniques used to measure fair value into three broad levels. The following is a brief description of those three levels:

 

Level 1 — Quoted prices in active markets for identical assets and liabilities
  
Level 2 — Other significant observable inputs (including quoted prices in active markets for similar assets or liabilities)
  

Level 3 — Significant unobservable inputs (including the Company’s own assumptions in determining the fair value)

 

The following table represents the Company’s hierarchy for its financial assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis as of SeptemberJune 30, 20172019 and December 31, 2016.2018.

 

  September 30, 2017 
  Level 1  Level 2  Level 3  Total 
Liabilities:            
Secured convertible debentures $  $  $3,183,210  $3,183,210 
Warrant derivative liability $  $  $15,729  $15,729 
  $  $  $3,198,939  $3,198,939 
                 
   December 31, 2016 
   Level 1   Level 2   Level 3   Total 
Liabilities:                
Secured convertible debentures $  $  $4,000,000  $4,000,000 
Warrant derivative liability $  $  $33,076  $33,076 
  $  $  $4,033,076  $4,033,076 
  June 30, 2019 
  Level 1  Level 2  Level 3  Total 
Liabilities:            
Proceeds Investment Agreement $  $  $6,240,000  $6,240,000 

 

17
  December 31, 2018 
  Level 1  Level 2  Level 3  Total 
Liabilities:            
Proceeds Investment Agreement $  $  $9,142,000  $9,142,000 

 

The following table represents the change in levelLevel 3 tier value measurements:

 

  Warrant derivative liability  Secured convertible debentures  Total 
December 31, 2016 $33,076  $4,000,000  $4,033,076 
Payments made on debentures     (750,000)  (750,000)
Change in fair value  (17,347)  (66,790)  (84,137)
September 30, 2017 $15,729  $3,183,210  $3,198,939 
  Proceeds
Investment
Agreement
 
December 31, 2018 $9,142,000 
Repayment of obligation  (6,000,000)
Change in fair value  3,098,000 
     
June 30, 2019 $6,240,000 

16

 

NOTE 8. ACCRUED EXPENSES

 

Accrued expenses consisted of the following at SeptemberJune 30, 20172019 and December 31, 2016:2018:

 

 

September 30,

2017

 

December 31,

2016

  June 30, 2019 December 31, 2018 
Accrued warranty expense $140,596  $374,597  $102,955  $195,135 
Accrued senior convertible note issuance costs     204,000 
Accrued litigation costs  363,508   1,119,445 
Accrued sales commissions  20,629   36,389   26,553   25,750 
Accrued payroll and related fringes  464,134   270,781   265,258   186,456 
Accrued insurance  103,480   81,610   39,112   71,053 
Accrued rent  147,333   182,409 
Accrued sales returns and allowances  51,316   215,802   28,714   13,674 
Other  234,497   177,141   236,134   469,154 
 $1,161,985  $1,542,729         
 $1,062,234  $2,080,667 

 

Accrued warranty expense was comprised of the following for the six months ended SeptemberJune 30, 2017:2019:

 

 2017  2019 
Beginning balance $374,597  $195,135 
Provision for warranty expense  103,206   25,341 
Charges applied to warranty reserve  (337,207)  (117,521)
    
Ending balance $140,596  $102,955 

 

NOTE 9. INCOME TAXES

 

The effective tax rate for the three and ninesix months ended SeptemberJune 30, 20172019 and 20162018 varied from the expected statutory rate due to the Company continuing to provide a 100% valuation allowance on net deferred tax assets. The Company determined that it was appropriate to continue the full valuation allowance on net deferred tax assets as of SeptemberJune 30, 20172019 primarily because of the current yearCompany’s history of operating losses.

 

The Company has incurred operating losses in recent years and it continues to be in a three-year cumulative loss position at June 30, 2019. Accordingly, the Company determined there was not sufficient positive evidence regarding its potential for future profits to outweigh the negative evidence of our three-year cumulative loss position under the guidance provided in ASC 740. Therefore, it determined to continue to provide a 100% valuation allowance on its net deferred tax assets totaled $25,535,000 and $22,455,000 as of September 30, 2017 and December 31, 2016, respectively.

assets. The Company recordsexpects to continue to maintain a full valuation allowance until it determines that it can sustain a level of profitability that demonstrates its ability to realize these assets. To the benefit it will derive in future accounting periods from tax losses and credits and deductible temporary differences as “deferred tax assets.” In accordance with Accounting Standards Codification (ASC) 740, “Income Taxes,”extent the Company records a valuation allowance to reducedetermines that the carrying valuerealization of its deferred tax assets if, based onsome or all available evidence, itof these benefits is more likely than not that somebased upon expected future taxable income, a portion or all of the deferred tax assetsvaluation allowance will not be realized.reversed.

 

AtNOTE 10. OPERATING LEASE

The Company entered into an operating lease with a third party in September 2012 for office and warehouse space in Lenexa, Kansas. The terms of the lease include monthly payments ranging from $38,026 to $38,533 with a maturity date of April 2020. The Company has the option to renew for an additional three years beyond the original expiration date, which may be exercised at the Company’s sole discretion. The Company evaluated the renewal option at the lease commencement date to determine if it is reasonably certain the exercise the option and concluded that it is not reasonably certain that any options will be exercised. The weighted average remaining lease term for the Company’s operating lease as of June 30, 2017,2019 was .83 years.

Expense related to the office space operating lease was recorded on a straight-line basis over the lease term. Lease expense under the operating lease was approximately $198,861 for the six months ended June 30, 2019.

The discount rate implicit within the Company’s operating lease was not generally determinable and therefore the Company haddetermined the discount rate based on its incremental borrowing rate on the information available approximately $46,750,000at commencement date. As of netJune 30, 2019, the operating loss carryforwards available to offset future taxable income generated. Such tax net operating loss carryforwards expire between 2023 and 2037. In addition, the Company had research and development tax credit carryforwards approximating $2,110,000 available aslease liabilities reflect a weighted average discount rate of September 30, 2017, which expire between 2023 and 2037.8%.

 

1817
 

 

The Internal Revenue Code contains provisions under Section 382 which limit a company’s ability to utilize netfollowing sets forth the operating loss carry-forwards in the event that it has experienced a more than 50% change in ownership over a three-year period. Current estimates prepared by the Company indicate that due to ownership changes which have occurred, approximately $765,000lease right of its net operating lossuse assets and $175,000liabilities as of its research and development tax credit carryforwards are currently subject to an annual limitation of approximately $1,151,000, but may be further limited by additional ownership changes which may occur in the future. As stated above, the net operating loss and research and development credit carryforwards expire between 2023 and 2037, allowing the Company to potentially utilize all of the limited net operating loss carry-forwards during the carryforward period.June 30, 2019:

 

As discussed in Note 1, “Summary of Significant Accounting Policies,” tax positions are evaluated in a two-step process. The Company first determines whether it is more likely than not that a tax position will be sustained upon examination. If a tax position meets the more-likely-than-not recognition threshold, it is then measured to determine the amount of benefit to recognize in the financial statements. The tax position is measured as the largest amount of benefit that is greater than 50% likely of being realized upon ultimate settlement. Management has identified no tax positions taken that would meet or exceed these thresholds and therefore there are no gross interest, penalties and unrecognized tax expense/benefits that are not expected to ultimately result in payment or receipt of cash in the consolidated financial statements.

Assets:   
Operating lease right of use assets $276,338 
     
Liabilities:    
Operating lease obligations-current portion $357,498 
     
Operating lease obligations-less current portion $ 
     
Total operating lease obligations $357,498 

 

The Company’s federal and state income tax returns are closed for examination purposes by relevant statute and by examination for 2012 and all prior tax years.

NOTE 10. COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

Operating Leases. The Company has several non-cancelable operating lease agreements for office space and warehouse space that expire at various dates through April 2020. The Company has also entered into month-to-month leases for equipment. Rent expense was $99,431 and $99,431 for the three months ended September 30, 2017 and 2016, respectively, and $298,293 and $298,293, for the nine months ended September 30, 2017 and 2016, respectively. Following are theour minimum lease payments for each year and in total.

 

Year ending December 31:   
2017 (period from October 1, 2017 to December 31, 2017) $112,080 
2018  451,248 
2019  457,327 
2020  154,131 
  $1,174,786 
Year ending December 31:   
2019 (period from July 1, 2019 to December 31, 2019) $229,170 
2020  154,131 
Total undiscounted minimum future lease payments  383,301 
Imputed interest (25,803)
  $357,498 

NOTE 11. CONTINGENCIES

 

License agreements.Litigation.The Company has several license agreements whereby it has been assigned the rights to certain licensed materials used in its products. Certain of these agreements require the Company to pay ongoing royalties based on the number of products shipped containing the licensed material on a quarterly basis. Royalty expense related to these agreements aggregated $6,250 and $6,250 for the three months ended September 30, 2017 and 2016, respectively, and $14,938 and $18,911 for the nine months ended September 30, 2017 and 2016, respectively.

 

Litigation.From time to time, we are notified that we may be a party to a lawsuit or that a claim is being made against us. It is our policy to not disclose the specifics of any claim or threatened lawsuit until the summons and complaint are actually served on us. After carefully assessing the claim, and assuming we determine that we are not at fault or we disagree with the damages or relief demanded, we vigorously defend any lawsuit filed against us. We record a liability when losses are deemed probable and reasonably estimable. When losses are deemed reasonably possible but not probable, we determine whether it is possible to provide an estimate of the amount of the loss or range of possible losses for the claim, if material for disclosure. In evaluating matters for accrual and disclosure purposes, we take into consideration factors such as our historical experience with matters of a similar nature, the specific facts and circumstances asserted, the likelihood of our prevailing, the availability of insurance, and the severity of any potential loss. We reevaluate and update accruals as matters progress over time.

 

The CompanyWhile the ultimate resolution is subjectunknown we do not expect that these lawsuits will individually, or in the aggregate, have a material adverse effect to various legal proceedings arising from normal business operations. Althoughour results of operations, financial condition or cash flows. However, the outcome of any litigation is inherently uncertain and there can be no assurances, based onassurance that any expense, liability or damages that may ultimately result from the information currently available, management believes that it is probable that the ultimate outcomeresolution of eachthese matters will be covered by our insurance or will not be in excess of the actionsamounts recognized or provided by insurance coverage and will not have a material adverse effect on the consolidatedour operating results, financial statement of the Company. However, an adverse outcome in certain of the actions could have a material adverse effect on the financial results of the Company in the period in which it is recorded.condition or cash flows.

 

Axon Enterprise, Inc. – (Formerly Taser International, Inc.)

 

The Company owns U.S. Patent No. 8,781,292 (the “ ‘292 Patent”), which is directed to a system that determines when a recording device, such as a law enforcement officer’s body camera or in-car video recorder, begins recording and automatically instructs other recording devices to begin recording. The technology described in the ‘292 Patent is incorporated in the Company’s VuLink product.

19

The Company received notice in April 2015 that Taser International, Inc., now known as Axon Enterprises, Inc. (“Axon”), had commenced an action in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (the “USPTO”) for a re-examination of the ‘292 patent. A re-examination is essentially a request that the USPTO review whether the patent should have issued in its present form in view of the “prior art,” e.g., other patents in the same technology field. The prior art used by Axon was from an unrelated third party and was not the result of any of Axon’s own research and development efforts.

On January 14, 2016 the USPTO ultimately rejected Axon’s efforts and confirmed the validity of the ‘292 Patent with 59 claims covering various aspects of the Company’s auto-activation technology. On February 2, 2016 the USPTO issued another patent relating to the Company’s auto-activation technology for law enforcement cameras. U.S. Patent No. 9,253,452 (the “ ‘452 Patent”), which generally covers the automatic activation and coordination of multiple recording devices in response to a triggering event, such as a law enforcement officer activating the light bar on the vehicle.

 

The Company filed suit on January 15, 2016 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Kansas (Case No: 2:16-cv-02032) against Axon, alleging willful patent infringement against Axon’s body camera product line.line and Signal auto-activation product. The Company later added the ‘452 patent to the suit and is seeking both monetary damages and a permanent injunction against Axon for infringement of both the ‘452 and ‘292 Patents.Patent.

 

In addition to the infringement claims, the Company added a new set ofbrought claims to the lawsuit alleging that Axon conspired to keep the Company out of the marketplace by engaging in improper, unethical, and unfair competition. The amended lawsuit alleges Axon bribed officials and otherwise conspired to secure no-bid contracts for its products in violation of both state law and federal antitrust law. The Company’s lawsuit also seeks monetary and injunctive relief, including treble damages, for these alleged violations.

 

Axon filed an answer, which denied the patent infringement allegations on April 1, 2016. In addition, Axon filed a motion to dismiss all allegations in the complaint on March 4, 2016 for which the Company filed an amended complaint on March 18, 2016 to address certain technical deficiencies in the pleadings. AxonDigital amended its complaint and Axon renewed its motion to seek dismissal of the allegations that it had bribed officials and otherwise conspired to secure no-bid contracts for its products in violation of both state law and federal antitrust law on April 1, 2016. Formal discovery commenced on April 12, 2016 with respect to the patent related claims. In January 2017, the Court granted Axon’s motion to dismiss the portion of the lawsuit regarding claims that it had bribed officials and otherwise conspired to secure no-bid contracts for its products in violation of both state law and federal antitrust law. The Company has appealed this decision to the United States Court of Appeals forOn May 2, 2018, the Federal Circuit. The Company has filed its timely, opening brief; Axon has sought but not yet recieved an extension of time in which to file its own responding brief,Circuit affirmed the District Court’s ruling and accordingly,on October 1, 2018 the matter has not yet been fully briefed or scheduledSupreme Court denied Digital Ally’s petition for argument.review.

18

 

In December 2016 and January 2017, Axon announced that it had commenced an action in the USPTOfiled two petitions forinter partes reviewInter Partes Review (“IPR”) of the Company’s ‘292 Patent. Previously Axon had attempted to invalidate the ‘292 Patent through a re-examination procedure at the USPTO. Axon is again attempting through its recently filed petition to convince the USPTO that Digital Ally’s patents lack patentability. Axon subsequently filed another action for an IPR against the ‘292 Patent and two more petitions against the ‘452 Patent. The USPTO rejected one of Axon’s requests on the ‘292United States Patent and instituted an investigation of the other petition. As for the ‘452 Patent, the courtTrademark Office (“USPTO”) rejected both of Axon’s requests on the petition challenging the claims at issue in the lawsuit.petitions. Axon is now statutorily precluded from filing any more IPR petitions against either the ‘292 or ‘452 Patents.Patent.

 

The District Court litigation in Kansas has beenwas temporarily stayed sincefollowing the filing of the petitions for IPR,IPR. However, on November 17, 2017, the Federal District Court of Kansas rejected Axon’s request to maintain the stay. With this significant ruling, the parties will now proceed towards trial. Since litigation has resumed, the Court has issued a claim construction order (also called aMarkmanOrder) where it sided with the Company on all disputes and denied Axon’s attempts to limit the scope of the claims. Following theMarkman Order, the Court set all remaining deadlines in the case. Fact discovery closed on October 8, 2018, and a Final Pretrial Conference took place on January 16, 2019. The parties filed motions for summary judgment on January 31, 2019.

On June 17, 2019, the Court however, requested an updategranted Axon’s motion for summary judgment that Axon did not infringe on the statusCompany’s patent and dismissed the case. Importantly, the Court’s ruling did not find that Digital’s ‘452 Patent was invalid. It also did not address any other issue, such as whether Digital’s requested damages were appropriate, and it does not impact the Company’s ability to file additional lawsuits to hold other competitors accountable for patent infringement. This ruling solely related to an interpretation of the petitionsclaims as they relate to Axon and was unrelated to the supplemental briefing Digital recently filed on its damages claim and the WatchGuard settlement. Those issues are separate and the judge’s ruling on summary judgment had nothing to do with Digital’s damages request. The Company has provided suchfiled an update afterappeal to this ruling and has asked the decision was rendered which denied the final ‘452 Patent petition. Because both of Axon’s petitions for an IPR on the ‘452 Patent that relatedappellate court to the claims in the lawsuit were denied, the Company is seeking to lift the stay and proceed with the lawsuit to a trial where the question of infringement and damages can be addressed.reverse this decision.

 

Enforcement Video, LLC d/b/a WatchGuard Video

 

On May 27, 2016 the Company filed suit against Enforcement Video, LLC d/b/a WatchGuard, Video (“WatchGuard”), (Case No. 2:16-cv-02349-JTM-JPO) alleging patent infringement based on WatchGuard’s VISTA Wifi and 4RE In-Car product lines.

 

20

On May 13, 2019, the parties resolved the dispute and executed a settlement agreement in the form of a Release and License Agreement. The USPTOlitigation has granted multiple patents to the Company with claims covering numerous features, suchbeen dismissed as automatically activating all deployed cameras in response to the activationa result of just one camera. Additionally, Digital Ally’s patent claims cover automatic coordination as well as digital synchronization between multiple recording devices. Digital Ally also has patent coverage directed to the coordination between a multi-camera system and an officer’s smartphone, which allows an officer to more readily assess an event on the scene while an event is taking place or immediately after it has occurred.this settlement.

 

The Company’s lawsuit alleges that WatchGuard incorporated this patented technology into its VISTA WifiRelease and 4RE In-Car product lines without its permission. Specifically, Digital Ally is accusing License Agreement encompasses the following key terms:

WatchGuard paid Digital Ally a one-time, lump settlement payment of $6,000,000.
Digital Ally has granted WatchGuard a perpetual covenant not to sue if WatchGuard’s products incorporate agreed-upon modified recording functionality. Digital Ally has also granted WatchGuard a license to the ‘292 Patent and the ‘452 Patent (and related patents, now existing and yet-to-issue) through December 31, 2023. The parties have agreed to negotiate in good faith to attempt to resolve any alleged infringement that occurs after the license period expires.
The parties have further agreed to release each other from all claims or liabilities pre-existing the settlement.
As part of the settlement, the parties agreed that WatchGuard is making no admission that it has infringed any of Digital Ally’s patents.

Upon receipt of infringing three patents: the ‘292 and ‘452 Patents and U.S. Patent No. 9,325,950$6,000,000 the (“ ‘950 Patent”). The Company is aggressively challenging WatchGuard’s infringing conduct, seeking both monetary damages, as well as seeking a permanent injunction preventing WatchGuard from continuing to sell its VISTA Wifi and 4RE In-Car product lines using Digital Ally’s own technology to compete against it. On May 8, 2017, Watchguardparties filed a petition seeking IPR ofjoint motion to dismiss the ‘950 Patent. The Company will vigorously oppose that petition. The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) will not issue a decision on whether to institute that petition until approximately November 2017. The lawsuit has been stayed pending a decision fromwhich the USPTO on whether to institute that petition.Judge granted.

 

Utility Associates,PGA Tour, Inc.

 

On October 25, 2013,January 22, 2019 the PGA Tour, Inc. (the “PGA”) filed suit against the Company filed a complaint in the United StatesFederal District Court for the District of Kansas (2:13-cv-02550-SAC) to eliminate threats by a competitor, Utility Associates, Inc. (“Utility”),(Case No. 2:19-cv-0033-CM-KGG) alleging breach of alleged patent infringement regarding U.S. Patent No. 6,831,556 (the “ ‘556 Patent”). Specifically, the lawsuit seeks a declaration that the Company’s mobile video surveillance systems do not infringe any claimcontract and breach of the ‘556 Patent. The Company became aware that Utility had mailed letters to currentimplied covenant of good faith and prospective purchasers of its mobile video surveillance systems threatening that the use of such systems purchased from third parties not licensedfair dealing relative to the ‘556 Patent would create liability for them for patent infringement.Web.com Tour Title Sponsor Agreement (the “Agreement”). The Company rejected Utility’s assertion and is vigorously defending the right of end-users to purchase such systems from providers other than Utility. The United States District Court for the District of Kansas dismissed the lawsuit because it decided that Kansascontract was not the proper jurisdictional forum for the dispute. The District Court’s decision was not a rulingexecuted on the merits of the case. The Company appealed the decision and the Federal Circuit affirmed the District Court’s previous decision.

In addition, the Company began proceedings to invalidate the ‘556 Patent through a request for IPR of the ‘556 patent at the USPTO. On July 27, 2015, the USPTO invalidated key claims in Utility’s ‘556 Patent. The Final Decision from the USPTO significantly curtails Utility’s ability to threaten law enforcement agencies, municipalities, and others with infringement of the ‘556 Patent. Utility appealed this decision to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit denied Utility’s appeal and therefore confirmed the ruling of the USPTO. This denial of Utility’s appeal finalized the USPTO’s ruling in the Company’s favor and the matter is now concluded.

On June 6, 2014 the Company filed an Unfair Competition lawsuit against Utility in the United States District Court for the District of Kansas. In the lawsuit it contends that Utility has defamed the Company and illegally interfered with its contracts, customer relationships and business expectancies by falsely asserting to its customers and others that its products violate the ‘556 Patent, of which Utility claims to be the holder.

The suit also includes claims against Utility for tortious interference with contracts and violation of the Kansas Uniform Trade Secrets Act (KUSTA), arising out of Utility’s employment of the Company’s employees, in violation of that employee’s Non-Competition and Confidentiality agreements with the Company. In addition to damages, the Company seeks temporary, preliminary, and permanent injunctive relief, prohibiting Utility from, among other things, continuing to threaten or otherwise interfere with the Company’s customers. On March 4, 2015, an initial hearing was held upon the Company’s request for injunctive relief.

Based upon facts revealed at the March 4, 2015 hearing, on March 16, 2015, the Company sought leave to amend its Complaint in the Kansas suit to assert additional claims against Utility. Those new claims include claims of actual or attempted monopolization, in violation of § 2 of the Sherman Act, claims arising under a new Georgia statute that prohibits threats of patent infringement in “bad faith,” and additional claims of unfair competition/false advertising in violation of § 63(a) of the Lanham Act. As these statutes expressly provide, the Company will seek treble damages, punitive damages and attorneys’ fees as well as injunctive relief. The Court concluded its hearing on April 22, 2015, and allowed the Company leave to amend its complaint, but denied its preliminary injunction. The discovery stage of the lawsuit expired in May 2016. Utility filed a Motion for Summary Judgment and the Company filed a Motion for Partial Summary Judgment. On March 30, 2017, the Court entered its order granting Utility’s motion and denying the Company’s motion for summary judgment in their entireties. The Company believes the District Court made several errors when ruling on the motions for summary judgment in light of the USPTO’s final decision issued on July 27, 2015 and the various facts and admissions already presented to such Court and has filed an appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit. Oral arguments are set to occur on January 17, 2018.

21

On September 13, 2014, Utility filed suit in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia against the Company alleging infringement of the ‘556 Patent. The suit was served on the Company on September 20, 2014. As alleged in the Company’s first filed lawsuit described above, the Company believes that the ‘556 Patent is both invalid and not infringed. Further, the USPTO has issued its final decision invalidating 23 of the 25 claims asserted in the ‘556 Patent, as noted above. The Company believes that the suit filed by Utility is without merit and is vigorously defending the claims asserted against the Company. An adverse resolution of the foregoing litigation or patent proceedings could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business, prospects, results of operations, financial condition, and liquidity. The Court stayed all proceedings with respect to this lawsuit pending the outcome of the patent review performed by the USPTO and the appellate court. Based on the USPTO’s final decision to invalidate substantially all claims contained in the ‘556 Patent and the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit full denial of Utility’s appeal, the Company intends to file for summary judgment in its favor if Utility does not request outright dismissal.

The Company is also involved as a plaintiff and defendant in ordinary, routine litigation and administrative proceedings incidental to its business from time to time, including customer collections, vendor and employment-related matters. The Company believes the likely outcome of any other pending cases and proceedings will not be material to its business or its financial condition.

Sponsorship.On April 16, 2015 by and between the Company entered intoparties. Under the Agreement, Digital Ally would be a Title Sponsorship Agreement (the “Agreement”) under which it became the title sponsor for aof and receive certain naming and other rights and benefits associated with the Web.com Tour golf tournament (the “Tournament”) held annually in the Kansas City Metropolitan area. The Agreement provides the Company with naming rights and other benefits for the 2015 through 2019 annual Tournament in exchange for Digital Ally’s payment to Tour of annual sponsorship fees. The suit has been resolved and the following sponsorship fee:

Year Sponsorship
fee
 
2015 $375,000 
2016 $475,000 
2017 $475,000 
2018 $500,000 
2019 $500,000 

The Companycase has the right to sell and retain the proceeds from the sale of additional sponsorships, including but not limited to a presenting sponsorship, a concert sponsorship and founding partnerships for the Tournament. The Company recorded a net sponsorship expense of $256,452 and $497,235 for the three months ended September 30, 2017, and 2016, respectively, and $263,047 and $499,271, respectively, for the nine months ended September 30, 2017 and 2016.been dismissed by Plaintiff with prejudice on April 17, 2019.

 

401 (k) Plan.In July 2008, theThe Company amended and restated itssponsors a 401(k) retirement savings plan.plan for the benefit of its employees. The plan, as amended, plan requires the Companyit to provide 100% matching contributions for employees, who elect to contribute up to 3% of their compensation to the plan and 50% matching contributions for employee’s elective deferrals on the next 2% of their contributions. The Company has made matching contributions totaling $43,455$26,968 and $46,346$28,973 for the three months ended SeptemberJune 30, 20172019 and 2016,2018, respectively, and $137,781$53,410 and $135,058$58,348 for the ninesix months ended SeptemberJune 30, 20172019 and 2016,2018, respectively. Each participant is 100% vested at all times in employee and employer matching contributions.

 

19

Consulting and Distributor Agreements.The Company entered into an agreement that requiresrequired it to make monthly payments whichthat will be applied to future commissions and/or consulting fees to be earned by the provider. The agreement is with a limited liability company (“LLC”) that is minority owned by a relative of the Company’s chief financial officer. Under the agreement, dated January 15, 2016 and as amended on February 13, 2017, the LLC provides consulting services for developing a new distribution channel outside of law enforcement for its body-worn camera and related cloud storage products to customers in the United States. The Company paidadvanced amounts to the LLC and advance against commissions ranging from $5,000 to $6,000 per month plus necessary and reasonable expenses for athe period of one year beginning January 2016,through June 30, 2017, which can be automatically extended based on the LLC achieving minimum sales quotas. The agreement was renewed in January 2017 for a period of three years, subject to yearly minimum sales thresholds that would allow the Company to terminate the contract if such minimums are not met. As of SeptemberJune 30, 2017,2019, the Company had advanced a total of $301,115$277,151 pursuant to this agreement.agreement and established an allowance reserve of $129,140 for a net advance of $148,011. The minimum sales threshold has not been met and the Company has discontinued all advances, although the contract has not been formally terminated. However, the exclusivity provisions of the agreement have been terminated.

 

22

On June 1, 2018 the Company entered into an agreement with an individual that required it to make monthly payments that will be applied to future commissions and/or consulting fees to be earned by the provider. Under the agreement, the individual provides consulting services for developing new distribution channels both inside and outside of law enforcement for its in-car and body-worn camera systems and related cloud storage products to customers within and outside the United States. The Company was required to advance amounts to the individual as an advance against commissions of $7,000 per month plus necessary and reasonable expenses for the period through August 31, 2018, which was extended to December 31, 2018 by mutual agreement of the parties at $6,000 per month. The parties have mutually agreed to further extend the arrangement on a monthly basis at $5,000 per month. As of June 30, 2019, the Company had advanced a total of $96,242 pursuant to this agreement.

 

NOTE 11.12. STOCK-BASED COMPENSATION

 

The Company recorded pretax compensation expense related to the grant of stock options and restricted stock issued of $478,863$585,195 and $422,246,$594,228 for the three months ended SeptemberJune 30, 20172019 and 2016,2018 and $981,652$1,310,393 and $1,203,312$1,087,746 for the ninesix months ended SeptemberJune 30, 20172019 and 2016,2018, respectively.

 

As of SeptemberJune 30, 2017,2019, the Company had adopted seven separate stock option and restricted stock plans: (i) the 2005 Stock Option and Restricted Stock Plan (the “2005 Plan”), (ii) the 2006 Stock Option and Restricted Stock Plan (the “2006 Plan”), (iii) the 2007 Stock Option and Restricted Stock Plan (the “2007 Plan”), (iv) the 2008 Stock Option and Restricted Stock Plan (the “2008 Plan”), (v) the 2011 Stock Option and Restricted Stock Plan (the “2011 Plan”), (vi) the 2013 Stock Option and Restricted Stock Plan (the “2013 Plan”) and, (vii) the 2015 Stock Option and Restricted Stock Plan (the “2015 Plan”) and (vii) the 2018 Stock Option and Restricted Stock Plan (the “2018 Plan”). The 2005 Plan, 2006 Plan, 2007 Plan, 2008 Plan, 2011 Plan, 2013 Plan, 2015 Plan and 20152018 Plan are referred to as the “Plans.”

 

These Plans permit the grant of stock options or restricted stock to its employees, non-employee directors and others for up to a total of 2,425,0003,425,000 shares of common stock. The 2005 Plan terminated during 2015 with 2814,616 shares not awarded or underlying options, which shares are now unavailable for issuance. Stock options granted under the 2005 Plan that remain unexercised and outstanding as of SeptemberJune 30, 20172019 total 18,563.13,125. The 2006 Plan terminated during 2016 with 4,50523,399 shares not awarded or underlying options, which shares are now unavailable for issuance. Stock options granted under the 2006 Plan that remain unexercised and outstanding as of SeptemberJune 30, 20172019 total 62,080.44,075. The 2007 Plan terminated during 2017 with 48,50087,776 shares not awarded or underlying options, which shares are now unavailable for issuance. Stock options granted under the 2007 Plan that remain unexercised and outstanding as of SeptemberJune 30, 20172019 total 41,875.6,875. The 2008 Plan terminated during 2018 with 8,249 shares not awarded or underlying options, which shares are now unavailable for issuance. Stock options granted under the 2008 Plan that remain unexercised and outstanding as of June 30, 2019 total 32,250.

 

The Company believes that such awards better align the interests of our employees with those of its stockholders. Option awards have been granted with an exercise price equal to the market price of its stock at the date of grant with such option awards generally vesting based on the completion of continuous service and having ten-year contractual terms. These option awards typically provide for accelerated vesting if there is a change in control (as defined in the Plans). The Company has registered all shares of common stock that are issuable under its Plans with the SEC. A total of 86,363626,316 shares remained available for awards under the various Plans as of SeptemberJune 30, 2017.2019.

 

The fair value of each option award is estimated on the date of grant using a Black-Scholes option valuation model. There were 100,000 stock options issued during the nine months ended September 30, 2017.

20

 

Activity in the various Plans during the ninesix months ended SeptemberJune 30, 20172019 is reflected in the following table:

 

Options Number of
Shares
 Weighted
Average
Exercise Price
  Number of
Shares
 Weighted
Average
Exercise Price
 
Outstanding at January 1, 2017  362,440  $18.46 
Outstanding at January 1, 2019  434,012  $4.62 
Granted  100,000   3.00  180,000 3.01 
Exercised         
Forfeited  (52,609)  (12.02)  (17,937)  (12.43)
Outstanding at September 30, 2017  409,831  $14.65 
Exercisable at September 30, 2017  301,031  $19.84 
Weighted-average fair value for options granted during the period at fair value  100,000  $2.49 
Outstanding at June 30, 2019  596,075 $3.90 
Exercisable at June 30, 2019  416,075 $4.28 

The fair value of each option award is estimated on the date of grant using a Black-Scholes option valuation model. Utilizing the following assumptions: risk free rate - 2.23%, estimated term - 5.5 years, and 108% volatility. The total estimated grant date fair value stock options issued during the six months ended June 30, 2019 was $436,217.

 

The Plans allow for the cashless exercise of stock options. This provision allows the option holder to surrender/cancel options with an intrinsic value equivalent to the purchase/exercise price of other options exercised. There were no shares surrendered pursuant to cashless exercises during the ninesix months ended SeptemberJune 30, 2017.2019.

23

 

At SeptemberJune 30, 2017,2019, the aggregate intrinsic value of options outstanding was approximately $-0-, and the aggregate intrinsic value of options exercisable was approximately $-0-. No options were exercised in the ninesix months ended SeptemberJune 30, 2017.2019.

 

As of SeptemberJune 30, 2017,2019, the unrecognized portion of stock compensation expense on all existing stock options was $218,034, which will be recognized over the next ten months.$399,866.

 

The following table summarizes the range of exercise prices and weighted average remaining contractual life for outstanding and exercisable options under the Company’s option plans as of SeptemberJune 30, 2017:2019:

 

    Outstanding options  Exercisable options   Outstanding options Exercisable options 
Exercise price
range
   Number of
options
  Weighted average
remaining
contractual life
  Number of
options
  Weighted average
remaining
contractual life
Exercise price
range
Exercise price
range
 Number of
options
 Weighted average
remaining
contractual life
 Number of
options
 Weighted average
remaining
contractual life
 
                   
$0.01 to $3.99   198,124  8.4 years  89,324  6.8 years0.01 to $3.49   471,625  8.9 years  291,625   8.2 years 
$4.00 to $6.99   34,125  5.0 years  34,125  5.0 years3.50 to $4.99 67,625 4.8 years 67,625 4.8 years 
$7.00 to $9.99   18,444  4.0 years  18,444  4.0 years5.00 to $6.49  —years  —years 
$10.00 to $12.99   6,200  1.7 years  6,200  1.7 years6.50 to $7.99 8,875 2.3 years 8,875 2.3 years 
$13.00 to $15.99   51,438  2.9 years  51,438  2.9 years8.00 to $9.99 2,500 1.9 years 2,500 1.9 years 
$16.00 to $18.99     0.0 years    0.0 years10.00 to $19.99 39,825 1.5 years 39,825 1.5 years 
$19.00 to $29.99   6,500  1.8 years  6,500  1.8 years20.00 to $24.99  5,625  0.2 years  5,625  0.2 years 
$30.00 to $55.00   95,000  0.2 years  95,000  0.2 years
    409,831  5.1 years  301,031  3.5 years          
   596,075 7.7 years  416,075  6.8 years 

 

Restricted stock grants. The Board of Directors has granted restricted stock awards under the Plans. Restricted stock awards are valued on the date of grant and have no purchase price for the recipient. Restricted stock awards typically vest over nine months to four years corresponding to anniversaries of the grant date. Under the Plans, unvested shares of restricted stock awards may be forfeited upon the termination of service to or employment with the Company, depending upon the circumstances of termination. Except for restrictions placed on the transferability of restricted stock, holders of unvested restricted stock have full stockholder’s rights, including voting rights and the right to receive cash dividends.

 

A summary of all restricted stock activity under the equity compensation plans for the ninesix months ended SeptemberJune 30, 20172019 is as follows:

 

 Number of Restricted shares Weighted average
grant date fair
value
  Number of
Restricted
shares
 Weighted
average
grant date
fair
value
 
Nonvested balance, January 1, 2017  495,300  $5.75 
Nonvested balance, January 1, 2019  772,150  $3.40 
Granted  522,000   3.80  522,110 2.91 
Vested  (136,750)  (6.47) (397,790) (3.84)
Forfeited  (9,200)  (6.47)  (2,500)  (2.30)
Nonvested balance, September 30, 2017  871,350  $5.78 
Nonvested balance, June 30, 2019  893,970 $2.92 

21

 

The Company estimated the fair market value of these restricted stock grants based on the closing market price on the date of grant. As of SeptemberJune 30, 2017,2019, there were $2,193,353$976,035 of total unrecognized compensation costs related to all remaining non-vested restricted stock grants, which will be amortized over the next 3918 months in accordance with the respective vesting scale.

24

 

The nonvested balance of restricted stock vests as follows:

 

Year ended December 31, Number of
shares
 
    
2017 (October 1 through December 31)  55,300 
2018  505,450 
2019  289,100 
2020  21,500 
Years ended Number of
shares
 
    
2019 (July 1, 2019 to December 31, 2019)  377,525 
2020  265,785 
2021  250,660 

 

NOTE 12.13. COMMON STOCK PURCHASE WARRANTS

 

The Company has issued common stock purchase warrants (the “Warrants”) in conjunction with various debt and equity issuances. The Warrantswarrants are either immediately exercisable, or have a delayed initial exercise date, no more than nine months from issue date, and allow the holders to purchase up to 3,013,4664,532,145 shares of common stock at $2.75$2.60 to $16.50 per share as of SeptemberJune 30, 2017.2019. The Warrantswarrants expire from July 22, 201715, 2020 through September 30, 2022July 31, 2023 and allow for cashless exercise.

 

 Warrants Weighted
average
exercise price
  Warrants Weighted
average
exercise price
 
Vested Balance, January 1, 2017  2,379,290  $10.47 
Vested Balance, January 1, 2019  4,693,145  $5.40 
Granted  1,334,000   3.37    
Exercised  (60,000)  3.00  (529,000) (2.96) 
Cancelled  (639,824)  13,43      
Vested Balance, September 30, 2017  3,013,466  $6.84 
Vested Balance, June 30, 2019  4,164,145 $5.71 

 

The total intrinsic value of all outstanding Warrantswarrants aggregated $-0- as of SeptemberJune 30, 20172019 and the weighted average remaining term is 4628 months.

 

The following table summarizes the range of exercise prices and weighted average remaining contractual life for outstanding and exercisable Warrantswarrants to purchase common shares as of SeptemberJune 30, 2017:2019:

 

    Outstanding and exercisable warrants   Outstanding and exercisable warrants
Exercise priceExercise price   Number of options  Weighted average
remaining
contractual life
Exercise price Number of
warrants
 Weighted
average

remaining
contractual life
$2.75   100,000  5.0 years2.60   465,712  4.1 years
$2.75   12,200  1.9 years3.00 701,667 3.8 years
$3.36   680,000  5.4 years3.25 120,000 3.5 years
$3.36   200,000  4.4 years3.36 880,000 3.4 years
$3.65   200,000  4.7 years3.50 18,000 0.1 years
$3.75   94,000  4.9 years3.65 200,000 3.0 years
$5.00   800,000  4.2 years3.75 94,000 3.1 years
$8.50   42,500  1.1 years5.00 800,000 2.5 years
$13.43   879,766  3.3 years13.43 879,766 1.5 years
$16.50   5,000  2.8 years16.50  5,000  1.0 years
$16.50       
    3,013,466  3.8 years   4,164,145 2.9 years

 

2522
 

 

NOTE 13.14. NET LOSS PER SHARE

The calculations of the weighted average number of shares outstanding and loss per share outstanding for the three and ninesix months ended SeptemberJune 30, 20172019 and 20162018 are as follows:

 

 Three Months Ended
September 30,
  Nine Months Ended
September 30,
  Three Months Ended
June 30,
  Six Months Ended
June 30,
 
 2017 2016 2017 2016  2019 2018 2019 2018 
Numerator for basic and diluted income per share – Net loss $(3,493,306) $(3,255,579) $(7,852,784) $(8,433,788) $(387,730) $(2,962,890) $(3,592,904) $(5,551,122)
                
Denominator for basic loss per share – weighted average shares outstanding  6,249,116   5,380,855   5,851,428   5,315,646   11,305,248   7,129,260   11,124,222   7,153,219 
Dilutive effect of shares issuable under stock options and warrants outstanding                        
                
Denominator for diluted loss per share – adjusted weighted average shares outstanding  6,249,116   5,380,855   5,851,428   5,315,646   11,305,248   7,129,260   11,124,222   7,153,219 
Net income (loss) per share:                
                
Net loss per share:                
Basic $(0.56) $(0.61) $(1.34) $(1.59) $(0.03) $(0.42) $(0.32) $(0.78)
Diluted $(0.56) $(0.61) $(1.34) $(1.59) $(0.03) $(0.42) $(0.32) $(0.78)

 

Basic loss per share is based upon the weighted average number of common shares outstanding during the period. For the three and ninesix months ended SeptemberJune 30, 20172019 and 2016,2018, all outstanding stock options and warrants to purchase common stock were antidilutive, and, therefore, not included in the computation of diluted net loss per share.

NOTE 15. SUBSEQUENT EVENTS

On August 5, 2019, the Company entered into a Securities Purchase Agreement (the “Purchase Agreement”) with several accredited investors (the “Investors”) providing for the purchase and issuance of the following securities for a price of $2,500,000:

(i)

Issuance of 8% Senior Secured Convertible Promissory Notes due August 4, 2020 (the “Notes”) with a principal face amount of $2,777,779, which Notes are, subject to certain conditions, convertible into 1,984,127 shares of the Company’s common stock (the “Common Stock”), at a price per share of $1.40. Monthly amortization of principal and interest commence on November 5, 2019 subject to prior conversion of shares;

(ii)

Issuance of five-year warrants to purchase an aggregate of 571,428 shares of Common Stock at an exercise price of $1.8125, subject to customary adjustments thereunder (the “Warrants”), which Warrants are immediately exercisable upon issuance and on a cashless basis if the Warrants have not been registered 180 days after the date of issuance; and

(iii)

Issuance of 89,285 shares of Common Stock which was equal to 5% of the aggregate purchase price of the Notes, with an aggregate value of $125,000,

(iv)The Investors are purchasing the foregoing securities for an aggregate purchase price of $2,500,000.

The Company issued to the Investors, an aggregate of $1,153,320 in principal amount of Notes, the shares of common stock issuable from time to time upon conversion of such Registered Notes and all of the 89,285 Commitment Shares were issued to the Investors in a registered direct offering and registered under the Securities Act of 1933. Approximately $1,153,320 of the Notes will be issued pursuant to an effective shelf registration statement.

The Company issued to the Investors in a concurrent private placement pursuant to an exemption from the registration requirements of the Securities Act, the remaining aggregate of $1,624,457.78 in principal amount of other Notes, the shares of Common Stock issuable from time to time upon conversion of such other Notes, the Warrants and the Warrant Shares.

In connection with the Purchase Agreement, the Company and certain of its subsidiaries entered into a security agreement, dated as of August 5, 2019, with the Investors, pursuant to which the Company and its subsidiary granted to the Investors a security interest in, among other items, the Company and its subsidiaries’ accounts, chattel paper, documents, equipment, general intangibles, instruments and inventory, and all proceeds, as set forth in the Security Agreement. In addition, pursuant to an Intellectual Property Security Agreement, dated as of August 5, 2019, the Company granted to the Investors a continuing security interest in all of the Company’s right, title and interest in, to and under certain of the Company’s trademarks, copyrights and patents. In addition, certain of the Company’s subsidiary jointly and severally agreed to guarantee and act as surety for the Company’s obligation to repay the Notes pursuant to a subsidiary guarantee.

 

*************************************

 

2623
 

 

Item 2.Management’s2. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operation.

 

This Report contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The words “believe,” “expect,” “anticipate,” “intend,” “estimate,” “may,” “should,” “could,” “will,” “plan,” “future,” “continue,” and other expressions that are predictions of or indicate future events and trends and that do not relate to historical matters identify forward-looking statements. These forward-looking statements are based largely on our expectations or forecasts of future events, can be affected by inaccurate assumptions, and are subject to various business risks and known and unknown uncertainties, a number of which are beyond our control. Therefore, actual results could differ materially from the forward-looking statements contained in this document, and readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on such forward-looking statements. We undertake no obligation to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise. A wide variety of factors could cause or contribute to such differences and could adversely impact revenues, profitability, cash flows and capital needs. There can be no assurance that the forward-looking statements contained in this document will, in fact, transpire or prove to be accurate.

 

Factors that could cause or contribute to our actual results differing materially from those discussed herein or for our stock price to be adversely affected include, but are not limited to: (1) our losses in recent years, including the six months ended June 30, 2019 and fiscal 2017 and 2016, and our ability to pay the Debentures and Notes when due;2018; (2) macro-economic risks from the effects of the decrease in budgets for the law-enforcement community; (3) our ability to increase revenues, increase our margins and return to consistent profitability in the current economic and competitive environment, including whether deliveries will resume under the AMR contract;environment; (4) our operation in developing markets and uncertainty as to market acceptance of our technology and new products; (5) the availability of funding from federal, state and local governments to facilitate the budgets of law enforcement agencies, including the timing, amount and restrictions on such funding; (6) our ability to deliver our new product offerings as scheduled andin 2019, such as the EVO-HD, have such new products perform as planned or advertised;advertised and whether they will help increase our revenues; (7) whether therewe will be commercial markets,able to increase the sales, domestically and internationally, for one or more of our newer products, and the degree to which the interest shown in our products includingin the DVM-800 HD, FirstVU HD, VuLink, VuVault.net, FleetVU and MicroVU HD, will translate into sales during 2017;future; (8) our ability to maintain or expand our share of the market for our products in the domestic and international markets in which we compete, including increasing our international revenues to their historical levels;revenues; (9) our ability to produce our products in a cost-effective manner; (10) competition from larger, more established companies with far greater economic and human resources; (11) our ability to attract and retain quality employees; (12) risks related to dealing with governmental entities as customers; (13) our expenditure of significant resources in anticipation of sales due to our lengthy sales cycle and the potential to receive no revenue in return; (14) characterization of our market by new products and rapid technological change; (15) our dependence on sales of our DVM-800, DVM-800 HD, FirstVU First VU HD and DVM-250 products; (16) potential that stockholders may lose all or part of their investment if we are unable to compete in our markets and return to profitability; (17) defects in our products that could impair our ability to sell our products or could result in litigation and other significant costs; (18) our dependence on key personnel; (19) our reliance on third-party distributors and sales representatives for part of our marketing capability; (20) our dependence on a few manufacturers and suppliers for components of our products and our dependence on domestic and foreign manufacturers for certain of our products; (21) our ability to protect technology through patents and to protect our proprietary technology and information as trade secrets and through other similar means; (22) our ability to generate more recurring cloud and service revenues; (23) risks related to our license arrangements; (24) our revenues and operating results may fluctuate unexpectedly from quarter to quarter; (25) sufficient voting power by coalitions of a few of our larger stockholders, including directors and officers, to make corporate governance decisions that could have significant effect on us and the other stockholders; (26) sale of substantial amounts of our common stock that may have a depressive effect on the market price of the outstanding shares of our common stock; (27) possible issuance of common stock subject to options and warrants that may dilute the interest of stockholders; (28) our ability to comply with Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 Section 404 as it may be required; (29) our nonpayment of dividends and lack of plans to pay dividends in the future; (30)(29) future sale of a substantial number of shares of our common stock that could depress the trading price of our common stock, lower our value and make it more difficult for us to raise capital; (31)(30) our additional securities available for issuance, which, if issued, could adversely affect the rights of the holders of our common stock; (32)(31) our stock price is likely to be highly volatile due to a number of factors, including a relatively limited public float; (33)(32) whether our appeal of the Court’s summary judgment ruling will be successful and whether the legal actions that the Company is taking or has takenlitigation against Utility Associates, Axon and WatchGuard will achieve theirits intended objectives; (34)objectives and result in monetary recoveries for us; (33) whether the USPTO rulings will curtail, eliminate or otherwise have an effect on the actions of Axon WatchGuard and Utility Associatesother competitors respecting us, our products and customers; (35)(34) whether the remaining two claims under the ‘556’556 Patent have applicability to us or our products; and (36)(35) whether our patented VuLink technology is becoming thede-facto “standard” for agencies engaged in deploying state-of-the-art body-worn and in-car camera systems;systems and will increase our revenues; (36) the outcome of our development of a documentation and validation program with KMC Brands for the Hemp industry; (37) the USPTO’s decision on Watchguard’s petition seeking IPR of the ‘950 Patent; (38) whether such technology will have a significant impact on our revenues in the long-term; and (39)(38) indemnification of our officers and directors.

 

2724
 

 

Current Trends and Recent Developments for the Company

 

Overview

 

We supply technology-based products utilizing our portable digital video and audio recording capabilities, for the law enforcement and security industries and for the commercial fleet and mass transit markets. We have the ability to integrate electronic, radio, computer, mechanical, and multi-media technologies to create unique solutions to our customers’ requests. We began shipping our flagshipOur products include the DVM-800 and DVM-800 Lite, in-car digital video mirror product in March 2006. We have developed additional products to complement our original in-car digital video products, including an array of in-car digital video mirrors (the DVM-100, DVM-400, DVM-800, DVM-800 HD and MicroVU HD), and body worn camera (FirstVU HD) products designedsystems for law enforcement usage. In recent years we have launched the following products:enforcement; the FirstVU HD; DVM-800;and the DVM-800 HD; the MicroVU HD; theFirstVU HD, body-worn cameras; our patented and revolutionary VuLink product, which integrates our body-worn cameras with our in-car systems by providing hands-free automatic activation;activation, for both law enforcement and commercial markets; the DVM-250 and DVM-250 Plus, a commercial line of digital video mirrors (the DVM-250 and DVM-250 Plus) that serve as “event recorders” for the commercial fleet and mass transit marketsmarkets; and FleetVU and VuLink, our cloud-based evidence management systems. We introduced the EVO-HD product in orderlate June 2019 and intend to expand our customer base beyondbegin full-scale deployments in the traditionalthird quarter 2019. It is designed and built on a new and highly advanced technology platform that will become the platform for a new family of in-car video solution products for the law enforcement agencies. We have additional research and development projects that we anticipate will result in several new product launches in 2017 and beyond.commercial markets. We believe that the launch of these new products will help to diversifyreinvigorate our in-car and broadenbody-worn systems revenues while diversifying and broadening the market for our product offerings.

 

We experienced operating losses for all of the quarters during 20172019 and 2016.2018 except for the most recent quarter which was aided by a patent litigation settlement. The following is a summary of our recent operating results on a quarterly basis:

 

    For the Three Months Ended: 
 Sept 30, 2017 June 30, 2017 March 31, 2017 December 31, 2016 September 30, 2016 June 30, 2016 March 31, 2016  June 30,
2019
 March 31,
2019
 December 31,
2018
 September 30,
2018
 June 30,
2018
 March 31,
2018
 
Total revenue $2,983,577  $3,486,502  $5,229,860  $3,445,610  $4,339,527  $4,384,411  $4,404,943  $2,546,983  $2,550,796  $2,378,287  $2,878,059  $3,563,550  $2,471,513 
Gross profit  1,008,613   1,173,216   2,276,849   148,807   2,033,571   1,265,236   1,853,619   980,812   1,181,740   56,658   1,177,289   1,618,467   1,109,394 
Gross profit margin percentage  33.8%  33.7%  43.5%  4.3%  46.9%  28.9%  42.1%  37.3%  46.3%  2.3%  40.9%  45.4%  44.9%
Total selling, general and administrative expenses  4,125,308   3,665,813   4,079,062   4,162,802   5,275,212   4,157,893   4,191,514   (1,616,830)  4,267,898   5,292,374   3,087,005   3,055,776   3,082,710 
Operating loss  (3,116,695)  (2,492,597)  (1,802,213)  (4,013,995)  (3,241,641)  (2,892,657)  (2,337,895)
Operating income percentage  (104.5)%  (71.5)%  (34.5)%  (116.5)%  (74.7)%  (66.0)%  (53.1)%
Operating income (loss)  2,567,642   (3,086,158)  (5,235,716)  (1,909,716)  (1,437,309)  (1,973,316)
Operating loss percentage  100.8%  (121.0)%  (220.1)%  (66.4)%  (40.3)%  (79.8)%
Net loss $(3,493,306) $(2,326,523) $(2,032,955) $(4,276,900) $(3,255,579) $(2,865,084) $(2,313,125) $(387,730) $(3,205,174) $(5,327,849) $(4,665,580) $(2,962,890) $(2,588,232)

 

Our business is subject to substantial fluctuations on a quarterly basis as reflected in the significant variations in revenues and operating results in the above table. These variations result from various factors, including but not limited to: 1)(1) the timing of large individual orders; 2)(2) the traction gained by our newer products, such as the DVM-800 HD, FirstVU HD, VuLink and FleetVU; 3)(3) production, quality and other supply chain issues affecting our cost of goods sold; 4)(4) unusual increases in operating expenses, such as our sponsorship of the Digital Ally Open golf tournament, the timing of trade shows and bonus compensation; (5) the timing of patent infringement litigation settlements, such as the $6.0 settlement we obtained from WatchGuard during the second quarter 2019; and 5)(5) ongoing patent and other litigation and related expenses respecting outstanding lawsuits. We reported an operating lossincome of $3,116,695$2,567,642 on revenues of $2,983,577$2,546,983 for thirdthe three months ended June 30, 2019 primarily as a result of the $6.0 million settlement of the WatchGuard patent litigation. The income recognized in the second quarter 2017, which continued2019 ended a series of quarterly losses resulting from competitive pressures, supply chain problems, increases in inventory reserves as our current product suite ages, product quality control issues, and product warranty issues, and infringement of our patents by direct competitors such as Axon and WatchguardWatchGuard that reduced our revenues, and that hurt our gross margins.litigation expenses relating to the patent infringement.

 

28

There have been aA number of factors and trends affectingaffected our recent performance, which include:

 

 On May 13, 2019 we reached a resolution of the pending patent infringement litigation with WatchGuard and executed a settlement agreement that resulted in the dismissal of this case. As part of the settlement agreement, we received a one-time $6,000,000 payment and granted WatchGuard a perpetual covenant not to sue WatchGuard if its products incorporate agreed-upon modified recording functionality. Additionally, we granted it a license to the ’292 Patent and ’452 Patent through December 31, 2023. As part of the settlement, the parties agreed that WatchGuard is making no admission that it has infringed any of our patents. See Note 11, “Contingencies” for the details respecting the settlement.

25

Revenues decreased in third quarter 2017 to $2,983,577 from $3,486,502slightly in second quarter 2017, $5,229,8602019 to $2,546,983 from $2,550,796 in first quarter 2017, $3,445,610 in fourth quarter 2016, and $4,339,527 in third quarter 2016.2019. The primary reason for the revenue decrease in the third quarter is the halt of deliveries under the AMR contract, which was expected to generate significant revenuesdecreases in the second quarter 2019 is that we continue to face increased challenges for our in-car and third quarters of 2017. Deliveries underbody-worn systems because our competitors have released new products with advanced features and have maintained their product price cuts. We introduced a new product platform, the AMR contract were placed on hold after AMR experienced two catastrophic accidents involvingEVO-HD, specifically for in-car systems late in June 2019 to address our competitors’ new product features. This new product platform utilizes advanced chipsets that will generate new and highly advanced products for our law enforcement and commercial customers and we believe will improve product revenues in future quarters. Our law enforcement revenues declined over the loss of life in vehicles equipped with our DVM-250’s. AMR alleged that the DVM-250 units in those vehicles failedprior period due to record the accidents. We met with AMR representatives in the third quarter 2017 to discuss the accidents and the performanceprice-cutting, willful infringement of our equipmentpatents and other actions by our competitors and adverse marketplace effects related to the patent litigation. For example, one of our competitors introduced a body-camera including a plancloud storage free for one year that disrupted has disrupted the market since 2017 and has continued to re-start the contract deliveries. We have proposed to AMR that it update and upgrade its existing equipment and resume deliveries under the contract including the roll out to new locationspressure our revenues in the first quarter of 2018. AMR has yet to approve our proposal, but we are encouraged by the dialogue we have had with AMR and are hopeful that deliveries will resume under the contract during first quarter 2018, although we can offer no assurances in this regard.2019.
   
 Recognizing a critical limitation in law enforcement camera technology, during 2014 we pioneered the development of our VuLink ecosystem that provided intuitive auto-activation functionality as well as coordination between multiple recording devices. The USPTO has recognized these pioneering efforts by grantinggranted us multiple patents with claims covering numerous features, such as automatically activating an officer’s cameras when the light bar is activated or when a data-recording device such as a smart weapon is activated. Additionally, our patent claims cover automatic coordination between multiple recording devices. Prior to this work,innovation, officers were forced to manually activate each device while responding to emergency scenarios - a requirement that both decreased the usefulness of the existing camera systems and diverted officers’ attention during critical moments. We believe law enforcement agencies have recognized the value of our VuLink technology and that a trend is developing where the agencies are seeking information on “auto-activation” features in requests for bids and requests for information involving the procurement process of body-worn cameras and in-car systems. We believe this trend may result in our patented VuLink technology becoming thede-facto “standard” for agencies engaged in deploying state-of-the-art body-worn and in-car camera systems. However, the willful infringement of our VuLink patent by Axon and others has substantially and negatively impacted revenues that otherwise would have been generated by our VuLink system and indirectly our body-worn and in-car systems. We believe that the results of the current patent litigation will largely set the competitive landscape for body-worn and in-car systems for the foreseeable future. We are seeking other ways to monetize our VuLink patents, which may include entering into license agreements or supply and distribution agreements with competitors. We expect that this technology will have a significant positive impact on our revenues in the long-term, particularly if we are successful in our prosecution of the patent infringement litigation currently pending with Axon and Watchguard,we can successfully monetize the underlying patents, although we can make no assurances in this regard.
   
 ServiceWe have asserted two significant patent infringement lawsuits involving Axon and other revenues increased 21%WatchGuard that has had significant impacts on our quarterly results primarily due to the timing and amounts of legal fees expended on such lawsuits. We settled the WatchGuard lawsuit in May 2019 for $6,000,000 (see Note 11 for details) and in June 2019 the Court granted Axon’s Motion for Summary Judgment and accepted Axon’s position that it did not infringe on our patents and dismissed the Axon lawsuit in its entirety. We have appealed the Court’s ruling. Future quarterly results during 2019 and possibly beyond will continue to be impacted as this appeal is heard and if the case moves to trial. If we win the appeal and the case moves to trial, the jury will then determine whether Axon infringed on our patents. If the jury decides that Axon infringes our patents, they would then determine the amount of compensatory damages owed to us by the defendants and whether such damage awards should be trebled due to willful infringement by the defendants. In addition, there may be attempts by the defendant to settle such lawsuit prior to such trial. A jury award or potential settlement prior to trial would likely have a significant impact on our quarterly operating results if and when it occurs.
We have announced a multi-year official partnership with NASCAR, naming us “A Preferred Technology Provider of NASCAR.” As part of the relationship, we will provide cameras that will be mounted in the nine months ended September 30, 2017Monster Energy NASCAR Cup Series garage throughout the season, bolstering both NASCAR’s commitment to safety at every racetrack and enhancing its officiating process through technology. We believe this new partnership with NASCAR will demonstrate the flexibility of our product offerings and help expand the appeal of our products and service capabilities to new commercial markets.
We recently announced a new partnership with KMC Brands, based in Desoto, KS. The two companies have agreed to a five-year exploratory venture to develop a documentation and validation program that ensures that all of the industrial hemp grown and processed by KMC Brands is certified and traceable from start to finish. Working together, the companies are launching a program that can validate and document the entire process of hemp farming, processing and distribution. Our technology will make it possible for KMC Brands to track the hemp production process from the nine months ended September 30, 2016. We are concentrating on expandingfarmer who plants the seed, to the processor that makes the oils and by-products to the retailer or distribution channel. The end consumers will thus know exactly where their hemp-based product was grown and be able to trace the production process.

26

Our objective is to expand our recurring service revenue to help stabilize our revenues on a quarterly basis. Revenues from extended warranty services increasedwarranties have been increasing and were approximately $271,000$343,119 for Q-2 2019, an increase of $69,648 (25%) over the comparable quarter in 2017.2018. Additionally, revenues from cloud storage revenues increasedremained steady in Q-2 2019 at $169,874 compared to approximately $156,000$181,419 for the nine months ended September 30, 2017 compared to 2016.prior year period. We are pursuing several new market channels that do not involve our traditional law enforcement and private security customers.customers, such as our NASCAR affiliation and new validation program with KMC Brands for the Hemp industry, which we believe will help expand the appeal of our products and service capabilities to new commercial markets. If successful, we believe that these new market channels could yield substantial recurring service revenues for us in 2018. We are testing a new revenue model that involves the long-term lease of our body-worn and/or in-car hardware, together with a monthly subscription for our cloud storage, search and archiving services for the underlying audio and video material. This new service revenue model could have a substantial impact on our revenues and improve the stability of our quarter-to-quarter revenues and operating results, although we can make no assurances in this regard. We believe this service revenue model may appeal to our customers, in particular our commercial and other non-law enforcement customers, because it reduces the initial capital outlay and eliminates repairs and maintenance in exchange for making level monthly payments for the utilization of the equipment, data storage and management services.future.
   
 Our newer products, including the DVM-800 and FirstVU HD, contributed 60% of total sales for the nine months ended September 30, 2017, compared to 59% for the nine months ended Sept 30, 2016. We have recently announced the launch of the DVM-800 HD in-car video system, which we believe will give us a competitive advantage in the market. The DVM-800 HD system provides full 1080P high definition video at a cost-effective price point. In addition, our commercial event recorders (DVM-250 Plus) increased from 7% to 10% of total revenues in the period.

29

Our international revenues decreased to $326,370$69,266 (3% of total revenues) during the nine months ended September 30, 2017,second quarter 2019, compared to $1,154,412 (9%$177,404 (5% of total revenues) during the nine months ended September 30, 2016.second quarter 2018. Our thirdsecond quarter 20162019 international revenues were aided by approximately $760,000 of revenue from the sale of our FirstVU HD body worn cameras, storage systems and extended service agreement to a non-law enforcement international customer. Our 2017 revenues have been disappointing after several positive quarters in 2016;disappointing; however, the international sales cycle generally takes longer than domestic business and we have provided bids to a number of international customers. We also believe thatintend to market our new EVO-HD product along with our other products, may appeal to international customers, in particularsuch as the DVM-800 HDFleetVu driver monitoring and management service and the FirstVU HD, although we can make no assurances in this regard.internationally.

 

Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements

 

We do not have any off-balance sheet debt nor did we have any transactions, arrangements, obligations (including contingent obligations) or other relationships with any unconsolidated entities or other persons that may have material current or future effect on financial conditions, changes in the financial conditions, results of operations, liquidity, capital expenditures, capital resources, or significant components of revenue or expenses.

 

We are a party to operating leases, title sponsorship, and license agreements that represent commitments for future payments (described in Note 10 to our condensed consolidated financial statements) and we have issued purchase orders in the ordinary course of business that represent commitments to future payments for goods and services.

For the Three Months Ended SeptemberJune 30, 20172019 and 20162018

 

Results of Operations

 

Summarized immediately below and discussed in more detail in the subsequent subsectionssub-sections is an analysis of our operating results for the three months ended SeptemberJune 30, 20172019 and 2016,2018, represented as a percentage of total revenues for each respective year:

 

 

Three Months Ended

September 30,

  

Three Months Ended

June 30,

 
 2017 2016  2019 2018 
Revenue  100%  100%  100%  100%
Cost of revenue  66%  53%  63%  55%
                
Gross profit  34%  47%  37%  45%
Selling, general and administrative expenses:                
Research and development expense  28%  17%  23%  9%
Selling, advertising and promotional expense  35%  32%  48%  20%
Stock-based compensation expense  16%  10%  23%  17%
General and administrative expense  59%  63%  78%  39%
Patent litigation settlement  (236)%  %
        
Total selling, general and administrative expenses  138%  122%  (64)%  85%
Operating loss  (104%)  (75%)
Change in fair value of secured notes payable  (1%)  —% 
        
Operating income (loss)  101%  (40)%
Change in fair value of secured convertible debentures  %  (23)%
Change in fair value of proceeds investment agreement  (116)%  %
Secured convertible debenture issuance expenses  %  (6)%
Change in warrant derivative liabilities  %  (9)%
Other income and interest expense, net  (12%)  —%   %  (5)%
        
Loss before income tax benefit  (117%)  (75%)  (15)%  (83)%
Income tax (provision)  —%   —%   %  %
        
Net loss  (117%)  (75%)  (15)%  (83)%
                
Net loss per share information:                
Basic $(0.56) $(0.61) $(0.03) $(0.42)
Diluted $(0.56) $(0.61) $(0.03) $(042)

 

3027
 

 

Revenues

 

Our current product offerings include the following:

 

Product Description 

Retail

Price

  Description Retail Price 
EVO HD An in-car digital audio/video system which records in 1080P high definition video and is designed for law enforcement and commercial fleet customers. This system includes two cameras and can use up to four external cameras for a total of four video streams. This system includes integrated, patented VuLink technology, internal GPS, and an internal Wi-Fi Module. The system includes the choice between a Wireless Microphone Kit or the option to use the FirstVu HD Body Camera as the wireless microphone. This system also includes a three-year Advanced Exchange Warranty. We offer a cloud storage solution to manage the recorded evidence and we charge a monthly device license fee for our cloud storage. $4,795 
DVM-750 An in-car digital audio/video system that is integrated into a rear view mirror primarily designed for law enforcement customers. We offer local storage as well as cloud storage solutions to manage the recorded evidence. We charge a monthly storage fee for our cloud storage option and a one-time fee for the local storage option. $3,995  An in-car digital audio/video system that is integrated into a rear view mirror primarily designed for law enforcement customers. We offer local storage as well as cloud storage solutions to manage the recorded evidence. We charge a monthly storage fee for our cloud storage option and a one-time fee for the local storage option. This product is being discontinued and phased out of our product line. $2,995 
MicroVU HD A compact in-car digital audio/video system that records in high definition primarily designed for law enforcement customers. This system uses an internal fixed focus camera that records in high definition quality. $2,595 
DVM-100 An in-car digital audio/video system that is integrated into a rear view mirror primarily designed for law enforcement customers. This system uses an integrated fixed focus camera. $1,895  An in-car digital audio/video system that is integrated into a rear view mirror primarily designed for law enforcement customers. This system uses an integrated fixed focus camera. This product is being discontinued and phased out of our product line. $1,895 
DVM-400 An in-car digital audio/video system that is integrated into a rear view mirror primarily designed for law enforcement customers. This system uses an external zoom camera. $2,795  An in-car digital audio/video system that is integrated into a rear view mirror primarily designed for law enforcement customers. This system uses an external zoom camera. This product is being discontinued and phased out of our product line. $2,795 
DVM-250 Plus An in-car digital audio/video system that is integrated into a rear view mirror primarily designed for commercial fleet customers. We offer a web-based, driver management and monitoring analytics package for a monthly service fee that is available for our DVM-250 customers. $1,295  An in-car digital audio/video system that is integrated into a rear view mirror primarily designed for commercial fleet customers. We offer a web-based, driver management and monitoring analytics package for a monthly service fee that is available for our DVM-250 customers. $1,295 
DVM-800 HD An in-car digital audio/video system which records in full 1080P high definition video that is integrated into a rear view mirror primarily designed for law enforcement customers. This system can use an internal fixed focus camera or two external cameras for a total of four video streams. We also offer the Premium Package which has additional warranty and retails for $4,795. We offer local storage as well as cloud storage solutions to manage the recorded evidence. We charge a monthly storage fee for our cloud storage option and a one-time fee for the local storage option. $4,295 
DVM-800 An in-car digital audio/video system which records in 480P standard definition video that is integrated into a rear view mirror primarily designed for law enforcement customers. This system can use an internal fixed focus camera or two external cameras for a total of four video streams. We also offer the Premium Package which has additional warranty and retails for $3,995. We offer local storage as well as cloud storage solutions to manage the recorded evidence. We charge a monthly storage fee for our cloud storage option and a one-time fee for the local storage option. $3,495  An in-car digital audio/video system which records in 480P standard definition video that is integrated into a rear view mirror primarily designed for law enforcement customers. This system can use an internal fixed focus camera or two external cameras for a total of four video streams. This system also includes the Premium Package which has additional warranty. We offer local storage as well as cloud storage solutions to manage the recorded evidence. We charge a monthly storage fee for our cloud storage option and a one-time fee for the local storage option. $3,995 
Laser Ally A hand-held mobile speed detection and measurement device that uses light beams rather than sound waves to measure the speed of vehicles. $1,995 
DVM-800 Lite An in-car digital audio/video system which records in 480P standard definition video that is integrated into a rear view mirror primarily designed for law enforcement customers. This system can use an internal fixed focus camera or two external cameras for a total of four video streams. This system also includes the Premium Package which has additional warranty. We offer local storage as well as cloud storage solutions to manage the recorded evidence. We charge a monthly storage fee for our cloud storage option and a one-time fee for the local storage option. This system is replacing the DVM-100 and DVM-400 product offerings and allows the customer to configure the system to their needs.  

Various based on configuration

 

 

 
FirstVU HD A body-worn digital audio/video camera system primarily designed for law enforcement customers. We also offer a cloud based evidence storage and management solution for our FirstVU HD customers for a monthly service fee. $595  A body-worn digital audio/video camera system primarily designed for law enforcement customers. We also offer a cloud based evidence storage and management solution for our FirstVU HD customers for a monthly service fee. $595 
VuLink An in-car device that enables an in-car digital audio/video system and a body worn digital audio/video camera system to automatically and simultaneously start recording. $495  An in-car device that enables an in-car digital audio/video system and a body worn digital audio/video camera system to automatically and simultaneously start recording. $495 

 

3128
 

 

We sell our products and services to law enforcement and commercial customers in the following manner:

 

 Sales to domestic customers are made directly to the end customer (typically a law enforcement agency or a commercial customer) through our sales force, comprised of our employees. Revenue is recorded when the product is shipped to the end customer.
   
 Sales to international customers are made through independent distributors who purchase products from us at a wholesale price and sell to the end user (typically law enforcement agencies or a commercial customer) at a retail price. The distributor retains the margin as its compensation for its role in the transaction. The distributor generally maintains product inventory, customer receivables and all related risks and rewards of ownership. Revenue is recorded when the product is shipped to the distributor consistent with the terms of the distribution agreement.
   
 Repair parts and services for domestic and international customers are generally handled by our inside customer service employees. Revenue is recognized upon shipment of the repair parts and acceptance of the service or materials by the end customer.

 

We may discount our prices on specific orders based upon the size of the order, the specific customer and the competitive landscape. We believe that our systems are at least comparable to those of our principal competitors and are generally lower priced when considering comparable features and capabilities.

 

Revenues for the third quarters of 2017second quarter 2019 and 2016second quarter 2018 were derived from the following sources:

 

  Three months ended September 30, 
  2017  2016 
DVM-800 and DVM 800HD  47%  32%
FirstVU HD  12%  22%
DVM-750  8%  10%
DVM- 250 Plus  6%  5%
Cloud service revenue  3%  1%
DVM-100 & 400  2%  1%
VuLink  1%  3%
LaserAlly  1%  %
Repair and service  8%  5%
Accessories and other revenue  12%  21%
   100%  100%

  Three months ended June 30, 
  2019  2018 
DVM-800  35%  50%
FirstVu HD  12%  11%
Repair and service  15%  9%
DVM-250 Plus  9%  5%
Cloud service revenue  7%  5%
EVO HD  3%  %
VuLink  1%  3%
DVM-750  %  4%
DVM-100 & DVM-400  %  1%
Accessories and other revenues  18%  12%
   100%  100%

 

Product revenues for the three months ended SeptemberJune 30, 20172019 and 20162018 were $2,521,663$1,945,724 and $3,836,691,$2,993,700, respectively, a decrease of $1,315,028 (34%$1,047,976 (35%), due to the following factors:

 

 The primary reason for the revenue decrease in the third quarter was the halt of deliveries under the AMR contract, which was expected to generate significantIn general, we have experienced pressure on our revenues in the secondas our in-car and third quarters of 2017, as discussed above.body-worn systems are facing increased competition because our competitors have released new products with advanced features. Additionally, our law enforcement revenues declined over the prior period due to price-cutting, willful infringement of our patents and other actions by our competitors, and adverse marketplace effects related to the patent litigation. litigation and supply chain issues. We introduced our EVO-HD late in second quarter 2019 with the goal of enhancing our product line features to meet these competitive challenges.
We shipped one individual ordersorder in excess of $100,000, for a total of approximately $153,000$179,700 in revenue and deferred revenue for the three months ended SeptemberJune 30, 20172019, compared to three individual orders in excess of $100,000 for the three months ended June 30, 2018 for a total of approximately $1,133,000$493,000 in revenue and deferred revenue for the three months ended September 30, 2016.revenue. Our average order size decreased to approximately $2,410$2,025 in the three months ended SeptemberJune 30, 20172019 from $2,875$2,275 during the three months ended SeptemberJune 30 2016. Our DVM-800 in-car video product represented 47% of total revenues.2018. For certain opportunities that involve multiple units and/or multi-year contracts, we have occasionally discounted our products to gain or retain market share and revenues.

32

We have recently announced the launch of the DVM-800 HD in-car video system, which we believe will give us a competitive advantage in the market. The DVM-800 HD system provides full 1080P high definition video at a cost-effective price point that is comparable feature-wise with our competitor’s products, but at a better price-point.
   
 Our international revenues decreased to $236,524 (8%$69,266 (3% of total revenues) during thirdsecond quarter 2017,2019, compared to $827,452 (19%$177,404 (5% of total revenues) during thirdsecond quarter 2016. Third2018. Our second quarter 20162019 international revenues were aided by approximately $760,000disappointing; however, the international sales cycle generally takes longer than domestic business and we have provided bids to a number of revenue generated by an order from a non-law enforcement international customer forcustomers. We are marketing our newer products, including the FleetVu driver monitoring and management service and the FirstVU HD, body worn cameras, storage systems and extended service agreement.internationally.

 

29

Service and other revenues for the three months ended SeptemberJune 30, 20172019 and 20162018 were $461,914$601,259 and $502,836,$569,850, respectively, a decreasean increase of $40,922 (8%$31,409 (6%), due to the following factors:reasons noted above.

 

Cloud revenues were $118,016 and $45,622 for the three months ended September 30, 2017 and 2016, respectively, an increase of $72,394 (159%). We have experienced increased interest in our cloud solutions for law enforcement and several of our commercial customers have implemented our FleetVU and asset tracking solutions, which contributed to our increased cloud revenues in 2017. We believe the trend of increased cloud service revenues will continue for the balance of 2017 because AMR awarded us the FleetVU manager cloud storage contract for DVM-250 systems in early 2017 and an increasing number of other commercial customers have elected to utilize our recurring service fee-based FleetVu and asset tracking solutions.
 Revenues from extended warranty services were $236,628$343,119 and $142,718 for$273,471 the three months ended SeptemberJune 30, 20172019 and 2016,2018, respectively, an increase of $93,910 (66%$69,648 (25%). We have many customers whothat have purchased extended warranty packages, primarily in our DVM-800 premium service program, and we expect the trend of increased revenues from these services to continue throughout 2017.2019.
   
 Our installationCloud revenues were $14,458$169,874 and $152,197$181,419 for the three months ended SeptemberJune 30, 20172019 and 2016,2018, respectively, a decrease of $137,739 (91%$11,545 (6%). Our cloud revenues for commercial customers were down for the three months ended June 30, 2019 compared to the same period in 2018 primarily due to the timing of renewals on the AMR contract. However, with the introduction of the EVO-HD and its cloud-based platform, we have experienced increased interest in our cloud solutions for law enforcement which we hope will result in higher revenues in future quarters.
Installation service revenues were $31,791 and $22,021 for the three months ended June 30, 2019 and 2018, respectively, an increase of $9,770 (44%). Installation revenues tend to vary moregreater than other service revenue types and are more dependent on larger customer implementations. In June 2017, AMR’s installation roll out had been put on hold, which significantly reduced third quarter 2017 installation revenues. By contrast, in third quarter 2016 we had a non-law enforcement international customer complete a large installation.

 

Total revenues for the three months ended SeptemberJune 30, 20172019 and 20162018 were $2,983,577$2,546,983 and $4,339,527,$3,563,550, respectively, a decrease of $1,355,950 (31%$1,016,567 (29%), due to the reasons noted above.

 

Cost of Revenue

 

Cost of product revenue on units sold for the three months ended SeptemberJune 30, 20172019 and 20162018 was $1,709,046$1,468,828 and $2,235,489,$1,831,615, respectively, a decrease of $526,443 (24%$362,787 (20%). The decrease in cost of goods sold is commensurate with the 34%35% decrease in product revenues offset withby the cost of goods sold attributable to product cost of sales as a percentage of revenues increasing to 68% during the three months ended September 30, 201775% in 2019 from 58% for the three months ended September 30, 2016. We increased the reserve for obsolete and excess inventories by approximately $103,000 during the three months ended September 30, 2017 due to increased levels of excess component parts of older versions of PCB boards, used trade-in inventory requiring refurbishment, and legacy products. Additionally, our production department spent time reworking returned product and were not able to be as efficient manufacturing new products.61% in 2018.

33

 

Cost of service and other revenues for the three months ended SeptemberJune 30, 20172019 and 20162018 was $265,918$127,343 and $70,467,$113,468, respectively, an increase of $195,451 (277%$13,875 (12%). The primary reason for the increase is the reclassification of certain technical support personnel to generate direct installationin service and other service revenues in the three months ended September 30, 2017 compared to September 30, 2016. In recent quarters, certain members of our technical support staff have been reclassified and their respective payroll expenses are now being charged to service cost of sales for product installation instead of executive, sales and administrative payroll as they weregoods sold is primarily due to the 25% increase in 2016. The payroll reclassification for three months ended September 30, 2017 was approximately $103,000.revenues from extended warranty services which has lower margins than our cloud services.

 

Total cost of sales as a percentage of revenues increased to 66%63% during the three months ended SeptemberJune 30, 20172019 compared to 53%55% for the three months ended SeptemberJune 30, 2016.2018. We believe our gross margins will return to more normal levels in future quartersimprove during the remainder of 2019 if we improve revenue levelscan increase revenues and continue to reduce product warranty issues.

 

We had $2,417,653$3,659,264 and $1,999,920$3,287,771 in reserves for obsolete and excess inventories at SeptemberJune 30, 20172019 and December 31, 2016,2018, respectively. Total raw materials and component parts were $4,828,517$4,903,170 and $4,015,170$4,969,786 at SeptemberJune 30, 20172019 and December 31, 2016,2018, respectively, a decrease of $66,616 (1%). Finished goods balances were $5,291,233 and $4,965,594 at June 30, 2019 and December 31, 2018, respectively, an increase of $813,347 (20%$325,639 (7%). The increase in raw materials was mostly in refurbished parts for FirstVU HD products. Finished goods balances were $7,509,227 and $7,215,346 at September 30, 2017 and December 31, 2016, respectively, an increase of $293,881 (4%). The increase in finished goods was primarily in the FirstVU HD and DVM-250 products. The increase in in DVM-250 product levels is primarily attributable to the halt of deliveries under the AMR contract in 2017. The increase in the inventory reserve is primarily due to the change in sales mix of our products, which has resulted in a higher level of excess component parts of the older versions of our PCB boards and the phase out of our DVM-750, DVM-500 Plus and LaserAlly legacy products. Additionally, we increased our reserves on selected refurbished and items requiring repair during the nine months ended September 30, 2017. We believe the reserves are appropriate given our inventory levels at SeptemberJune 30, 2017.2019.

 

Gross Profit

 

Gross profit for the three months ended SeptemberJune 30, 20172019 and 20162018 was $1,008,613$950,812 and $2,033,571,$1,618,467, respectively, a decrease of $1,024,958 (50%$667,655 (41%). The decrease is commensurate with the 31%29% decrease in total revenues forand the three months ended September 30, 2017 combined with cost of sales as a percentage of revenues increasing to 66%63% during the three months ended SeptemberJune 30, 20172019 from 53%55% for the sixthree months ended SeptemberJune 30, 2016.2018. We believe that gross margins will improve during the remainder of 2017 and beyond2019 if we improve revenue levels andprimarily through the introduction of products such as the EVO-HD, continue to reduce product warranty issues.issues and shift our revenues to higher-margin cloud services. Our goal is to improve our margins to 60% over the longer term based on the expected margins of our newer products, in particular theEVO-HD, DVM-800, DVM-800 HDVuLink and FirstVU HD and our cloud evidence storage and management offering, if they continue to gain traction in the marketplace and we are able to increase our commercial market penetration for the balance of 2017 and in 2018.2019. In addition, if revenues from these products increase, we will seek to further improve our margins from them through economies of scale and more efficiently utilizing fixed manufacturing overhead components. We plan to continue our initiative onto more efficient management of our supply chain through outsourcing production, quantity purchases and more effective purchasing practices.

 

30

Selling, General and Administrative Expenses

 

Selling, general and administrative expenses were $4,125,308$(1,616,830) and $5,275,212$3,055,776 for the three months ended SeptemberJune 30, 20172019 and 2016,2018, respectively, a decrease of $1,149,904 (22%$4,672,606 (153%). OverallThe significant decrease was fueled by the patent litigation settlement of $6 million that we received in second quarter 2019. Exclusive of the patent litigation settlement, overall selling, general and administrative expenses as a percentage of sales increased to 138%172% in 2017second quarter 2019 compared to 122%85% in the same period in 2016.2018. The significant components of selling, general and administrative expenses are as follows:

 

  Three Months Ended September 30, 
  2017  2016 
Research and development expense $831,573  $731,077 
Selling, advertising and promotional expense  1,048,334   1,369,244 
Stock-based compensation expense  478,863   422,246 
Professional fees and expense  411,945   432,325 
Executive, sales and administrative staff payroll  694,475   1,641,014 
Other  660,118   679,306 
Total $4,125,308  $5,275,212 

34

  Three Months Ended June 30, 
  2019  2018 
Research and development expense $582,905  $333,760 
Selling, advertising and promotional expense  1,237,947   712,008 
Stock-based compensation expense  585,195   594,228 
Professional fees and expense  228,476   422,320 
Executive, sales and administrative staff payroll  1,090,868   431,138 
Other  657,779   562,322 
Patent litigation settlement  (6,000,000)   
Total $(1,616,830) $3,055,776 

 

Research and development expense.We continue to focus on bringing new products to market, including updates and improvements to current products. Our research and development expenses totaled $831,573$582,905 and $731,077$333,760 for the three months ended SeptemberJune 30, 20172019 and 2016,2018, respectively, an increase of $100,496 (14%$249,145 (75%). We employed a total of 3215 engineers at SeptemberJune 30, 20172019 compared to 2911 engineers at SeptemberJune 30, 2016,2018, most of whom are dedicated to research and development activities for new products. We increased our engineering staff of web-based developers as we expanded our offerings to include, among other items, cloud-based evidence storageproducts and management for our law enforcement customers (VuVault.net) and our web-based commercial fleet driver monitoring and management tool (FleetVU Manager).primarily the EVO-HD, which was launched in late second quarter 2019. Research and development expenses as a percentage of total revenues were 28%23% for the three months ended SeptemberJune 30, 20172019 compared to 17%9% for the three months ended SeptemberJune 30, 2016. We have active research and development projects on several new products, as well as upgrades to our existing product lines.2018. We consider our research and development capabilities and new product focus to be a competitive advantage and will continue to invest in this area on a prudent basis.basis and consistent with our financial resources.

Selling, advertising and promotional expenses.Selling, advertising and promotional expense totaled $1,048,334$1,237,947 and $1,369,244$712,008 for the three months ended SeptemberJune 30, 20172019 and 2016,2018, respectively, a decreasean increase of $320,910 (23%$525,939 (74%). SalesmanThe increase was primarily attributable to our sponsorship of a NASCAR race in May 2019 and other related sponsorship opportunities. Salesmen salaries and commissions representsrepresent the primary components of these overall costs and were $701,399$727,155 and $753,658$594,831 for the three months ended SeptemberJune 30, 20172019 and 2016,2018, respectively, a decreasean increase of $52,259 (7%$132,324 (22%). We increased the number of salesmen in our law enforcement and commercial channels in late 2018 and have increased travel expenses in 2019 compared to 2018. The effective commission rate was 23.5% and 17.4%28.5% for the three months ended SeptemberJune 30, 2017 and 2016, respectively.2019 compared to 16.7% for the three months June 30, 2018.

 

Promotional and advertising expenses totaled $346,935$510,792 during the three months ended SeptemberJune 30, 20172019 compared to $615,586$111,677 during the three months ended SeptemberJune 30, 2016, a decrease2018, an increase of $268,651 (44%$399,115 (357%). The decreaseincrease is primarily attributable net promotional expenses associated with being the title sponsorto sponsorship of the Web.com Tour golf tournament held annuallyNASCAR race in the Kansas City Metropolitan area being less in 2017 comparedMay 2019 and efforts to 2016. We incurred net promotional expenses of $263,047 in the third quarter 2017 relative to this sponsorship compared to $497,235expand brand awareness and leverage our relationship with NASCAR for the third quarter of 2016. The Company is also decreasing the number of trade shows attended during 2017 because it has lost some of its confidence in the efficiency and effectiveness of many of the lesser attended trade showsbusiness opportunities.

Stock-based compensation expense.Stock based compensation expense totaled $478,863$585,195 and $422,246$594,228 for the three months ended SeptemberJune 30, 20172019 and 2016,2018, respectively, a decrease of $56,617 (13%$9,033 (2%). The increase is primarily dueWe continue to the amortization of the restricted stock granted in August 2017rely on stock-based compensation during 2019 and 2018 as we attempt to the Company’s officers and other employees that had the effect of increasing the stock compensation expensereduce cash expenses for the three months ended September 30, 2017 compared to 2016.liquidity reasons.

Professional fees and expense. Professional fees and expenses totaled $411,945$228,476 and $432,325$422,320 for the three months ended SeptemberJune 30, 20172019 and 2016,2018, respectively, a decrease of $20,380 (5%$193,844 (46%). The decrease in professional fees and expenses in the three months ended September 30, 2017 compared to 2016 isare primarily attributable to lower litigationlegal fees and expenses related to the Utility,ongoing Axon and WatchGuard lawsuits. These matters continuelawsuit and the reduced litigation chargesresolution of the WatchGuard and PGA lawsuits. The PGA lawsuit was resolved on April 17, 2019 and the cost to resolve this matter was accrued as of June 30, 2019. The WatchGuard lawsuit was settled on May 13, 2019. On June 17, 2019, the Court granted Axon’s Motion for Summary Judgment which accepted Axon’s position that it did not infringe on our patent and dismissed the lawsuit in its entirety. We have appealed the Court’s ruling and are generally due to timing issues inconfident that the litigation. The Axon and Watchguard lawsuits were both under a stay order pending final USPTO rulings onappellate court will reverse the various IPR requests, which have largely been ruled in our favor. Wejudge’s decision. If we are successful with the appeal, we intend to pursue recovery from Utility, Axon WatchGuard,and their insurers and other responsible parties as appropriate. If the jury determines Axon infringed our patents, they would then determine the amount of compensatory damages owed to us and whether such damage awards should be trebled due to willful infringement by Axon. In addition, there may be attempts by Axon to settle the lawsuit prior to the trial. Such jury award and/or potential settlement prior to trial would likely have a significant impact on our quarterly operating results if and when it occurs.

 

Executive, sales and administrative staff payroll.Executive, sales and administrative staff payroll expenses totaled $694,475$1,090,868 and $1,641,014$431,138 for the three months ended SeptemberJune 30, 20172019 and 2016,2018, respectively, a decreasean increase of $946,539 (58%$659,730 (153%). The primary reason for the decreaseincrease in executive, sales and administrative staff payroll was a reduction of $730,000an increase in executivestaff from 83 at June 30, 2018 to 113 at June 30, 2019 and bonuses and the reclassification of certain technical support personnelpaid to generate direct installation and other service revenuesexecutives in the three months ended September 30, 2017 compared to September 30, 2016. We have increased our technical support staff in recent quarters to handle field inquiries and requests for product installation services because our installed customer base has expanded and additional technical support and marketing was required for our new products, such as the DVM-800 and FirstVU HD. In recent quarters, certain members of our technical support staff have been reclassified to direct services for product installation and other services for our customers and their respective payroll related expenses are now being charged to service cost of sales in 2017 compared to 2016. During thesecond quarter ended September 30, 2016 a special bonus of $630,000 was awarded to our CEO, which did not occur in 2017.2019.

Other. Other selling, general and administrative expenses totaled $660,118$657,779 and $679,306$562,322 for the three months ended SeptemberJune 30, 20172019 and 2016,2018, respectively, an increase of $95,457 (17%). The increase in other expenses in second quarter 2019 compared to second quarter 2018 is primarily attributable to higher contract employee expenses and travel costs. We have added several contract employees to our technical support teams during 2019.

31

Patent litigation settlement. The income attributable to our patent litigation settlement was $6,000,000 and $-0- for the three months ended June 30, 2019 and 2018, respectively. On May 13, 2019 we reached a decreaseresolution of $19,188 (3%).the pending patent infringement litigation with WatchGuard and executed a settlement agreement that resulted in the dismissal of this case. As part of such agreement, we received a one-time $6,000,000 payment and granted WatchGuard a perpetual covenant to not sue WatchGuard if its products incorporate agreed-upon modified recording functionality. Additionally, we granted it a license to the ‘292 Patent and ‘452 Patent through December 31, 2023. As part of the settlement, the parties agreed that WatchGuard was making no admission that it had infringed any of our patents. See Note 11, “Contingencies” for the details respecting the settlement.

 

Operating LossIncome (Loss)

 

For the reasons previously stated, our operating lossincome was $3,116,695 and $3,241,641$2,567,642 for the three months ended SeptemberJune 30, 2017 and 2016, respectively,2019 compared to an operating loss of $(1,437,309) for the three months ended June 30, 2018, an improvement of $124,946 (4%$4,004,951 (279%). Operating lossincome as a percentage of revenues increased to 104%101% in 20172019 from 75%an operating loss of (40%) in 2016.2018.

35

 

Interest Income

 

Interest income decreasedincreased to $1,761$5,628 for the three months ended SeptemberJune 30, 20172019 from $5,913$684 in 2016.

Interest Expense

We incurred interest expense of $375,0482018, which reflected our higher cash and $776 during the three months ended September 30, 2017 and 2016. We issued an aggregate of $4.0 million principal amount of Debentures on December 30, 2016 which bore interest at the rate of 8% per annum that remained outstanding at September 30, 2017. In addition, we issued Notes with a principal balance of $700,000cash equivalent levels in June 2017. One of these Notes and a new Note had an outstanding principal balance of $650,000 at September 30, 2017. No similar interest-bearing debt was outstanding during the 2016 period.

We amortized the interest expense of $288,895 and $-0-, representing the discount associated with the $700,000 Notes during the three months ended September 30, 2017 and 2016, respectively. The discount resulted from the issuance of detachable common stock purchase warrants together with the $700,000 principal amount of the Notes, which is recorded as a discount and amortized2019 compared to interest expense over the term of the Notes. The total remaining unamortized discount was $117,000 and $-0- at September 30, 2017 and 2016, respectively.2018.

 

Change in Warrant Derivative Liabilities

 

Detachable warrants exercisable to purchase a total of 398,916 shares of common stock, as adjusted, were issued in conjunction with $2.0 million and $4.0 million Secured Convertible Notes during March and August 2014. The warrants were required to be treated as derivative liabilities because of their anti-dilution and down-round provisions. Accordingly, we estimated the fair value of such warrants as of their respective dates of issuance and recorded a corresponding derivative liability in the balance sheet. Upon exercise of the warrants we recognized a gain/loss based on the closing market price of the underlying common stock on the dates of exercise. In addition, the warrant derivative liability was adjusted to the estimated fair value of any unexercised warrants as of December 31, 2017 and June 30, 2018.

The holder of the warrants exercised its option to purchase common stock for all remaining outstanding warrants during the year ended December 31, 2018. There remained no warrants classified as derivative liabilities outstanding at December 31, 2018 therefore the respective warrant derivative liability balance was $0 at June 30, 2019 and December 31, 2018 and no change in fair value was recorded for the three months ended June 30, 2019

The changes in the fair value of the warrant derivatives related to unexercised warrants resulted in a charge of $310,195 for the three months ended June 30, 2018.

Change in Fair Value of Secured Convertible Debentures

We elected to account for the $6.875 million principal amount of the 2018 Debentures issued in April and May 2018 on their fair value basis. Therefore, we determined the fair value of the 2018 Debentures which yielded an estimated fair value of $4,565,749 including their embedded derivatives as of their origination date. We also determined the estimated fair value of $5,354,803 for the debentures including their embedded derivatives as of June 30, 2018. The change in fair value of the 2018 Debentures was $842,783 from origination date to June 30, 2018, which was recognized as a loss in the Condensed Consolidated Statement of Operations. We paid these Debentures on August 21, 2018 so there was no similar fair value change in the three months ended June 30, 2019.

Change in Fair Value of Proceeds Investment Agreement

We elected to account for the Proceeds Investment Agreement (the “PIA”) that we entered into July of 2018 on its fair value basis. Therefore, we determined the fair value of the 2018 PIA as of June 30, 2019, and March 31, 2019 to be $6,240,000 and $9,279,000, respectively. During the six months ended June 30, 2019, we settled our patent infringement litigation with WatchGuard and received a lump sum payment of $6.0 million as further described in Note 11. In accordance with the terms of the PIA, we remitted the $6.0 million as a principal payment toward our minimum return payment obligations under the PIA. The change in fair value from March 31, 2019 and June 30, 2019 was $2,961,000, which was recognized as a loss in the Condensed Consolidated Statement of Operations at June 30, 2019. There was no similar PIA at June 30, 2018.

32

Secured Convertible Debentures Issuance Expenses

We elected to account for and record our $6.875 million principal amount of the 2018 Debentures issued in April and May 2018 on a fair value basis. Accordingly, we were required to expense the related issuance costs to other expense in the condensed consolidated statements of operations. Such costs totaled $220,312 for the three months ended June 30, 2018. The issuance costs included a $150,000 placement agent fee and the remainder was primarily legal fees. No similar debt issuances occurred during the three months ended June 30, 2019.

Interest Expense

We incurred interest expense of $-0- and $152,975 during the three months ended June 30, 2019 and 2018. We issued an aggregate of $6.875 million principal amount of Debentures in April and May 2018 bearing interest at the rate of 8% per annum on the outstanding principal balance.

All interest-bearing debt had been paid off prior to December 31, 2018 so there was no interest expense for the three months ended June 30, 2019.

Loss before Income Tax Benefit

As a result of the above, we reported a loss before income tax benefit of $387,730 and $2,962,890 for the three months ended June 30, 2019 and 2018, respectively, an improvement of $2,575,160 (87%).

Income Tax Benefit

We did not record an income tax related to our losses for the three months ended June 30, 2019 due to our overall net operating loss carryforwards available. We have further determined to continue providing a full valuation reserve on our net deferred tax assets as of June 30, 2019.

We had approximately $61,600,000 of net operating loss carryforwards and $1,795,000 of research and development tax credit carryforwards as of December 31, 2018 available to offset future net taxable income.

Net Loss

As a result of the above, we reported net losses of $387,730 and $2,962,890 for the three months ended June 30, 2019 and 2018, respectively, an improvement of $2,575,160 (87%).

Basic and Diluted Income (Loss) per Share

The basic and diluted loss per share was ($0.03) and ($0.42) for the three months ended June 30, 2019 and 2018, respectively, for the reasons previously noted. All outstanding stock options were considered antidilutive and therefore excluded from the calculation of diluted loss per share for the three months ended June 30, 2019 and 2018 because of the net loss reported for each period.

For the Six Months Ended June 30, 2019 and 2018

Results of Operations

Summarized immediately below and discussed in more detail in the subsequent subsections is an analysis of our operating results for the six months ended June 30, 2019 and 2018, represented as a percentage of total revenues for each respective year:

  

Six Months Ended

June 30,

 
  2019  2018 
Revenue  100%  100%
Cost of revenue  58%  55%
         
Gross profit  42%  45%
Selling, general and administrative expenses:        
Research and development expense  21%  13%
Selling, advertising and promotional expense  39%  23%
Stock-based compensation expense  26%  18%
General and administrative expense  84%  48%
Patent litigation settlement  (118)%  %
         
Total selling, general and administrative expenses  52%  102%
         
Operating loss  (10)%  (57)%
Change in fair value of secured notes payable  —%   (14)%
Change in fair value proceeds investment agreement  (60)%  %
Loss on the extinguishment of secured convertible debentures  —%   (8)%
Change in warrant derivative liabilities  —%   (5)%
Secured convertible debentures issuance expense  —%   (4)%
Other income and interest expense, net  —%   (4)%
         
Loss before income tax benefit  (70)%  (92)%
Income tax benefit  %  %
         
Net loss  (70)%  (92)%
         
Net loss per share information:        
Basic $(0.32) $(0.78)
Diluted $(0.32) $(0.78)

33

Revenues for the six months ended 2019 and 2018, respectively, were derived from the following sources:

  Six months ended June 30, 
  2019  2018 
DVM-800  39%  47%
FirstVU HD  15%  11%
DVM-250 Plus  8%  6%
Cloud service revenue  7%  6%
VuLink  2%  2%
EVO  1%  %
DVM-750  %  4%
DVM-100 & DVM-400  %  1%
Repair and service  14%  10%
Accessories and other revenues  14%  13%
   100%  100%

Product revenues for the six months ended June 30, 2019 and 2018 were $3,866,188 and $4,984,813, respectively, a decrease of $1,118,625 (22%), due to the following factors:

In general, we have experienced pressure on our revenues as our in-car and body-worn systems faced increased competition because our competitors have released new products with advanced features. Additionally, our law enforcement revenues declined over the prior period due to price-cutting, willful infringement of our patents and other actions by our competitors, adverse marketplace effects related to the patent litigation and supply chain issues. We introduced the EVO-HD late in second quarter 2019 with the goal of enhancing our product line features to meet these competitive challenges.
We shipped two individual orders in excess of $100,000, for a total of approximately $300,000 in revenue and deferred revenue for the six months ended June 30, 2019 compared to three individual orders in excess of $100,000, for a total of approximately $493,000 in revenue and deferred revenue for the six months ended June 30, 2018. Our average order size decreased to approximately $2,035 in the six months ended June 30, 2019 from $2,216 during the six months ended June 30, 2018. For certain opportunities that involve multiple units and/or multi-year contracts, we have occasionally discounted our products to gain or retain market share and revenues.
Our international revenues decreased to $105,720 (2% of total revenues) during the six months ended June 30, 2018, compared to $210,129 (3% of total revenues) during the six months ended June 30, 2018. Our international revenues for the six months ended June 30, 2019 were disappointing; however, the international sales cycle generally takes longer than domestic business and we have provided bids to a number of international customers. We plan to market the EVO-HD along with our other products, including the FleetVu driver monitoring and management service and the FirstVU HD, internationally.

34

Service and other revenues for the six months ended June 30, 2019 and 2018 were $1,231,591 and $1,050,250, respectively, an increase of $181,341 (17%), due to the following factors:

Revenues from extended warranty services were $670,689 and $526,133 for the six months ended June 30, 2019 and 2018, respectively, an increase of $144,556 (27%). We have many customers that have purchased extended warranty packages, primarily in our DVM-800 premium service program, and we expect the trend of increased revenues from these services to continue throughout 2019.
Cloud revenues were $349,337 and $326,741 for the six months ended June 30, 2019 and 2018, respectively, an increase of $22,596 (7%). We have experienced increased interest in our cloud solutions for law enforcement primarily due to the deployment of our new cloud-based EVO-HD in-car system which contributed to our increased cloud revenues in six months ended June 30, 2019. We expect this trend to continue for 2019 as the migration from local storage to cloud storage continues in our customer base.
Installation service revenues were $83,027 and $46,565 for the six months ended June 30, 2019 and 2018, respectively, an increase of $36,462 (78%). Installation revenues tend to vary greater than other service revenue types and are more dependent on larger customer implementations.

Total revenues for the six months ended June 30, 2019 and 2018 were $5,097,779 and $6,035,063, respectively, a decrease of $937,284 (16%), due to the reasons noted above.

Cost of Revenue

Cost of product revenue on units sold for the six months ended June 30, 2019 and 2018 was $2,731,899 and $3,080,360, respectively, a decrease of $348,461 (11%). The decrease in cost of goods sold is commensurate with the 22% decrease in product revenues offset by the cost of goods sold attributable to product cost of sales as a percentage of revenues increasing to 71% in 2019 from 62% in 2018.

Cost of service and other revenues for the six months ended June 30, 2018 and 2017 was $233,328 and $226,842, respectively, an increase of $6,486 (3%). The increase in service and other cost of goods sold is primarily due to the 17% increase in service revenues for the six months ended June 30, 2019 compared to 2018.

Total cost of sales as a percentage of revenues increased to 58% during the six months ended June 30, 2019 compared to 55% for the six months ended June 30, 2018. We believe our gross margins will improve during the remainder of 2019 if we can increase revenues and continue to reduce product warranty issues.

Gross Profit

Gross profit for the six months ended June 30, 2019 and 2018 was $2,132,552 and $2,727,861, respectively, a decrease of $595,309 (22%). The decrease is primarily attributable to the 16% decrease in revenues and the cost of sales as a percentage of revenues increasing to 58% during the six months ended June 30, 2019 from 55% for the six months ended June 30, 2018. We believe that gross margins will improve during 2019 if we improve revenue levels primarily through the introduction of products such as the EVO-HD, continue to reduce product warranty issues and shift our revenues to higher-margin cloud services. Our goal is to improve our margins to 60% over the longer term based on the expected margins of our EVO-HD, DVM-800, VuLink and FirstVU HD and our cloud evidence storage and management offering, if they gain traction in the marketplace and we are able to increase our commercial market penetration in 2019. In addition, if revenues from these products increase, we will seek to further improve our margins from them through economies of scale and more efficiently utilizing fixed manufacturing overhead components. We plan to continue our initiative to more efficient management of our supply chain through outsourcing production, quantity purchases and more effective purchasing practices.

35

Selling, General and Administrative Expenses

Selling, general and administrative expenses were $2,651,068 and $6,138,486 for the six months ended June 30, 2019 and 2018, respectively, a decrease of $3,487,418 (57%). The significant decrease was fueled by the patent litigation settlement of $6.0 million that we received in second quarter 2019. Exclusive of the patent litigation settlement overall selling, general and administrative expenses as a percentage of sales increased to 170% for the six months ended June 30, 2019 compared to 102% in the same period in 2018. The significant components of selling, general and administrative expenses are as follows:

  Six Months Ended June 30, 
  2019  2018 
Research and development expense $1,045,076  $773,880 
Selling, advertising and promotional expense  1,993,936   1,386,413 
Stock-based compensation expense  1,310,393   1,087,746 
Professional fees and expense  1,169,452   810,905 
Executive, sales and administrative staff payroll  1,705,289   953,918 
Other  1,426,922   1,125,624 
Patent litigation settlement  (6,000,000)   
Total $2,651,068  $6,138,486 

Research and development expense.We continue to focus on bringing new products to market, including updates and improvements to current products; however, we are now relying more on contracted engineering services on an “as-needed” basis. Our research and development expenses totaled $1,045,076 and $773,880 for the six months ended June 30, 2019 and 2018, respectively, an increase of $271,196 (35%). We employed 15 engineers at June 30, 2019 compared to 11 engineers at June 30, 2018, most of whom are dedicated to research and development activities for new products and primarily the EVO-HD, which we launched in late second quarter 2019. Research and development expenses as a percentage of total revenues were 21% for the six months ended June 30, 2019 compared to 13% for the six months ended June 30, 2018 We consider our research and development capabilities and new product focus to be a competitive advantage and will continue to invest in this area on a prudent basis and consistent with our financial resources.

Selling, advertising and promotional expenses.Selling, advertising and promotional expense totaled $1,993,936 and $1,386,413 for the six months ended June 30, 2019 and 2018, respectively, an increase of $607,523 (44%). Salesman salaries and commissions represent the primary components of these costs and were $1,359,129 for the six months ended June 30, 2019 compared to $1,189,667 for the six months ended June 30, 2018, an increase of $169,462 (14%). We increased the number of salesmen in our law enforcement and commercial channels in late 2018 and increased travel expenses in 2019 compared to 2018. The overall effective commission rate was 26.7% for the six months ended June 30, 2019 compared to 19.7% for the six months ended June 30, 2018.

Promotional and advertising expenses totaled $634,807 during the six months ended June 30, 2019 compared to $191,246 during the six months ended June 30, 2018, an increase of $443,561 (232%). The increase is primarily attributable to sponsorship of the NASCAR race in May 2019 and efforts to expand brand awareness and leverage our relationship with NASCAR for business opportunities.

Stock-based compensation expense.Stock based compensation expense totaled $1,310,393 and $1,087,746 for the six months ended June 30, 2018 and 2017, respectively, an increase of $222,647 (20%). The increase is primarily due to the increased amortization during the six months ended June 30, 2019 related to the restricted stock granted during 2019 and 2018 to our officers, directors, and other employees. We relied more on stock-based compensation during 2019 and 2018 resulting in increased stock-based compensation as we attempted to reduce cash expenses for liquidity reasons.

Professional fees and expense. Professional fees and expenses totaled $1,169,452 and $810,905 for the six months ended June 30, 2019 and 2018, respectively, an increase of $358,547 (44%). The professional fees are primarily attributable to legal fees and expenses related to the ongoing Axon lawsuit and the resolution of the WatchGuard and PGA lawsuits. The PGA lawsuit was resolved on April 17, 2019 and the cost to resolve this matter was accrued as of June 30, 2019. The WatchGuard lawsuit was settled on May13, 2019. On June 17, 2019, the Court granted Axon’s Motion for Summary Judgment which accepted Axon’s position that it did not infringe on our patent and dismissed the lawsuit in its entirety. We have appealed the Court’s ruling and are confident that the appellate court will reverse the judge’s decision. If we are successful with the appeal, we intend to pursue recovery from Axon and their insurers and other responsible parties as appropriate. If the juries determine Axon infringed our patents, they would then determine the amount of compensatory damages owed to us and whether such damage awards should be trebled due to willful infringement by Axon. In addition, there may be attempts by Axon to settle the lawsuit prior to the trial. Such jury award and/or potential settlement prior to trial would likely have a significant impact on our quarterly operating results if and when they occur.

Executive, sales and administrative staff payroll.Executive, sales and administrative staff payroll expenses totaled $1,705,289 and $953,918 for the six months ended June 30, 2019 and 2018, respectively, an increase of $751,371 (79%). The primary reason for the increase in executive, sales and administrative staff payroll was an increase in staff from 83 at June 30, 2018 to 113 at June 30, 2019 and bonuses paid to executives during the six months ended June 30, 2019.

36

Other. Other selling, general and administrative expenses totaled $1,426,922 and $1,125,624 for the six months ended June 30, 2019 and 2018, respectively, an increase of $301,298 (27%). The increase in other expenses in the six months ended June 30, 2019 compared to 2018 is primarily attributable to higher contract employee expenses and travel costs. We have added several contract employees to our technical support teams during 2019.

Patent litigation settlement. The income attributable to our patent litigation settlement was $6,000,000 and $-0- for the six months ended June 30, 2019 and 2018, respectively. On May 13, 2019 we reached a resolution of the pending patent infringement litigation with WatchGuard and executed a settlement agreement that resulted in the dismissal of this case. As part of the settlement agreement, we received a one-time $6,000,000 payment and granted WatchGuard a perpetual covenant to not sue WatchGuard if its products incorporate agreed-upon modified recording functionality. Additionally, we granted it license to the ‘292 Patent and ‘452 Patent through December 31, 2023. As part of the settlement, the parties agreed that WatchGuard made no admission that it had infringed any of our patents. See Note 11, “Contingencies” for the details respecting the settlement.

Operating Loss

For the reasons previously stated, our operating loss was $518,516 and $3,410,625 for the six months ended June 30, 2019 and 2018, respectively an improvement of $2,892,109 (84%). Operating loss as a percentage of revenues decreased to 10% for the first six months of 2019 from 57% for the same period in 2018.

Interest Income

Interest income increased to $23,612 for the six months ended June 30, 2019 from $2,300 in 2018 which reflected our overall higher cash and cash equivalent levels in 2019 compared to 2018.

Interest Expense

We incurred interest expense of $-0- and $283,203 during the six months ended June 30, 2019 and 2018. We issued an aggregate of $6.875 million principal amount of Debentures in April and May 2018 bearing interest at the rate of 8% per annum on the outstanding principal balance.

All interest bearing debt had been paid off prior to December 31, 2018 so there was no interest expense for the six months ended June 30, 2019.

Change in Warrant Derivative Liabilities

Detachable warrants exercisable to purchase a total of 398,916 shares of common stock, as adjusted, were issued in conjunction with $2.0 million and $4.0 million Secured Convertible Notes during March and August 2014. The warrants were required to be treated as derivative liabilities because of their anti-dilution and down-round provisions. Accordingly, we estimated the fair value of such warrants as of their respective date of issuance and recorded a corresponding derivative liability in the balance sheet. Upon exercise of the warrants we recognized a gain/loss based on the closing market price of the underlying common stock on the date of exercise. In addition, the warrant derivative liability iswas adjusted to the estimated fair value of any unexercised warrants as of December 31, 20162017 and SeptemberJune 30, 2017.2018.

The holder of the warrants exercised its option to purchase common stock for all remaining outstanding warrants during the year ended December 31, 2018. There remained no warrants classified as derivative liabilities outstanding exercisable to purchase 12,200 shares of common stock at December 31, 2016 and September 30, 2017 and2018 therefore the respective warrant derivative liability balance was $33,076$0 at December 31, 20162018 and $15,729 at Septemberno change in fair value for the six months ended June 30, 2017.2019

 

The changes in the fair value of the warrant derivatives related to unexercised warrants resulted in a gaincharge of $3,628$309,306 for the threesix months ended SeptemberJune 30, 2017 compared2018.

Secured Convertible Debentures Issuance Expenses

We elected to account for and record our $6.875 million Secured Convertible Debenture issued in April and May 2018 on a fair value basis. Accordingly, we were required to expense the related issuance costs to other expense in the condensed consolidated statements of operations. Such costs totaled $220,312 for the six months ended June 30, 2018. The issuance costs included a $150,000 placement agent fee and the remainder was primarily legal fees. No similar debt issuances occurred in 2019.

37

Loss on Extinguishment of Secured Convertible Debentures

The Board of Directors approved the Private Placement of $6.875 million of debentures and 806,667 Warrants exercisable to purchase 916,667 shares of common stock of the Company. The Private Placement closed on April 3, 2018.

The Private Placement resulted in gross proceeds of $6.25 million before placement agent fees and other expenses associated with the transaction. A portion of the proceeds was used to repay in full the Debentures issued in December 2016, which matured on March 30, 2018, and approximately $758,500 principal amount of the June Note and Secured Note that matured in March 2018. The balance of the proceeds was used for working capital purposes.

In conjunction with the transaction the Company recorded a loss on extinguishment of $19,075the secured convertible debentures totaling $500,000 for the threesix months ended SeptemberJune 30, 2016.2018. There was no similar extinguishment of secured convertible debentures in 2019.

Change in Fair Value of Proceeds Investment Agreement

We elected to account for the PIA that we entered into July of 2018 on its fair value basis. Therefore, we determined the fair value of the 2018 PIA Agreement as of June 30, 2019, and December 31, 2018 to be $6,240,000 and $9,142,000, respectively. During the six months ended June 30, 2019, we settled our patent infringement litigation with WatchGuard and it received a lump sum payment of $6.0 million as further described in Note 11. In accordance with the terms of the PIA, we remitted the $6.0 million as a principal payment toward our minimum return payment obligations under the PIA. The change in fair value from December 31, 2018 to June 30, 2019 was $3,098,000, which was recognized as a loss in the Condensed Consolidated Statement of Operations at June 30, 2019. There was no similar PIA at June 30, 2018.

 

Change in Fair Value of Secured Convertible Notes Payable

 

We elected to account for the $4.0 million principal amount of Debentures outstanding at Septemberwhich were paid off on April 3, 2018 on their fair value basis. The change in fair value of the debentures was $12,807 during the six months ended June 30, 20172018 which was recognized as a gain in the Condensed Consolidated Statement of Operations. We paid these Debentures on April 3, 2018 so there was no similar fair value change in the six months ended June 30, 2019.

We elected to account for the $6.875 million principal amount of the 2018 Debentures issued in April and December 31, 2016May 2018 on their fair value basis. Therefore, we determined the fair value of the 2018 Debentures utilizing Monte Carlo simulation models which yielded an estimated fair value of $3,183,210 and $4,000,000 for the Debentures$4,565,749 including their embedded derivatives as of September 30, 2017 and December 31, 2016, respectively. Notheir origination date. We also determined the estimated fair value was allocated toof $5,354,803 for the detachable Warrantsdebentures including their embedded derivatives as of the origination date because of the relativeJune 30, 2018. The change in fair value of the Debentures including its embedded derivative features approximated the gross proceeds of the financing transaction. We made payments of $750,000 against the Debentures on August 24, 2017. The fair value of the2018 Debentures was $3,183,210 at September 30, 2017 representing a fair value change of $6,952$842,783 from origination date to June 30, 2017,2018, which was recognized as a chargeloss in the Condensed Consolidated Statement of Operations forOperations. We paid these Debentures on August 21, 2018 so there was no similar fair value change in the threesix months ended SeptemberJune 30, 2017.2019.

 

Loss before Income Tax Benefit

 

As a result of the above, we reported a loss before income tax benefit of $3,493,306$3,592,904 and $3,255,579$5,551,122 for the threesix months ended SeptemberJune 30, 20172019 and 2016,2018, respectively, a deteriorationan improvement of $237,727 (7%$1,958,218 (35%).

 

Income Tax Benefit

 

We did not record an income tax benefit related to our losses for the threesix months ended SeptemberJune 30, 20172019 due to our overall net operating loss carryforwards available. We have further determined to continue providing a full valuation reserve on our net deferred tax assets as of SeptemberJune 30, 2017. During 2017, we increased our valuation reserve on deferred tax assets by $3,080,000 whereby our deferred tax assets continue to be fully reserved due to our recent operating losses.2019.

36

 

We had approximately $46,745,000$61,600,000 of net operating loss carryforwards and $2,110,000$1,795,000 of research and development tax credit carryforwards as of September 30, 2017December 31, 2018 available to offset future net taxable income.

 

Net Loss

 

As a result of the above, we reported net losses of $3,493,306$3,592,904 and $3,255,579$5,551,122 for the threesix months ended SeptemberJune 30, 20172019 and 2016,2018, respectively, an improvement of $237,727 (7%$1,958,218 (35%).

 

Basic and Diluted Loss per Share

 

The basic and diluted loss per share was $0.56($0.32) and $0.61($0.78) for the threesix months ended SeptemberJune 30, 20172019 and 2016,2018, respectively, for the reasons previously noted. All outstanding stock options were considered antidilutive and therefore excluded from the calculation of diluted loss per share for the threesix months ended SeptemberJune 30, 20172019 and 2016 because of the net loss reported for each period.

For the Nine Months Ended September 30, 2017 and 2016

Results of Operations

Summarized immediately below and discussed in more detail in the subsequent subsections is an analysis of our operating results for the nine months ended September 30, 2017 and 2016, represented as a percentage of total revenues for each respective year:

  

Nine Months Ended

September 30,

 
  

2017

 

  

2016

 

 
Revenue  100%  100%
Cost of revenue  62%  61%
         
Gross profit  38%  39%
Selling, general and administrative expenses:        
Research and development expense  21%  18%
Selling, advertising and promotional expense  26%  25%
Stock-based compensation expense  8%  9%
General and administrative expense  46%  52%
         
Total selling, general and administrative expenses  101%  104%
         
Operating loss  (63%)  (65%)
Other income and interest expense, net  (4%)  1%
         
Loss before income tax benefit  (67%)  (64%)
Income tax benefit  %  %
         
Net loss  (67%)  (64%)
         
Net loss per share information:        
Basic $(1.34) $(1.59)
Diluted $(1.34) $(1.59)

37

Revenues for the nine months ended 2017 and 2016, respectively, were derived from the following sources:

  Nine months ended September 30, 
  2017  2016 
DVM-800 and DVM 800HD  48%  40%
FirstVU HD  12%  19%
DVM-250 Plus  10%  7%
DVM-750  3%  7%
DVM-100 & DVM-400  2%  3%
DVM-500 Plus  %  1%
VuLink  2%  2%
Cloud service revenue  2%  1%
Repair and service  8%  5%
Accessories and other revenues  13%  15%
   100%  100%

Our commercial event recorders (DVM-250 Plus) increased from 7% to 10% of total revenues, which trend is expected to continue because of the appeal of our FleetVU driver management and monitoring tool.

Product revenues for the nine months ended September 30, 2017 and 2016 were $10,263,833 and $11,946,100, respectively, a decrease of $1,682,267 (14%), due to the following factors:

Our revenues decreased in the 2017 period compared to 2016 principally due to the AMR contract issues and a decrease in our law enforcement revenues over the prior period. Additionally, our law enforcement revenues declined over the prior period due to price-cutting and other actions by our competitors and adverse marketplace effects related to the patent litigation. Our commercial event recorder revenues were better in the nine months ended September 30, 2017 compared to 2016. In early 2017 we were awarded the AMR contract for 1,550 DVM-250 systems, as well as FleetVU manager cloud storage and system implementation, which had a positive impact on revenues. We had expected more substantial increases in our commercial event recorder revenues given the AMR contract, which was awarded in early 2017. AMR halted deliveries under the contract after it experienced two catastrophic accidents involving the loss of life in vehicles equipped with our DVM-250’s. AMR alleged that the DVM-250 units in those vehicles failed to record the accidents. We met with AMR representatives in the third quarter 2017 to discuss the accidents and the performance of our equipment including a plan to re-start the contract deliveries. We proposed that AMR update and upgrade its existing equipment and resume deliveries under the contract including a roll-out to new locations in the first quarter of 2018. AMR has yet to approve the proposal, but we are encouraged by the dialogue we have had with AMR and are hopeful that deliveries will resume under the contract during first quarter 2018 although we can offer no assurances in this regard.
We shipped nine individual orders in excess of $100,000, for a total of approximately $2,331,000 in revenue and deferred revenue for the nine months ended September 30, 2017 compared to eight individual orders in excess of $100,000, for a total of approximately $2,591,000 in revenue and deferred revenue for the nine months ended September 30, 2016. Our average order size decreased to approximately $2,740 in the nine months ended September 30, 2017 from $2,860 during the nine months ended September 30, 2016. Our newer mirror-based products include the DVM-800 and DVM-800 HD, which are sold at lower retail pricing levels compared to our legacy products. For certain opportunities that involve multiple units and/or multi-year contracts, we have occasionally discounted our products to gain or retain market share and revenues.
We have recently announced the launch of the DVM-800 HD in-car video system, which we believe will give us a competitive advantage in the market. The DVM-800 HD system provides full 1080P high definition video at a cost-effective price point that is competitive feature wise with our competitor’s products but at a better price-point.
Our international revenues decreased to $326,370 (3% of total revenues) during the nine months ended September 30, 2017, compared to $1,154,412 (9% of total revenues) during the nine months ended September 30, 2016. Our third quarter 2016 revenues were aided by approximately $760,000 of revenue from the sale of our FirstVU HD body worn cameras, storage systems and extended service agreement to a non-law enforcement international customer. Our 2017 revenues have been disappointing after several positive quarters in 2016; however, the international sales cycle generally takes longer than domestic business and we have provided bids to a number of international customers. We also believe that our new products may appeal to international customers, in particular the DVM-800 HD and FirstVU HD, although we can make no assurances in this regard.

38

Service and other revenues for the nine months ended September 30, 2017 and 2016 were $1,436,106 and $1,182,781, respectively, an increase of $253,325 (21%), due to the following factors:

Cloud revenues were $259,962 and $104,390 for the nine months ended September 30, 2017 and 2016, respectively, an increase of $155,572 (149%). We have experienced increased interest in our cloud solutions for law enforcement and several of our commercial customers have implemented our FleetVU and asset tracking solutions, which contributed to our increased cloud revenues in 2017. We believe the trend of increased cloud service revenues will continue for the balance of 2017 because AMR awarded us the FleetVU manager cloud storage contract for DVM-250 systems in early 2017 and an increasing number of other commercial customers have elected to utilize our recurring service fee-based FleetVu and asset tracking solutions. Revenues from extended warranty services were $638,982 and $368,055 the nine months ended September 30, 2017 and 2016, respectively, an increase of $270,927 (74%). We have many customers that have purchased extended warranty packages, primarily in our DVM-800 premium service program, and we expect the trend of increased revenues from these services to continue throughout 2017.
Installation service revenues were $161,408 and $175,075 for the nine months ended September 30, 2017 and 2016, respectively, a decrease of $13,667 (8%). The decrease in 2017 was partially due to AMR halting its roll out of deliveries and installations to additional locations in June 2017 as noted above.

Total revenues for the nine months ended September 30, 2017 and 2016 were $11,699,939 and $13,128,881, respectively, a decrease of $1,428,942 (11%), due to the reasons noted above.

Cost of Revenue

Cost of product revenue on units sold for the nine months ended September 30, 2017 and 2016 was $6,450,570 and $7,487,747, respectively, a decrease of $1,037,177 (14%). The decrease in cost of goods sold is commensurate with the 14% decrease in product revenues coupled with product cost of sales as a percentage of revenues decreasing to 62% in 2017 from 63% in 2016. We increased the reserve for obsolete and excess inventories by approximately $418,000 during the nine months ended September 30, 2017 due to increased levels of excess component parts of older versions of PCB boards, used trade-in inventory requiring refurbishment and legacy products.

Cost of service and other revenues for the nine months ended September 30, 2017 and 2016 was $790,691 and $488,708, respectively, an increase of $301,983 (62%). The increase in service and other cost of goods sold is commensurate with the 21% increase in service and other revenues coupled with service cost of sales increasing to 55% from 41% for the nine months ended September 30, 2017 compared to September 30, 2016. The primary reason for the increase is the reclassification of certain technical support personnel to generate direct installation and other service revenues in the nine months ended September 30, 2017 compared to September 30, 2016. In recent quarters, certain members of our technical support staff have been reclassified and their respective payroll expenses are now being charged to service cost of sales for product installation instead of executive, sales and administrative payroll as they were in 2016. The payroll reclassification for nine months ended September 30, 2017 was approximately $309,000.

Total cost of sales as a percentage of revenues increased to 62% during the nine months ended September 30, 2017 compared to 61% for the nine months ended September 30, 2016. We believe our gross margins will increase if we improve revenue levels and continue to reduce product warranty issues.

Gross Profit

Gross profit for the nine months ended September 30, 2017 and 2016 was $4,458,678 and $5,152,426, respectively, a decrease of $693,748 (13%). The decrease is primarily attributable to the 11% decrease in revenues for the nine months ended September 30, 2017 and cost of sales as a percentage of revenues increasing to 62% during the nine months ended September 30, 2017 from 61% for the nine months ended September 30, 2016. We believe that gross margins will improve in 2017 and beyond if we improve revenue levels and reduce product warranty issues. Our goal is to improve our margins to 60% over the longer term based on the expected margins of our newer products, in particular the DVM-800, DVM-800 HD and FirstVU HD, if they continue to gain traction in the marketplace and we are able to increase our commercial market penetration in 2017 and 2018. In addition, as revenues from these products increase, we will seek to further improve our margins from them through economies of scale and more efficiently utilizing fixed manufacturing overhead components. We plan to continue our initiative on more efficient management of our supply chain through outsourcing production, quantity purchases and more effective purchasing practices.

39

Selling, General and Administrative Expenses

Selling, general and administrative expenses were $11,870,183 and $13,624,619 for the nine months ended September 30, 2017 and 2016, respectively, a decrease of $1,754,436 (13%). Selling, general and administrative expenses as a percentage of sales decreased to 101% in 2017 compared to 104% in 2016. The significant components of selling, general and administrative expenses are as follows:

  Nine Months Ended September 30, 
  2017  2016 
Research and development expense $2,495,924  $2,353,081 
Selling, advertising and promotional expense  3,036,168   3,295,743 
Stock-based compensation expense  981,652   1,203,312 
Professional fees and expense  1,187,435   1,487,657 
Executive, sales and administrative staff payroll  2,065,327   3,259,773 
Other  2,103,677   2,025,053 
Total $11,870,183  $13,624,619 

Research and development expense.We continue to focus on bringing new products to market, including updates and improvements to current products. Our research and development expenses totaled $2,495,924 and $2,353,081 for the nine months ended September 30, 2017 and 2016, respectively, an increase of $142,843 (6%). We employed a total of 32 engineers at September 30, 2017 compared to 29 engineers at September 30, 2016, most of whom are dedicated to research and development activities for new products. We have increased our engineering staff of web-based developers as we expanded our offerings to include, among other items, cloud-based evidence storage and management for our law enforcement customers (VuVault.net) and our web-based commercial fleet driver monitoring and management tool (FleetVU Manager). Research and development expenses as a percentage of total revenues were 21% for the nine months ended September 30, 2017 compared to 18% for the nine months ended September 30, 2016. We consider our research and development capabilities and new product focus to be a competitive advantage and will continue to invest in this area on a prudent basis.

Selling, advertising and promotional expenses.Selling, advertising and promotional expense totaled $3,036,168 and $3,295,743 for the nine months ended September 30, 2017 and 2016, respectively, a decrease of $259,575 (8%). Salesman salaries and commissions represent the primary components of these costs and were $2,418,904 for the nine months ended September 30, 2017 compared to $2,358,745 for the nine months ended September 30, 2016, an increase of $60,159 (3%). We have increased the number of salesman in 2017 compared to 2016, in particular in our commercial sales channel. The overall effective commission rate was 20.7% and 18.0% for the nine months ended September 30, 2017 and September 30, 2016, respectively.

Promotional and advertising expenses totaled $617,264 during the nine months ended September 30, 2017 compared to $936,998 during the nine months ended September 30, 2016, a decrease of $319,734 (34%). The decrease is primarily attributable net promotional expenses associated with being the title sponsor of the Web.com Tour golf tournament held annually in the Kansas City Metropolitan area being less in 2017 compared to 2016. We incurred net promotional expenses of $263,047 in the nine months ended September 30, 2017 relative to this sponsorship compared to $499,271 for nine months ended September 30, 2016. The Company is also decreasing the number of trade shows attended during 2017 because it has lost some of its confidence in the efficiency and effectiveness of many of the lesser attended trade shows.

40

Stock-based compensation expense.Stock based compensation expense totaled $981,652 and $1,203,312 for the nine months ended September 30, 2017 and 2016, respectively, a decrease of $221,660 (18%). In 2017, the Company adopted the new accounting standard issued by the FASB to reduce the complexity of accounting for stock compensation and elected to account for stock option forfeitures as they occur. For the nine months ended September 30, 2017 there were 52,609 stock options that expired and were forfeited, which decreased stock compensation expense for the nine months ended September 30, 2017 compared to 2016. Additionally, the amortization of the restricted stock granted during 2017 and 2016 to our officers, directors, and other employees when the general market price of our common stock was lower also had the effect of decreasing the stock compensation expense for the nine months ended September 30, 2017 compared to 2016.

Professional fees and expense. Professional fees and expenses totaled $1,187,435 and $1,487,657 for the nine months ended September 30, 2017 and 2016, respectively, a decrease of $300,322 (20%). The decrease in professional fees and expenses in 2017 compared to 2016 is primarily attributable to lower litigation expenses related to the Utility, Axon and WatchGuard lawsuits. These matters continue and the reduced litigation charges are generally due to timing issues in the litigation, although the Axon and Watchguard lawsuits were both under a stay order pending final USPTO rulings on the various IPR requests which have largely now been ruled in our favor. We intend to pursue recovery from Utility, Axon, WatchGuard, their insurers and other responsible parties as appropriate.

Executive, sales and administrative staff payroll.Executive, sales and administrative staff payroll expenses totaled $2,065,327 and $3,259,773 for the nine months ended September 30, 2017 and 2016, respectively, a decrease of $1,194,446 (37%). The primary reason for the decrease in executive, sales and administrative staff payroll was a reduction of $855,000 in executive bonuses and the reclassification of certain technical support personnel to generate direct installation and other service revenues in the nine months ended September 30, 2017 compared to September 30, 2016. We have increased our technical support staff in recent quarters to handle field inquiries and requests for product installation services because our installed customer base has expanded and additional technical support and marketing was required for our new products, such as the DVM-800 and FirstVU HD. In recent quarters, we have reclassified certain members of our technical support staff to direct services for product installation and other services for our customers and their respective payroll related expenses are now being charged to service cost of sales in 2017 compared to 2016. During the nine months ended September 30, 2016 a special bonus of $630,000 was awarded to our CEO, which did not occur in 2017.

Other. Other selling, general and administrative expenses totaled $2,103,677 and $2,025,053 for the nine months ended September 30, 2017 and 2016, respectively, an increase of $78,624 (4%). The increase in other expenses in 2017 compared to 2016 is primarily attributable to increased health insurance premiums for our associates.

Operating Loss

For the reasons previously stated, our operating loss was $(7,411,505) and $(8,472,193) for the nine months ended September 30, 2017 and 2016, respectively, an improvement of $1,060,688 (13%). Operating loss as a percentage of revenues decreased to 63% for the first nine months of 2017 from 65% for the same period in 2016.

Interest Income

Interest income decreased to $10,619 for the nine months ended September 30, 2017 from $22,103 in 2016.

Interest Expense

We incurred interest expense of $536,035 and $2,438 during the nine months ended September 30, 2017 and 2016. We issued an aggregate of $4.0 million principal amount of Debentures on December 30, 2016, which bore interest at the rate of 8% per annum on the unpaid balance outstanding at September 30, 2017. In addition, we issued two Notes with a principal balance of $700,000 in June 2017. One of these Notes and a new Note had an outstanding principal balance of $650,000 at September 30, 2017. No similar interest-bearing debt was outstanding during the 2016 period.

We amortized to interest expense $288,895 and $-0-, representing the discount associated with the $1,000,000 subordinated notes during the nine months ended September 30, 2017, and 2016 respectively. The discount resulted from the issuance of detachable common stock purchase warrants together with the $700,000 principal amount of Notes, which is recorded as a discount and amortized to interest expense over the term of the underlying Notes. The total remaining unamortized discount was $117,000 and $-0- at September 30, 2017, and 2016 respectively.

41

Change in Warrant Derivative Liabilities

Detachable warrants exercisable to purchase a total of 398,916 common shares, as adjusted, were issued in conjunction with $2.0 million and $4.0 million Secured Convertible Notes during March and August 2014. The warrants were required to be treated as derivative liabilities because of their anti-dilution and down-round provisions. Accordingly, we estimated the fair value of such warrants as of their respective date of issuance and recorded a corresponding derivative liability in the balance sheet. Upon exercise of the warrants we recognized a gain/loss based on the closing market price of the underlying common stock on the date of exercise. In addition, the warrant derivative liability is adjusted to the estimated fair value of any unexercised warrants as of December 31, 2016 and September 30, 2017. There remained warrants outstanding exercisable to purchase 12,200 shares of common stock at December 31, 2016 and September 30, 2017 and the warrant derivative liability balance was $33,076 at December 31, 2016 and $15,729 at September 30, 2017.

The changes in the fair value of the warrant derivatives related to unexercised warrants resulted in a gain of $17,347 for the nine months ended September 30, 2017 compared to a gain of $18,740 for the nine months ended September 30, 2016.

Change in Fair Value of Secured Convertible Notes Payable

We elected to account for the $4.0 million principal amount of Debentures outstanding at September 30, 2017 and December 31, 2016 on their fair value basis. Therefore, we determined the fair value of the Debentures utilizing Monte Carlo simulation models which yielded an estimated fair value of $3,183,210 and $4,000,000 for the Debentures including their embedded derivatives as of September 30, 2017 and December 31, 2016, respectively. No value was allocated to the detachable Warrants as of the origination date because of the relative fair value of the Debentures including its embedded derivative features approximated the gross proceeds of the financing transaction. We made payments totaling $750,000 against the Debentures on August 24, 1997. The fair value of the Debentures was $3,183,210 at September 30, 2017 representing a fair value change of $66,790 from December 31, 2016, which was recognized as income in the Condensed Consolidated Statement of Operations.

Loss before Income Tax Benefit

As a result of the above, we reported a loss before income tax benefit of $7,852,784 and $8,433,788 for the nine months ended September 30, 2017 and 2016, respectively, an improvement of $581,004 (7%).

Income Tax Benefit

We did not record an income tax benefit related to our losses for the nine months ended September 30, 2017 due to our overall net operating loss carryforwards available. We have further determined to continue providing a full valuation reserve on our net deferred tax assets as of September 30, 2017. During 2017, we increased our valuation reserve on deferred tax assets by $3,080,000 whereby our deferred tax assets continue to be fully reserved due to our recent operating losses.

We had approximately $46,745,000 of net operating loss carryforwards and $2,110,000 of research and development tax credit carryforwards as of September 30, 2017 available to offset future net taxable income.

Net Loss

As a result of the above, we reported net losses of $7,852,784 and $8,433,788 for the nine months ended September 30, 2017 and 2016, respectively, an improvement of $581,004 (7%).

Basic and Diluted Loss per Share

The basic and diluted loss per share was $1.34 and $1.59 for the nine months ended September 30, 2017 and 2016, respectively, for the reasons previously noted. All outstanding stock options were considered antidilutive and therefore excluded from the calculation of diluted loss per share for the nine months ended September 30, 2017 and 2016 because of the net loss reported for each period.

 

4238
 

 

Liquidity and Capital Resources

 

OnManagement’s Liquidity Plan -The Company incurred substantial operating losses in recent years due to the factors cited elsewhere in this Report and has accessed the public and private capital markets to raise funding through the issuance of debt and equity. During the six months ended June 30, 2017,2019, the Company settled one of its patent infringement cases and received a lump sum payment of $6.0 million which we borrowed $700,000used to pay our obligations under unsecured notes payable with twothe PIA, as more fully described in Note 11. In recent years the Company has accessed the public and private third party lenders. The loans were represented by two promissory notes (the “Notes”)capital markets to raise funding through the issuance of debt and equity. In that bore interest at 8% per annum and were payable in cash on or beforeregard, the maturity date of September 30, 2017. The Notes were unsecured and subordinated to all existing and future senior indebtedness, as such term is definedCompany raised $1,564,000 in the Notes. Wesix months ended June 30, 2019 from the exercise of warrants. Additionally, the Company raised funding in the form of subordinated debt, secured debt and proceeds investment agreements totaling $16,500,000, and net proceeds of $7,324,900 from an underwritten public offering of common stock during the year ended December 31, 2018. The Company issued common stock with detachable common stock purchase warrants for $2,776,332 and raised funding from subordinated and secured debt totaling $1,608,500 during the year ended December 31, 2017. During 2016, the Company raised $4.0 million of funding in the form of convertible debentures and common stock purchase warrants. These debt and equity raises were utilized to fund its operations and management expects to continue this pattern until it achieves positive cash flows from operations, although it can offer no assurance in this regard.

On August 5, 2019, the Company raised funds from the issuance of $2.78 million principal balance of convertible debentures with detachable warrants to purchase 200,000571,248 shares of common stock for $3.65 per share in connection with the Notes. Such warrants are exercisable immediately and expire on June 29, 2022. Wenet proceeds being used the proceeds of this private placement for general working capital purposes. We paid one of the Notespurposes as more fully described in the principal amount of $350,000 on September 1, 2017 and extended the maturity date of the other Note to December 31, 2017.15.

 

On September 29, 2017, we borrowed $300,000 underThe Company retired all interest-bearing debt outstanding during the year ended December 31, 2018 and had no interest-bearing debt outstanding during the six months ended June 30, 2019. The only long-term obligations outstanding as of June 30, 2019 is associated with the proceeds investment agreement which the Company entered into during July 2018 that is more fully described in Note 6.

The Company will have to restore positive operating cash flows and profitability over the next year and/or raise additional capital to fund its operational plans, meet its customary payment obligations and otherwise execute its business plan. There can be no assurance that it will be successful in restoring positive cash flows and profitability, or that it can raise additional debt or equity financing when needed and obtain it on terms acceptable or favorable to the Company.

The Company has implemented an unsecured note payable withenhanced quality control program to detect and correct product issues before they result in significant rework expenditures affecting the Company’s gross margins and has seen progress in that regard. In addition, the Company undertook a private, third party lender.number of cost reduction initiatives, including a reduction of its workforce in 2018 by approximately 40%, restructuring its direct sales force and cutting other selling, general and administrative costs. The loan is represented by a promissory note (also referredCompany increased its addressable market to as the “Note”) that bears interest at 8% per annumnon-law enforcement customers and is payableobtained new non-law enforcement contracts in cash on or before the maturity date. The Note is due and payable in full on November 30, 2017 and may be prepaid without penalty at any time. The Note is unsecured2018, which contracts include recurring revenue during the period 2019 to 2020. It believes that its quality control, headcount reduction and subordinatedcost cutting initiatives, and expansion to all existingnon-law enforcement sales channels will restore positive operating cash flows and future senior indebtedness, as such term is defined inprofitability during the Note. We issued warrants to purchase 100,000 shares of common stock for $2.75 per share in connection with the Note. Such warrants are exercisable immediately and expire on September 30, 2022. We used the proceeds of this private placement for general working capital purposes.

On August 23, 2017, we closed a $3.0 million offering of our common stock and common stock purchase warrants in a registered direct offering. At the closing, we sold to institutional investors in a registered direct offering an aggregate of 940,000 shares of our common stock at a price of $3.00 per share and Series B Warrants, for gross offering proceeds of $3.0 million. For each share of common stock purchased, investors received two registered warrants, each with an exercise price of $3.36 per share (the “Series A-1 Warrant” and the “Series A-2 Warrant”). The Series A-1 Warrants are exercisable to purchase up to 680,000 shares of common stock and have a term of five years commencing six months following the closing date. The Series A-2 warrants are immediately exercisable to purchase a 200,000 shares of common stock and have a term of five years commencing on the closing date. Additionally, the Company issued to certain of the investors, in lieu of shares of common stock at closing, Series B Warrants that are immediately exercisable (the “Series B Warrant”) to purchase 60,000 shares of common stock for which the investors paid $2.99 per share at the closing and will pay $0.01 per share upon exercise of the Series B Warrant so that such investors’ beneficial ownership interest would not exceed 9.9% of the issued and outstanding shares of common stock. The Series B Warrant terminates upon exercise in full. After placement agent fees and other estimated offering expenses, the net offering proceeds to us totaled approximately $2.8 million. The foregoing warrants issued in this transaction did not contain terms that would require us to record derivative warrant liabilities that could affect our financial statements. Proceeds of the offering were used to pay a portion of the outstanding principal balance of the Debentures, retire one of the Notes and for other working capital purposes.

On December 30, 2016, we completed a private placement of $4.0 million principal amount of Debentures with two institutional investors. Such Debentures bear interest at 8% per annum payable in cash on a quarterly basis and are secured by substantially all of our tangible and certain intangible assets. In addition, we issued the investors warrants to acquire 800,000 shares of common stock at $5.00 per share. We made payments of $750,000 against the Debentures on August 24, 2017. The Debentures mature on March 30, 2018 and are convertible at any time six months after their date of issue at the option of the holders into shares of common stock at $5.00 per share. In addition, we can elect to redeem the Debentures at 112% of their outstanding principal balance and could force conversion by the holders if the market price exceeds $7.50 per share for ten consecutive trading days. We used the proceeds of this private placement for general working capital purposes.

We may findnext year, although it necessary to retire the Debentures by the payment of cash at maturity, which would be a significant requirement. We plan to obtain such funding from operations or a capital raise or a combination of the two. We believe that we have the capability to retire the Debentures by a cash payment when they become due, although we can offer no assurances in this regard.

 

If we had tomust further supplement our liquidity to support our operations in 2017,2019, given our recent history of net operating losses and negative cash flows, we do not believe that traditional banking indebtedness would be available to us given our recent operating history. Our 2017/20182019 operating plan could include raising additional capital through an asset sale, a public offering or a private placement of debt or equity.equity, all of which are under consideration as part of our strategic alternatives. We have demonstrated our ability to raise new debt or equity capital in recent years and ifmost recently by the underwritten public offering in September 2018, PIA Financing in August 2018 and the convertible note offering in August 2019. If necessary, we believe that we could raise additional capital during the next 12 months if required, but againwe can offer no assurances in this regard.

43

 

Further, we had warrants outstanding exercisable to purchase 3,013,4664,164,145 shares of common stock at a weighted average exercise price $6.84$5.71 per share outstanding as of SeptemberJune 30, 2017.2019. In addition, there are common stock purchase options outstanding exercisable to purchase 301,031416,075 shares at an average price of $19.84 per share and the recently issued 800,000 warrants at an exercise price of $5.00 per share, 200,000 warrants at an exercise price of $3.65 per share and 100,000 warrants at an exercise price of $2.75$4.28 per share. We could potentially use such outstanding warrants to provide near-term liquidity andif we could induce their holders to exercise their warrants by adjusting/lowering the exercise price on a temporary or permanent basis if the exercise price was below the then market price of our common stock, although we can offer no assurances in this regard. Ultimately, we must restore profitable operations and positive cash flows to provide liquidity to support our operations and, if necessary, to raise capital on commercially reasonable terms in 2017 and 2018.2019, although we can offer no assurances in this regard.

 

Based on the uncertainties described above, the Company believes itswe believe our business plan does not alleviate the existence of substantial doubt about itsour ability to continue as a going concern within one year after the date that the financial statements in this Report.Report are filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

 

We had $816,174$331,665 of available cash and equivalents (including $500,000 of restricted cash) and net working capital of approximately $4.7 million$4,634,857 as of SeptemberJune 30, 2017.2019. Net working capital as of SeptemberJune 30, 20172019 includes approximately $1.9$1.6 million of accounts receivable and $10.1$6.8 million of inventory.

39

 

Cash and cash equivalents balances: As of SeptemberJune 30, 2017,2019, we had cash and cash equivalents with an aggregate balance of $316,174,$331,655, a decrease from a balance of $3,883,124$3,598,807 at December 31, 2016.2018. Summarized immediately below and discussed in more detail in the subsequent subsections are the main elements of the $3,566,950$3,267,142 net decrease in cash during the ninesix months ended SeptemberJune 30, 2017:2019:

 

 Operating activities:$5,763,9481,269,447of netcash used inprovided by operating activities. Net cash provided by operating activities was $1,269,447 for the six months ended June 30, 2019 compared to cash used in operating activities was $5,763,948 and 4,726,611of $1,522,067 for the ninesix months ended SeptemberJune 30, 2017 and 2016, respectively, a deterioration2018, an improvement of $1,037,337.$2,791,514. The deteriorationimprovement was primarily the result of our improved operating results for the six months ended June 30, 2019 compared to 2018 and increases in inventory andaccounts payable offset by decreases in accrued expenses, offset by increases in deferred revenue and decreases in accounts receivable.expenses. Our goal is to increase revenues, return to profitability and decrease our inventory levels during the remainder of 2017,2019, thereby providing positive cash flows from operations, although there can be no assurances that we will be successful in this regard.
    
 Investing activities:activities: $455,516$100,589of netcash used in investing activities. Cash used in investing activities was $455,516 and $373,907$100,589 for the ninesix months ended SeptemberJune 30, 20172019 compared to cash provided by investing activities of $416,099 for the six months ended June 30, 2018. We satisfied the requirements to maintain a minimum cash balance of $500,000 on March 30, 2018 and 2016, respectively.the restriction was lifted and the funds became available for working capital needs. In 20172019 and 2016,2018, we incurred costs for an integrated display system, demo equipment, tooling of new products and for patent applications on our proprietary technology utilized in our new products and included in intangible assets.
    
 Financing activities:activities:$2,652,5144,436,000of netcash provided byused infinancing activities. Cash used in financing activities for the six months ended June 30, 2019 was $4,436,000 compared to cash provided by financing activities was $2,652,514of $1,523,096 for the ninesix months ended SeptemberJune 30, 2017 compared to cash used in financing activities of $7,862 for the nine months ended September 30, 2016. On August 23, 2017, we closed a $3.0 million offering of our common stock and common stock purchase warrants. After placement fees and other estimated offering expenses, the net offering proceeds to us totaled approximately $2.8 million prior to any exercise of the warrants. Proceeds of the offering were used to pay down a portion of the principal balance of the Debentures and one of the Notes and for general working capital purposes.2018. We received $1,000,000$1,564,000 of proceeds in the ninesix months ended SeptemberJune 30, 20172019 from the issuanceexercise of common stock warrants. On May 30, 2019, we repaid $6,000,000 under the PIA. On April 3, 2018 and May 11, 2018, we received proceeds of $6,250,000 from the 2018 Debentures and warrants, primarily for full repayment of the Notes. During 2015 we acquired2016 Debentures issued in December 2016 and other outstanding debt of the company, working capital equipment financed through capital lease obligations and payments on such obligations represented the cash used in financing activities.general corporate purposes.

 

The net result of these activities was a decrease in cash of $3,566,950$3,267,142 to $316,174$331,355 for the ninesix months ended SeptemberJune 30, 2017.2019.

 

Commitments:

 

We had $316,174$331,665 of cash and cash equivalent balances and net positive working capital approximating $4.7 million$4,634,857 as of SeptemberJune 30, 2017.2019. Accounts receivable balances represented $1,861,009$1,612,046 of our net working capital at SeptemberJune 30, 2017.2019. We intend to collect our outstanding receivables on a timely basis during the balance of 2017,2019, which would help to provide positive cash flow to support our operations during such period.the balance of 2019. Inventory represented $10,061,991$6,792,049 of our net working capital at SeptemberJune 30, 20172019 and finished goods represented $7,509,227$5,291,233 of total inventory. We are actively managing the overall level of inventory and our goal is to reduce such levels during the balance of 20172019 by our sales activities, which should provide additional cash flow to help support our operations during 2017.2019.

 

44

Capital Expenditures.We had no material commitments for capital expenditures at SeptemberJune 30, 2017.2019.

Lease Commitments-Operating Leases.Leases. We have a non-cancelable long-term operating lease agreement for office and warehouse space that expires during April 2020. We have also entered into month-to-month leases for equipment.equipment and facilities. Rent expense for the nine months ended September 30, 2017 and 2016 was $298,293 and $298,293, respectively, related to these leases.

leases was $198,861 and $198,861 for the six months ended June 30, 2019 and 2018, respectively. Following are our minimum lease payments for each year and in total.

 

Year ending December 31:   
2017(period from October 1, 2017 to December 31, 2017) $112,080 
2018  451,248 
2019  457,327 
2020  154,131 
     
  $1,174,786 
Year ending December 31:   
2019(period from July 1, 2019 to December 31, 2019) $229,170 
2020  154,131 
     
  $383,301 

 

License agreements.We have several license agreements under which we have been assigned the rights to certain materials used in its products. Certain of these agreements require us to pay ongoing royalties based on the number of products shipped containing the licensed material on a quarterly basis. Royalty expense related to these agreements aggregated $14,938 and $18,911 for the nine months ended September 30, 2016 and 2015, respectively.

Following is a summary of our licenses as of September 30, 2017:

License Type40
 

Effective

Date

Expiration
Date
Terms
Production software license agreementApril 2005April 2018Automatically renews for one-year periods unless terminated by either party.
Software sublicense agreementOctober 2007October 2018Automatically renews for one-year periods unless terminated by either party.
Software development and software services agreementJune 2015June 2018Renewable by mutual agreement of the parties unless terminated by Digital Ally for convenience.

 

Litigation.

 

The CompanyFrom time to time, we are notified that we may be a party to a lawsuit or that a claim is subjectbeing made against us. It is our policy to various legal proceedings arising from normal business operations. Althoughnot disclose the specifics of any claim or threatened lawsuit until the summons and complaint are actually served on us. After carefully assessing the claim, and assuming we determine that we are not at fault or we disagree with the damages or relief demanded, we vigorously defend any lawsuit filed against us. We record a liability when losses are deemed probable and reasonably estimable. When losses are deemed reasonably possible but not probable, we determine whether it is possible to provide an estimate of the amount of the loss or range of possible losses for the claim, if material for disclosure. In evaluating matters for accrual and disclosure purposes, we take into consideration factors such as our historical experience with matters of a similar nature, the specific facts and circumstances asserted, the likelihood of our prevailing, the availability of insurance, and the severity of any potential loss. We reevaluate and update accruals as matters progress over time.

While the ultimate resolution is unknown we do not expect that these lawsuits will individually, or in the aggregate, have a material adverse effect to our results of operations, financial condition or cash flows. However, the outcome of any litigation is inherently uncertain and there can be no assurances, based onassurance that any expense, liability or damages that may ultimately result from the information currently available, management believes that it is probable that the ultimate outcomeresolution of eachthese matters will be covered by our insurance or will not be in excess of the actionsamounts recognized or provided by insurance coverage and will not have a material adverse effect on the consolidatedour operating results, financial statement of the Company. However, an adverse outcome in certain of the actions could have a material adverse effect on the financial results of the Company in the period in which it is recorded.condition or cash flows.

 

Axon Enterprise, Inc. – (Formerly Taser International, Inc.)

The Company owns U.S. Patent No. 8,781,292 (the “ ‘292 Patent”), which is directed to a system that determines when a recording device, such as a law enforcement officer’s body camera or in-car video recorder, begins recording and automatically instructs other recording devices to begin recording. The technology described in the ‘292 Patent is incorporated in the Company’s VuLink product.

45

The Company received notice in April 2015 that Taser International, Inc., now known as Axon Enterprises, Inc. (“Axon”), had commenced an action in the USPTO for a re-examination of the ‘292 Patent. A re-examination is essentially a request that the USPTO review whether the patent should have issued in its present form in view of the “prior art,” e.g., other patents in the same technology field. The prior art used by Axon was from an unrelated third party and was not the result of any of Axon’s own research and development efforts.

On January 14, 2016 the USPTO ultimately rejected Axon’s efforts and confirmed the validity of the ‘292 Patent with 59 claims covering various aspects of the Company’s auto-activation technology. On February 2, 2016 the USPTO issued another patent relating to the Company’s auto-activation technology for law enforcement cameras. U.S. Patent No. 9,253,452 (the “ ‘452 Patent”), which generally covers the automatic activation and coordination of multiple recording devices in response to a triggering event, such as a law enforcement officer activating the light bar on the vehicle.

 

The Company filed suit on January 15, 2016 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Kansas (Case No: 2:16-cv-02032) against Axon, alleging willful patent infringement against Axon’s body camera product line.line and Signal auto-activation product. The Company later added the ‘452 patent to the suit and is seeking both monetary damages and a permanent injunction against Axon for infringement of both the ‘452 and ‘292 Patents.Patent.

 

In addition to the infringement claims, the Company added a new set ofbrought claims to the lawsuit alleging that Axon conspired to keep the Company out of the marketplace by engaging in improper, unethical, and unfair competition. The amended lawsuit alleges Axon bribed officials and otherwise conspired to secure no-bid contracts for its products in violation of both state law and federal antitrust law. The Company’s lawsuit also seeks monetary and injunctive relief, including treble damages, for these alleged violations.

 

Axon filed an answer, which denied the patent infringement allegations on April 1, 2016. In addition, Axon filed a motion to dismiss all allegations in the complaint on March 4, 2016 for which the Company filed an amended complaint on March 18, 2016 to address certain technical deficiencies in the pleadings. AxonDigital amended its complaint and Axon renewed its motion to seek dismissal of the allegations that it had bribed officials and otherwise conspired to secure no-bid contracts for its products in violation of both state law and federal antitrust law on April 1, 2016. Formal discovery commenced on April 12, 2016 with respect to the patent related claims. In January 2017, the Court granted Axon’s motion to dismiss the portion of the lawsuit regarding claims that it had bribed officials and otherwise conspired to secure no-bid contracts for its products in violation of both state law and federal antitrust law. The Company has appealed this decision to the United States Court of Appeals forOn May 2, 2018, the Federal Circuit. The Company has filed its timely, opening brief; Axon has sought but not yet recieved an extension of time in which to file its own responding brief,Circuit affirmed the District Court’s ruling and accordingly,on October 1, 2018 the matter has not yet been fully briefed or scheduledSupreme Court denied Digital Ally’s petition for argument.review.

 

In December 2016 and January 2017, Axon announced that it had commenced an action in the USPTOfiled two petitions forinter partes reviewInter Partes Review (“IPR”) of the Company’s ‘292 Patent. Previously Axon had attempted to invalidate the ‘292 Patent through a re-examination procedure at the USPTO. Axon is again attempting through its recently filed petition to convince the USPTO that Digital Ally’s patents lack patentability. Axon subsequently filed another action for an IPR against the ‘292 Patent and two more petitions against the ‘452 Patent. The USPTO rejected one of Axon’s requests on the ‘292United States Patent and instituted an investigation of the other petition. As for the ‘452 Patent, the courtTrademark Office (“USPTO”) rejected both of Axon’s requests on the petition challenging the claims at issue in the lawsuit.petitions. Axon is now statutorily precluded from filing any more IPR petitions against either the ‘292 or ‘452 Patents.Patent.

 

The District Court litigation in Kansas has beenwas temporarily stayed sincefollowing the filing of the petitions for IPR,IPR. However, on November 17, 2017, the Federal District Court of Kansas rejected Axon’s request to maintain the stay. With this significant ruling, the parties will now proceed towards trial. Since litigation has resumed, the Court has issued a claim construction order (also called aMarkmanOrder) where it sided with the Company on all disputes and denied Axon’s attempts to limit the scope of the claims. Following theMarkman Order, the Court set all remaining deadlines in the case. Fact discovery closed on October 8, 2018, and a Final Pretrial Conference took place on January 16, 2019. The parties filed motions for summary judgment on January 31, 2019.

On June 17, 2019, the Court however, requested an updategranted Axon’s motion for summary judgment that Axon did not infringe on the statusCompany’s patent and dismissed the case. Importantly, the Court’s ruling did not find that Digital’s ‘452 Patent was invalid. It also did not address any other issue, such as whether the Company’s requested damages were appropriate, and it does not impact the Company’s ability to file additional lawsuits to hold other competitors accountable for patent infringement. This ruling solely related to an interpretation of the petitionsclaims as they relate to Axon and was unrelated to the supplemental briefing the Company recently filed on its damages claim and the WatchGuard settlement. Those issues are separate and the judge’s ruling on summary judgment had nothing to do with the Company’s damages request. The Company has provided suchfiled an update afterappeal to this ruling and has asked the decision was rendered which denied the final ‘452 Patent petition. Because both of Axon’s petitions for an IPR on the ‘452 Patent that relatedappellate court to the claims in the lawsuit were denied, the Company is seeking to lift the stay and proceed with the lawsuit to a trial where the question of infringement and damages can be addressed.reverse this decision.

 

Enforcement Video, LLC d/b/a WatchGuard Video

 

On May 27, 2016 the Company filed suit against Enforcement Video, LLC d/b/a WatchGuard, Video (“WatchGuard”), (Case No. 2:16-cv-02349-JTM-JPO) alleging patent infringement based on WatchGuard’s VISTA Wifi and 4RE In-Car product lines.

 

The USPTO has granted multiple patents to the Company with claims covering numerous features, such as automatically activating all deployed cameras in response to the activation of just one camera. Additionally, Digital Ally’s patent claims cover automatic coordination as well as digital synchronization between multiple recording devices. Digital Ally also has patent coverage directed to the coordination between a multi-camera system and an officer’s smartphone, which allows an officer to more readily assess an event on the scene while an event is taking place or immediately after it has occurred.

4641
 

 

On May 13, 2019, the parties resolved the dispute and executed a settlement agreement in the form of a Release and License Agreement. The litigation has been dismissed as a result of this settlement.

The Company’s lawsuit alleges that WatchGuard incorporated this patented technology into its VISTA WifiRelease and 4RE In-Car product lines without its permission. Specifically, Digital Ally is accusing License Agreement encompasses the following key terms:

WatchGuard paid Digital Ally a one-time, lump settlement payment of $6,000,000.
Digital Ally has granted WatchGuard a perpetual covenant not to sue if WatchGuard’s products incorporate agreed-upon modified recording functionality. Digital Ally has also granted WatchGuard a license to the ‘292 Patent and the ‘452 Patent (and related patents, now existing and yet-to-issue) through December 31, 2023. The parties have agreed to negotiate in good faith to attempt to resolve any alleged infringement that occurs after the license period expires.
The parties have further agreed to release each other from all claims or liabilities pre-existing the settlement.
As part of the settlement, the parties agreed that WatchGuard is making no admission that it has infringed any of Digital Ally’s patents.

Upon receipt of infringing three patents: the ‘292 and ‘452 Patents and U.S. Patent No. 9,325,950 (the “ ‘950 Patent”). The Company is aggressively challenging WatchGuard’s infringing conduct, seeking both monetary damages, as well as seeking a permanent injunction preventing WatchGuard from continuing to sell its VISTA Wifi and 4RE In-Car product lines using Digital Ally’s own technology to compete against it. On May 8, 2017, Watchguard$6,000,000 the parties filed a petition seeking IPR ofjoint motion to dismiss the ‘950 Patent. The Company will vigorously oppose that petition. The PTAB will not issue a decision on whether to institute that petition until approximately November 2017. The lawsuit has been stayed pending a decision fromwhich the USPTO on whether to institute that petition.Judge granted.

 

Utility Associates,PGA Tour, Inc.

On October 25, 2013,January 22, 2019 the PGA Tour, Inc. (the “PGA”) filed suit against the Company filed a complaint in the United StatesFederal District Court for the District of Kansas ((Case No. 2:13-cv-02550-SAC)to eliminate threats by a competitor, Utility Associates, Inc. (“Utility”),19-cv-0033-CM-KGG) alleging breach of alleged patent infringement regarding U.S. Patent No. 6,831,556 (the “ ‘556 Patent”). Specifically, the lawsuit seeks a declaration that the Company’s mobile video surveillance systems do not infringe any claimcontract and breach of the ‘556 Patent. The Company became aware that Utility had mailed letters to currentimplied covenant of good faith and prospective purchasers of its mobile video surveillance systems threatening that the use of such systems purchased from third parties not licensedfair dealing relative to the ‘556 Patent would create liability for them for patent infringement.Web.com Tour Title Sponsor Agreement (the “Agreement”). The Company rejected Utility’s assertion and is vigorously defending the right of end-users to purchase such systems from providers other than Utility. The United States District Court for the District of Kansas dismissed the lawsuit because it decided that KansasAgreement was not the proper jurisdictional forum for the dispute. The District Court’s decision was not a rulingexecuted on the merits of the case. The Company appealed the decision and the Federal Circuit affirmed the District Court’s previous decision.

In addition, the Company began proceedings to invalidate the ‘556 Patent through a request for IPR of the ‘556 patent at the USPTO. On July 27, 2015, the USPTO invalidated key claims in Utility’s ‘556 Patent. The Final Decision from the USPTO significantly curtails Utility’s ability to threaten law enforcement agencies, municipalities, and others with infringement of the ‘556 Patent. Utility appealed this decision to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit denied Utility’s appeal and therefore confirmed the ruling of the USPTO. This denial of Utility’s appeal finalized the USPTO’s ruling in Digital’s favor and the matter is now concluded.

On June 6, 2014, the Company filed an Unfair Competition lawsuit against Utility in the United States District Court for the District of Kansas. In the lawsuit, it contends that Utility has defamed the Company and illegally interfered with its contracts, customer relationships and business expectancies by falsely asserting to its customers and others that its products violate the ‘556 Patent, of which Utility claims to be the holder.

The suit also includes claims against Utility for tortious interference with contract and violation of the Kansas Uniform Trade Secrets Act (KUSTA), arising out of Utility’s employment of the Company’s employees, in violation of that employee’s Non-Competition and Confidentiality agreements with the Company. In addition to damages, the Company seeks temporary, preliminary, and permanent injunctive relief, prohibiting Utility from, among other things, continuing to threaten or otherwise interfere with the Company’s customers. On March 4, 2015, an initial hearing was held upon the Company’s request for injunctive relief.

Based upon facts revealed at the March 4, 2015 hearing, on March 16, 2015, the Company sought leave to amend its Complaint in the Kansas suit to assert additional claims against Utility. Those new claims include claims of actual or attempted monopolization, in violation of § 2 of the Sherman Act, claims arising under a new Georgia statute that prohibits threats of patent infringement in “bad faith,” and additional claims of unfair competition/false advertising in violation of § 63(a) of the Lanham Act. As these statutes expressly provide, the Company will seek treble damages, punitive damages and attorneys’ fees as well as injunctive relief. The Court concluded its hearing on April 22, 2015, and allowed the Company leave to amend its complaint, but denied its preliminary injunction. The discovery stage of the lawsuit expired in May 2016. Utility filed a Motion for Summary Judgment and the Company filed a Motion for Partial Summary Judgment. On March 30, 2017, the Court entered its order granting Utility’s motion and denying the Company’s motion for summary judgment in their entireties. The Company believes the District Court made several errors when ruling on the motions for summary judgment in light of the USPTO’s final decision issued on July 27, 2015 and the various facts and admissions already presented to such Court and is filing an appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit. Oral arguments are set to occur on January 17, 2018.

47

On September 13, 2014, Utility filed suit in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia against the Company alleging infringement of the ‘556 Patent. The suit was served on the Company on September 20, 2014. As alleged in the Company’s first filed lawsuit described above, the Company believes that the ‘556 Patent is both invalid and not infringed. Further, the USPTO has issued its final decision invalidating 23 of the 25 claims asserted in the ‘556 Patent, as noted above. The Company believes that the suit filed by Utility is without merit and is vigorously defending the claims asserted against the Company. An adverse resolution of the foregoing litigation or patent proceedings could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business, prospects, results of operations, financial condition, and liquidity. The Court stayed all proceedings with respect to this lawsuit pending the outcome of the patent review performed by the USPTO and the appellate court. Based on the USPTO’s final decision to invalidate substantially all claims contained in the ‘556 Patent and the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit full denial of Utility’s appeal, the Company intends to file for summary judgment in its favor if Utility does not request outright dismissal. 

The Company is also involved as a plaintiff and defendant in ordinary, routine litigation and administrative proceedings incidental to its business from time to time, including customer collections, vendor and employment-related matters. The Company believes the likely outcome of any other pending cases and proceedings will not be material to its business or its financial condition.

Sponsorship.On April 16, 2015 by and between the Company entered intoparties. Under the Agreement, Digital Ally would be a Title Sponsorship Agreement (the “Agreement”) under which it became the title sponsor for aof and receive certain naming and other rights and benefits associated with the Web.com Tour golf tournament (the “Tournament”) held annually in the Kansas City Metropolitan area. The Agreement provides the Company with naming rights and other benefits for the 2015 through 2019 annual Tournament in exchange for Digital Ally’s payment to Tour of annual sponsorship fees. The suit has been resolved and the following sponsorship fee:case has been dismissed by Plaintiff with prejudice on April 17, 2019.

 

Year Sponsorship
fee
 
2015 $375,000 
2016 $475,000 
2017 $475,000 
2018 $500,000 
2019 $500,000 

The Company has the right to sell and retain the proceeds from the sale of additional sponsorships, including but not limited to a presenting sponsorship, a concert sponsorship and founding partnerships for the Tournament. The Company recorded a net sponsorship expense of $263,047 and $499,271, respectively, for the nine months ended September 30, 2017 and 2016.

401 (k) Plan.We sponsor aIn July 2008, the Company amended and restated its 401(k) retirement savings plan. The amended plan forrequires the benefit of our employees. The plan, as amended, requires usCompany to provide 100% matching contributions for employees who elect to contribute up to 3% of their compensation to the plan and 50% matching contributions for employee’s elective deferrals on the next 2% of their contributions. WeThe Company has made matching contributions totaling $137,781$26,968 and $135,058$28,973 for the ninethree months ended SeptemberJune 30, 20172019 and 2016,2018, respectively, and $53,410 and $58,348 for the six months ended June 30, 2019 and 2018, respectively. Each participant is 100% vested at all times in employee and employer matching contributions.

Consulting and Distributor Agreements.The Company entered into an agreement that requiresrequired it to make monthly payments whichthat will be applied to future commissions and/or consulting fees to be earned by the provider. The agreement is with a limited liability company (“LLC”) that is minority owned by a relative of the Company’s chief financial officer. Under the agreement, dated January 15, 2016 and as amended on February 13, 2017, the LLC provides consulting services for developing a new distribution channel outside of law enforcement for its body-worn camera and related cloud storage products to customers in the United States. The Company paidadvanced amounts to the LLC and advance against commissions ranging from $5,000 to $6,000 per month plus necessary and reasonable expenses for athe period of one year beginning January 2016,through June 30, 2017, which can be automatically extended based on the LLC achieving minimum sales quotas. The agreement was renewed in January 2017 for a period of three years, subject to yearly minimum sales thresholds that would allow the Company to terminate the contract if such minimums are not met. As of SeptemberJune 30, 2017,2019, the Company had advanced a total of $301,115$277,151 pursuant to this agreement and established an allowance reserve of $129,140 for a net advance of $148,011. The minimum sales threshold has not been met and the Company has discontinued all advances, although the contract has not been formally terminated. However, the exclusivity provisions of the agreement have been terminated.

On June 1, 2018 the Company entered into an agreement with an individual that required it to make monthly payments that will be applied to future commissions and/or consulting fees to be earned by the provider. Under the agreement, the individual provides consulting services for developing new distribution channels both inside and outside of law enforcement for its in-car and body-worn camera systems and related cloud storage products to customers within and outside the United States. The Company was required to advance amounts to the individual as an advance against commissions of $7,000 per month plus necessary and reasonable expenses for the period through August 31, 2018, which was extended to December 31, 2018 by mutual agreement of the parties at $6,000 per month. The parties have mutually agreed to further extend the arrangement on a monthly basis at $5,000 per month. As of June 30, 2019, the Company had advanced a total of $96,242 pursuant to this agreement.

 

4842
 

 

Critical Accounting Policies

Critical Accounting Policies

 

Our significant accounting policies are summarized in note 1 to our condensed consolidated financial statements included in Item 1, “Financial Statements,”Statements”, of this report. While the selection and application of any accounting policy may involve some level of subjective judgments and estimates, we believe the following accounting policies are the most critical to our financial statements, potentially involve the most subjective judgments in their selection and application, and are the most susceptible to uncertainties and changing conditions:

 

 Revenue Recognition/Recognition / Allowance for Doubtful Accounts;
   
 Allowance for Excess and Obsolete Inventory;
   
 Warranty Reserves;
   
 Stock-based Compensation Expense;
   
 Accounting for Income Taxes; and
   
 Determination of Fair Value Calculation for Financial Instruments and Derivatives; and
   
 Going Concern Analysis.

Revenue Recognition / Allowances for Doubtful Accounts. Revenue is recognized for the shipment of products or delivery of service when all four of the following conditions are met:

 

 (i)Persuasive evidence of an arrangement exists;Identify the contract with the customer;
   
 (ii)Delivery has occurred;Identify the performance obligations in the contract;
   
 (iii)The price is fixed or determinable; andDetermine the transaction price;
   
 (iv)CollectabilityAllocate the transaction price to the performance obligations in the contract; and
(v)Recognize revenue when a performance obligation is reasonably assured.satisfied.

We consider the terms and conditions of the contract and our customary business practices in identifying our contracts under ASC 606. We determine we have a contract when the customer order is approved, we can identify each party’s rights regarding the services to be transferred, we can identify the payment terms for the services, we have determined the customer has the ability and intent to pay and the contract has commercial substance. At contract inception we evaluate whether the contract includes more than one performance obligation. We apply judgment in determining the customer’s ability and intent to pay, which is based on a variety of factors, including the customer’s historical payment experience or, in the case of a new customer, credit and financial information pertaining to the customer.

Performance obligations promised in a contract are identified based on the services and the products that will be transferred to the customer that are both capable of being distinct, whereby the customer can benefit from the service either on its own or together with other resources that are readily available from third parties or from us, and are distinct in the context of the contract, whereby the transfer of the services and the products is separately identifiable from other promises in the contract. Our performance obligations consist of (i) products, (ii) professional services, and (iii) extended warranties.

The transaction price is determined based on the consideration to which we expect to be entitled in exchange for transferring services to the customer. Variable consideration is included in the transaction price if, in our judgment it is probable that a significant future reversal of cumulative revenue under the contract will not occur. None of our contracts contain a significant financing component.

If the contract contains a single performance obligation, the entire transaction price is allocated to the single performance obligation. Contracts that contain multiple performance obligations require an allocation of the transaction price to each performance obligation based on the relative standalone selling price (“SSP”).

Revenue is recognized at the time the related performance obligation is satisfied by transferring the control of the promised service to a customer. Revenue is recognized when control of the service is transferred to the customer, in an amount that reflects the consideration that we expect to receive in exchange for our services. We generate all our revenue from contracts with customers.

 

We review all significant, unusual or nonstandard shipments of product or delivery of services as a routine part of our accounting and financial reporting process to determine compliance with these requirements. Extended warranties are offered on selected products and when a customer purchases an extended warranty the associated proceeds are treated as deferred revenuecontract liability and recognized over the term of the extended warranty.

43

 

Our principal customers are state, local and federal law enforcement agencies, which historically have been low risks for uncollectible accounts. However, we do have commercial customers and international distributors that present a greater risk for uncollectible accounts than such law enforcement customers and we consider a specific reserve for bad debts based on their individual circumstances. Our historical bad debts have been negligible, with less than $198,000$218,000 charged off as uncollectible on cumulative revenues of $214.1$233.5 million since we commenced deliveries during 2006. As of SeptemberJune 30, 20172019, and December 31, 2016,2018, we had provided a reserve for doubtful accounts of $70,000.$90,000 and $70,000, respectively.

 

We periodically perform a specific review of significant individual receivables outstanding for risk of loss due to uncollectibility. Based on such review, we consider our reserve for doubtful accounts to be adequate as of SeptemberJune 30, 2017.2019. However, should the balance due from any significant customer ultimately become uncollectible then our allowance for bad debts will not be sufficient to cover the charge-off and we will be required to record additional bad debt expense in our statement of operations.

Allowance for Excess and Obsolete Inventory.

We record valuation reserves on our inventory for estimated excess or obsolete inventory items. The amount of the reserve is equal to the difference between the cost of the inventory and the estimated market value based upon assumptions about future demand and market conditions. On a quarterly basis, management performs an analysis of the underlying inventory to identify reserves needed for excess and obsolescence. Management uses its best judgment to estimate appropriate reserves based on this analysis. In addition, we adjust the carrying value of inventory if the current market value of that inventory is below its cost.

49

 

Inventories consisted of the following at SeptemberJune 30, 20172019 and December 31, 2016:2018:

 

 

September 30, 2017

  December 31,  2016  

June 30, 2019

 

December 31, 2018

 
Raw material and component parts $4,828,517  $4,015,170  $4,903,170  $4,969,786 
Work-in-process  141,900   355,715   256,910   351,451 
Finished goods  7,509,227   7,215,346   5,291,233   4,965,594 
                
Subtotal  12,749,644   11,586,231   10,451,313   10,286,831 
Reserve for excess and obsolete inventory  (2,417,653)  (1,999,920)  (3,659,264)  (3,287,771)
                
Total $10,061,991  $9,586,311  $6,792,049  $6,990,060 

 

We balance the need to maintain strategic inventory levels to ensure competitive delivery performance to our customers against the risk of inventory obsolescence due to changing technology and customer requirements. As reflected above, our inventory reserves represented 19.0%35.0% of the gross inventory balance at SeptemberJune 30, 2017,2019, compared to 17.3%32.0% of the gross inventory balance at December 31, 2016.2018. We had $2,417,653$3,659,264 and $1,999,920$3,287,771 in reserves for obsolete and excess inventories at SeptemberJune 30, 20172019 and December 31, 2016,2018, respectively. Total raw materials and component parts were $4,828,517$4,903,170 and $4,015,170$4,969,786 at SeptemberJune 30, 20172019 and December 31, 2016,2018, respectively, a decrease of $66,616 (1%). Finished goods balances were $5,291,233 and $4,965,594 at June 30, 2019 and December 31, 2018, respectively, an increase of $813,347 (20%$325,639 (7%). The increase in raw materials and component parts was mostly in refurbished parts for FirstVU HD products. Finished goods balances were $7,509,227 and $7,215,346 at September 30, 2017 and December 31, 2016, respectively, an increase of $293,881 (4%). The increase in finished goods at September 30, 2017 was primarily in FirstVU HD and DVM 250 products. The increase in the inventory reserve is primarily due to the change in sales mix of our products, which has resulted in a higher level of excess component parts of the older versions of our PCB boards and the phase out of our DVM-750, DVM-500 Plus and LaserAlly legacy products. Additionally, we increased our reserves on selected refurbished inventory and items requiring repair during the nine months ended September 30, 2017. We believe the reserves are appropriate given our inventory levels at SeptemberJune 30, 2017.2019.

 

If actual future demand or market conditions are less favorable than those projected by management or significant engineering changes to our products that are not anticipated and appropriately managed, additional inventory write-downs may be required in excess of the inventory reserves already established.

 

Warranty Reserves.

We generally provide up to a two-year parts and labor warranty on our products to our customers. Provisions for estimated expenses related to product warranties are made at the time products are sold. These estimates are established using historical information on the nature, frequency, and average cost of claims. We actively study trends of claims and take action to improve product quality and minimize claims. Our warranty reserves were decreased to $140,596$102,955 as of SeptemberJune 30, 20172019 compared to $374,597$195,135 as of December 31, 20162018, primarily for expected replacements associated with select FirstVU HD customers. We have limited experience with the FirstVU HD and DVM-800 and will monitor our reserve for all warranty claims related to these two newer products. There is a risk that we will have higher warranty claim frequency rates and average cost of claims than our history has indicated on our legacy mirror products on our new products for which we have limited experience. Actual experience could differ from the amounts estimated requiring adjustments to these liabilities in future periods.

Stock-based Compensation Expense.

We grant stock options to our employees and directors and such benefits provided are share-based payment awards which require us to make significant estimates related to determining the value of our share-based compensation. Our expected stock-price volatility assumption is based on historical volatilities of the underlying stock whichthat are obtained from public data sources and there were 100,000180,000 options granted during the ninesix months ended SeptemberJune 30, 2017.2019.

44

 

If factors change and we develop different assumptions in future periods, the compensation expense that we record in the future may differ significantly from what we have recorded in the current period. There is a high degree of subjectivity involved when using option pricing models to estimate share-based compensation. Changes in the subjective input assumptions can materially affect our estimates of fair values of our share-based compensation. Certain share-based payment awards, such as employee stock options, may expire worthless or otherwise result in zero intrinsic value compared to the fair values originally estimated on the grant date and reported in our financial statements. Alternatively, values may be realized from these instruments that are significantly in excess of the fair values originally estimated on the grant date and reported in our financial statements. Although the fair value of employee share-based awards is determined using an established option pricing model, that value may not be indicative of the fair value observed in a willing buyer/willing seller market transaction. In addition, we account for forfeitures as they occur.

50

Accounting for Income Taxes.

Accounting for income taxes requires significant estimates and judgments on the part of management. Such estimates and judgments include, but are not limited to, the effective tax rate anticipated to apply to tax differences that are expected to reverse in the future, the sufficiency of taxable income in future periods to realize the benefits of net deferred tax assets and net operating losses currently recorded and the likelihood that tax positions taken in tax returns will be sustained on audit.

As required by authoritative guidance, we record deferred tax assets or liabilities based on differences between financial reporting and tax bases of assets and liabilities using currently enacted rates that will be in effect when the differences are expected to reverse. Authoritative guidance also requires that deferred tax assets be reduced by a valuation allowance if it is more likely than not that all or some portion or all of the deferred tax asset will not be realized. As of December 31, 2016,2018, cumulative valuation allowances in the amount of $22,340,000$21,500,000 were recorded in connection with the net deferred income tax assets. Based on a review of our deferred tax assets and recent operating performance, we determined that our valuation allowance should be increased to $25,535,000 to fully reserve our deferred tax assets at September 30, 2017. We determined that it was appropriate to continue to provide a full valuation reserve on our net deferred tax assets as of SeptemberJune 30, 20172019 because of the overall net operating loss carryforwards available. We expect to continue to maintain a full valuation allowance until we determine that we can sustain a level of profitability that demonstrates our ability to realize these assets. To the extent we determine that the realization of some or all of these benefits is more likely than not based upon expected future taxable income, a portion or all of the valuation allowance will be reversed. Such a reversal would be recorded as an income tax benefit and, for some portion related to deductions for stock option exercises, an increase in shareholders’ equity.

 

As required by authoritative guidance, we have performed a comprehensive review of our portfolio of uncertain tax positions in accordance with recognition standards established by the FASB, an uncertain tax position represents our expected treatment of a tax position taken in a filed tax return, or planned to be taken in a future tax return, that has not been reflected in measuring income tax expense for financial reporting purposes. We have no recorded liability as of June 30, 20172019 representing uncertain tax positions.

 

We have generated substantial deferred income tax assets related to our operations primarily from the charge to compensation expense taken for stock options, certain tax credit carryforwards and net operating loss carryforwards. For us to realize the income tax benefit of these assets, we must generate sufficient taxable income in future periods when such deductions are allowed for income tax purposes. In some cases where deferred taxes were the result of compensation expense recognized on stock options, our ability to realize the income tax benefit of these assets is also dependent on our share price increasing to a point where these options have intrinsic value at least equal to the grant date fair value and are exercised. In assessing whether a valuation allowance is needed in connection with our deferred income tax assets, we have evaluated our ability to generate sufficient taxable income in future periods to utilize the benefit of the deferred income tax assets. We continue to evaluate our ability to use recorded deferred income tax asset balances. If we fail to generate taxable income for financial reporting in future years, no additional tax benefit would be recognized for those losses, since we will not have accumulated enough positive evidence to support our ability to utilize net operating loss carryforwards in the future. Therefore, we may be required to increase our valuation allowance in future periods should our assumptions regarding the generation of future taxable income not be realized.

Determination of Fair Value for Financial Instruments and Derivatives.

During 20162018 we issued $4.0 million of Debentures with detachable warrants to purchase common stock and in 2014 in two separate transactions we issued a total of $6.0 million of Secured Convertible Notes with detachable warrants to purchase common stock.entered into the proceeds investment agreement (PIA). We elected to record the 2016 Debentures and 2014 Secured Convertible NotesPIA, on their fair value basis. In addition, the warrants to purchase common stock issued in conjunction with the 2014 Secured Convertible Notes contained anti-dilution provisions that required them to be accounted for as derivative liabilities. We were required to determine the fair value of these financial instruments outstanding as of September 30, 2017 and 2016 for financial reporting purposes. The entire principal balance of the Secured Convertible Notes issued in 2014 has been converted to equity and all warrants have been exercised, except for warrants exercisable to purchase 12,200 common shares at $5.00 per share, as of September 30, 2017. The 2016 Debentures remained outstanding as of September 30, 2017.

51

In accordance with ASC Topic 820 —Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures (“ASC 820”), the Company utilizes the market approach to measure fair value for its financial assets and liabilities. The market approach uses prices and other relevant information generated by market transactions involving identical or comparable assets, liabilities or a group of assets or liabilities, such as a business.

 

ASC 820 utilizes a fair value hierarchy that prioritizes the inputs to valuation techniques used to measure fair value into three broad levels. The following is a brief description of those three levels:

 

Level 1 — Quoted prices in active markets for identical assets and liabilities
   
Level 2 — Other significant observable inputs (including quoted prices in active markets for similar assets or liabilities)
   

Level 3 — Significant unobservable inputs (including the Company’s own assumptions in determining the fair value)

45

 

The following table represents the Company’s hierarchy for its financial assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis as of SeptemberJune 30, 2017.2019.

 

  Level 1  Level 2  Level 3  Total 
Liabilities                
Secured convertible debenture $      -  $        -  $3,183,210  $3,183,210 
Warrant derivative liabilities $-  $-  $15,729  $15,729 
  $-  $-  $3,198,939  $3,198,939 
  June 30, 2019 
  Level 1  Level 2  Level 3  Total 
Liabilities                
Proceeds investment agreement $-  $-  $6,240,000  $6,240,000 

 

Going Concern Analysis.

In accordance with ASU 2014-15,Presentation of Financial Statements- Going Concern (Subtopic 205-40) – Disclosure of Uncertainties about an Entity’s Ability to Continue as a Going Concern, we are required to evaluate whether there are conditions or events, considered in the aggregate, that raise substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern within one year after the date that our financials are issued. When management identifies conditions or events that raise substantial doubt about their ability to continue as a going concern theyit should consider whether theirits plans to mitigate those relevant conditions or events will alleviate the substantial doubt. If conditions or events raise substantial doubt about an entity’s ability to continue as a going concern, but the substantial doubt is alleviated as a result of management’s plans, the entity should disclose information that enables user of financial statements to understand the principal events that raised the substantial doubt, management’s evaluation of the significance of those conditions or events, and management’s plans that alleviated substantial doubt about the entity’s ability to continue as a going concern.

 

We performed the analysis and our overall assessment was there were conditions or events, considered in the aggregate as of SeptemberJune 30, 2017,2019, which raised substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern within the next twelve monthsyear, but such doubt was not adequately mitigated by our plans to address the substantial doubt as disclosed in Note 1: Management’s Liquidity Plan.

 

Inflation and Seasonality

 

Inflation has not materially affected us during the past fiscal year. We do not believe that our business is seasonal in nature; however,nature however; we generallyusually generate higher revenues during the second half of the calendar year than in the first half.

52

 

Item 3. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk.

 

Not Applicable.

 

Item 4. Controls and Procedures.

 

Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures

 

The Company maintains disclosure controls and procedures, as such terms are defined in Rules 13a-15(e) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”). The Company, under the supervision and with the participation of its management, including its Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, has evaluated the effectiveness of the design and operation of such disclosure controls and procedures for this report. Based upon that evaluation, the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer have concluded that the Company’s disclosure controls and procedures were effective as of SeptemberJune 30, 20172019 to provide reasonable assurance that material information required to be disclosed by the Company in this report was recorded, processed, summarized and communicated to the Company’s management as appropriate and within the time periods specified in SEC rules and forms.

 

Changes in Internal Control over Financial Reporting

 

There have not been any changes in the Company’s internal control over financial reporting, as such term is defined in Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) under the Exchange Act, during its last fiscal quarter that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect its internal control over financial reporting.

 

46

PART II – OTHER INFORMATION

 

Item 1. Legal Proceedings.

 

The CompanyFrom time to time, we are notified that we may be a party to a lawsuit or that a claim is subjectbeing made against us. It is our policy to various legal proceedings arising from normal business operations. Althoughnot disclose the specifics of any claim or threatened lawsuit until the summons and complaint are actually served on us. After carefully assessing the claim, and assuming we determine that we are not at fault or we disagree with the damages or relief demanded, we vigorously defend any lawsuit filed against us. We record a liability when losses are deemed probable and reasonably estimable. When losses are deemed reasonably possible but not probable, we determine whether it is possible to provide an estimate of the amount of the loss or range of possible losses for the claim, if material for disclosure. In evaluating matters for accrual and disclosure purposes, we take into consideration factors such as our historical experience with matters of a similar nature, the specific facts and circumstances asserted, the likelihood of our prevailing, the availability of insurance, and the severity of any potential loss. We reevaluate and update accruals as matters progress over time.

While the ultimate resolution is unknown we do not expect that these lawsuits will individually, or in the aggregate, have a material adverse effect to our results of operations, financial condition or cash flows. However, the outcome of any litigation is inherently uncertain and there can be no assurances, based onassurance that any expense, liability or damages that may ultimately result from the information currently available, management believes that it is probable that the ultimate outcomeresolution of eachthese matters will be covered by our insurance or will not be in excess of the actionsamounts recognized or provided by insurance coverage and will not have a material adverse effect on the consolidatedour operating results, financial statement of the Company. However, an adverse outcome in certain of the actions could have a material adverse effect on the financial results of the Company in the period in which it is recorded.condition or cash flows.

 

Axon Enterprise, Inc. – (Formerly Taser International, Inc.)

 

The Company owns U.S. Patent No. 8,781,292 (the “ ‘292 Patent”), which is directed to a system that determines when a recording device, such as a law enforcement officer’s body camera or in-car video recorder, begins recording and automatically instructs other recording devices to begin recording. The technology described in the ‘292 Patent is incorporated in the Company’s VuLink product.

The Company received notice in April 2015 that Taser International, Inc., now known as Axon Enterprises, Inc. (“Axon”), had commenced an action in the USPTO for a re-examination of the ‘292 Patent. A re-examination is essentially a request that the USPTO review whether the patent should have issued in its present form in view of the “prior art,” e.g., other patents in the same technology field. The prior art used by Axon was from an unrelated third party and was not the result of any of Axon’s own research and development efforts.

On January 14, 2016 the USPTO ultimately rejected Axon’s efforts and confirmed the validity of the ‘292 Patent with 59 claims covering various aspects of the Company’s auto-activation technology. On February 2, 2016 the USPTO issued another patent relating to the Company’s auto-activation technology for law enforcement cameras. U.S. Patent No. 9,253,452 (the “ ‘452 Patent”), which generally covers the automatic activation and coordination of multiple recording devices in response to a triggering event, such as a law enforcement officer activating the light bar on the vehicle.

 

The Company filed suit on January 15, 2016 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Kansas (Case No: 2:16-cv-02032) against Axon, alleging willful patent infringement against Axon’s body camera product line.line and Signal auto-activation product. The Company later added the ‘452 Patent to the suit and is seeking both monetary damages and a permanent injunction against Axon for infringement of both the ‘452 and ‘292 Patents.Patent.

53

 

In addition to the infringement claims, the Company added a new set ofbrought claims to the lawsuit alleging that Axon conspired to keep the Company out of the marketplace by engaging in improper, unethical, and unfair competition. The amended lawsuit alleges Axon bribed officials and otherwise conspired to secure no-bid contracts for its products in violation of both state law and federal antitrust law. The Company’s lawsuit also seeks monetary and injunctive relief, including treble damages, for these alleged violations.

 

Axon filed an answer, which denied the patent infringement allegations on April 1, 2016. In addition, Axon filed a motion to dismiss all allegations in the complaint on March 4, 2016 for which the Company filed an amended complaint on March 18, 2016 to address certain technical deficiencies in the pleadings. AxonDigital amended its complaint and Axon renewed its motion to seek dismissal of the allegations that it had bribed officials and otherwise conspired to secure no-bid contracts for its products in violation of both state law and federal antitrust law on April 1, 2016. Formal discovery commenced on April 12, 2016 with respect to the patent related claims. In January 2017, the Court granted Axon’s motion to dismiss the portion of the lawsuit regarding claims that it had bribed officials and otherwise conspired to secure no-bid contracts for its products in violation of both state law and federal antitrust law. The Company has appealed this decision to the United States Court of Appeals forOn May 2, 2018, the Federal Circuit. The Company has filed its timely, opening brief; Axon has sought but not yet recieved an extension of time in which to file its own responding brief, affirmed the District Court’s ruling and accordingly,on October 1, 2018 the matter has not yet been fully briefed or scheduledSupreme Court denied Digital Ally’s petition for argument.review.

 

In December 2016 and January 2017, Axon announced that it had commenced an action in the USPTOfiled two petitions for IPR of the Company’s ‘292 Patent. Previously Axon had attempted to invalidate the ‘292 Patent through a re-examination procedure at the USPTO. Axon is again attempting through its recently filed petition to convince the USPTO that Digital Ally’s patents lack patentability. Axon subsequently filed another IPR against the ‘292 Patent and two more petitionsInter Partes Review (“IPR”) against the ‘452 Patent. The USPTOUnited States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) rejected oneboth of Axon’s requests on the ‘292 Patent and instituted an investigation of the other petition. As for the ‘452 Patent, the court rejected Axon’s request on the petition challenging the claims at issue in the lawsuit while the other petitionpetitions. Axon is still under consideration. A decision on this final petition will issue in August 2017. Axon isnow statutorily precluded from filing any more IPR petitions against either the ‘292 or ‘452 Patents.Patent.

 

SinceThe District Court litigation in Kansas was temporarily stayed following the filing of the petitions for IPR. However, on November 17, 2017, the Federal District Court of Kansas rejected Axon’s request to maintain the stay. With this significant ruling, the parties will now proceed towards trial. Since litigation has resumed, the Court has issued a claim construction order (also called aMarkmanOrder) where it sided with the Company on all disputes and denied Axon’s attempts to limit the scope of the claims. Following theMarkman Order, the Court set all remaining deadlines in Kansas has been stayed.the case. Fact discovery closed on October 8, 2018, and a Final Pretrial Conference took place on January 16, 2019. The parties filed motions for summary judgment on January 31, 2019.

On June 17, 2019, the Court however, requested an updategranted Axon’s motion for summary judgment that Axon did not infringe on the statusCompany’s patent and dismissed the case. Importantly, the Court’s ruling did not find that Digital’s ‘452 Patent was invalid. It also did not address any other issue, such as whether the Company’s requested damages were appropriate, and it does not impact the Company’s ability to file additional lawsuits to hold other competitors accountable for patent infringement. This ruling solely related to an interpretation of the petitionsclaims as they relate to Axon and was unrelated to the supplemental briefing the Company recently filed on its damages claim and the WatchGuard settlement. Those issues are separate and the judge’s ruling on summary judgment had nothing to do with Digital’s damages request. The Company will be providing suchhas filed an update afterappeal to this ruling and has asked the decision on the final ‘452 Patent petition. Because Axon’s petition on the ‘452 Patent that relatedappellate court to the claims in the lawsuit was denied, the Company will be seeking to lift the stay and proceed with the lawsuit to a trial where the question of infringement and damages can be addressed.reverse this decision.

 

47

Enforcement Video, LLC d/b/a WatchGuard Video

 

On May 27, 2016 the Company filed suit against Enforcement Video, LLC d/b/a WatchGuard, Video (“WatchGuard”), (Case No. 2:16-cv-02349-JTM-JPO) alleging patent infringement based on WatchGuard’s VISTA Wifi and 4RE In-Car product lines.

 

On May 13, 2019, the parties resolved the dispute and executed a settlement agreement in the form of a Release and License Agreement. The USPTOlitigation has granted multiple patents to the Company with claims covering numerous features, suchbeen dismissed as automatically activating all deployed cameras in response to the activationa result of just one camera. Additionally, Digital Ally’s patent claims cover automatic coordination as well as digital synchronization between multiple recording devices. Digital Ally also has patent coverage directed to the coordination between a multi-camera system and an officer’s smartphone, which allows an officer to more readily assess an event on the scene while an event is taking place or immediately after it has occurred.this settlement.

 

The Company’s lawsuit alleges that WatchGuard incorporated this patented technology into its VISTA WifiRelease and 4RE In-Car product lines without its permission. Specifically, Digital Ally is accusing License Agreement encompasses the following key terms:

WatchGuard paid Digital Ally a one-time, lump settlement payment of $6,000,000.
Digital Ally has granted WatchGuard a perpetual covenant not to sue if WatchGuard’s products incorporate agreed-upon modified recording functionality. Digital Ally has also granted WatchGuard a license to the ‘292 Patent and the ‘452 Patent (and related patents, now existing and yet-to-issue) through December 31, 2023. The parties have agreed to negotiate in good faith to attempt to resolve any alleged infringement that occurs after the license period expires.
The parties have further agreed to release each other from all claims or liabilities pre-existing the settlement.
As part of the settlement, the parties agreed that WatchGuard is making no admission that it has infringed any of Digital Ally’s patents.

Upon receipt of infringing three patents: the ‘292 and ‘452 Patents and U.S. Patent No. 9,325,950 (the ‘950 Patent”). The Company is aggressively challenging WatchGuard’s infringing conduct, seeking both monetary damages, as well as seeking a permanent injunction preventing WatchGuard from continuing to sell its VISTA Wifi and 4RE In-Car product lines using Digital Ally’s own technology to compete against it. On May 8, 2017, Watchguard$6,000,000 the parties filed a petition seeking IPR ofjoint motion to dismiss the ‘950 Patent. The Company will vigorously oppose that petition. The PTAB will not issue a decision on whether to institute that petition until approximately November 2017. The lawsuit has been stayed pending a decision fromwhich the USPTO on whether to institute that petition.Judge granted.

54

 

Utility Associates,PGA Tour, Inc.

On October 25, 2013,January 22, 2019 the PGA Tour, Inc. (the “PGA”) filed suit against the Company filed a complaint in the United StatesFederal District Court for the District of Kansas ((Case No. 2:13-cv-02550-SAC)to eliminate threats by a competitor, Utility Associates, Inc. (“Utility”),19-cv-0033-CM-KGG) alleging breach of alleged patent infringement regarding U.S. Patent No. 6,831,556 (the “ ‘556 Patent”). Specifically, the lawsuit seeks a declaration that the Company’s mobile video surveillance systems do not infringe any claimcontract and breach of the ‘556 Patent. The Company became aware that Utility had mailed letters to currentimplied covenant of good faith and prospective purchasers of its mobile video surveillance systems threatening that the use of such systems purchased from third parties not licensedfair dealing relative to the ‘556 PatentWeb.com Tour Title Sponsor Agreement (the “Agreement”). The contract was executed on April 16, 2015 by and between the parties. Under the Agreement, Digital Ally would create liabilitybe a title sponsor of and receive certain naming and other rights and benefits associated with the Web.com Tour for them2015 through 2019 in exchange for patent infringement. The Company rejected Utility’s assertion and is vigorously defending the rightDigital Ally’s payment to Tour of end-users to purchase such systems from providers other than Utility. The United States District Court for the District of Kansas dismissed the lawsuit because it decided that Kansas was not the proper jurisdictional forum for the dispute. The District Court’s decision was not a ruling on the merits of the case. The Company appealed the decision and the Federal Circuit affirmed the District Court’s previous decision.

In addition, the Company began proceedings to invalidate the ‘556 Patent through a request for IPR of the ‘556 Patent at the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”). On July 27, 2015, the USPTO invalidated key claims in Utility’s ‘556 Patent. The Final Decision from the USPTO significantly curtails Utility’s ability to threaten law enforcement agencies, municipalities, and others with infringement of the ‘556 Patent. Utility appealed this decision to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit denied Utility’s appeal and therefore confirmed the ruling of the USPTO. This denial of Utility’s appeal finalized the USPTO’s ruling in Digital’s favor and the matter is now concluded.

On June 6, 2014 the Company filed an Unfair Competition lawsuit against Utility in the United States District Court for the District of Kansas. In the lawsuit, it contends that Utility has defamed the Company and illegally interfered with its contracts, customer relationships and business expectancies by falsely asserting to its customers and others that its products violate the ‘556 Patent, of which Utility claims to be the holder.annual sponsorship fees.

 

The suit also includes claims against Utility for tortious interferencehas been resolved and the case has been dismissed by Plaintiff with contract and violation of the Kansas Uniform Trade Secrets Act (KUSTA), arising out of Utility’s employment of the Company’s employees, in violation of that employee’s Non-Competition and Confidentiality agreements with the Company. In addition to damages, the Company seeks temporary, preliminary, and permanent injunctive relief, prohibiting Utility from, among other things, continuing to threaten or otherwise interfere with the Company’s customers. On March 4, 2015, an initial hearing was held upon the Company’s request for injunctive relief.

Based upon facts revealed at the March 4, 2015 hearing, on March 16, 2015, the Company sought leave to amend its Complaint in the Kansas suit to assert additional claims against Utility. Those new claims include claims of actual or attempted monopolization, in violation of § 2 of the Sherman Act, claims arising under a new Georgia statute that prohibits threats of patent infringement in “bad faith,” and additional claims of unfair competition/false advertising in violation of § 63(a) of the Lanham Act. As these statutes expressly provide, the Company will seek treble damages, punitive damages and attorneys’ fees as well as injunctive relief. The Court concluded its hearingprejudice on April 22, 2015, and allowed the Company leave to amend its complaint, but denied its preliminary injunction. The discovery stage of the lawsuit expired in May 2016. Utility filed a Motion for Summary Judgment and the Company filed a Motion for Partial Summary Judgment. On March 30, 2017, the Court entered its order granting Utility’s motion and denying the Company’s motion for summary judgment in their entireties. The Company believes the District Court made several errors when ruling on the motions for summary judgment in light of the USPTO’s final decision issued on July 27, 2015 and the various facts and admissions already presented to such Court and is filing an appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit. Oral arguments are set to occur on January 17, 2018.2019.

On September 13, 2014, Utility filed suit in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia against the Company alleging infringement of the ‘556 Patent. The suit was served on the Company on September 20, 2014. As alleged in the Company’s first filed lawsuit described above, the Company believes that the ‘556 Patent is both invalid and not infringed. Further, the USPTO has issued its final decision invalidating 23 of the 25 claims asserted in the ‘556 Patent, as noted above. The Company believes that the suit filed by Utility is without merit and is vigorously defending the claims asserted against the Company. An adverse resolution of the foregoing litigation or patent proceedings could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business, prospects, results of operations, financial condition, and liquidity. The Court stayed all proceedings with respect to this lawsuit pending the outcome of the patent review performed by the USPTO and the appellate court. Based on the USPTO’s final decision to invalidate substantially all claims contained in the ‘556 Patent and the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit full denial of Utility’s appeal, the Company intends to file for summary judgment in its favor if Utility does not request outright dismissal.

55

The Company is also involved as a plaintiff and defendant in ordinary, routine litigation and administrative proceedings incidental to its business from time to time, including customer collections, vendor and employment-related matters. The Company believes the likely outcome of any other pending cases and proceedings will not be material to its business or its financial condition.

 

Item 2. Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities and Use of Proceeds.

 

On June 30, 2017, the Company borrowed an aggregate of $700,000 under the Notes with two private, third-party lenders. The unsecured Notes bear interest of 8% per annum with all principal and accrued interest due on or before their September 30, 2017 maturity date. In connection with the issuance of the Notes the Company issued the lenders warrants to purchase a total of 200,000 shares common stock at an exercise of $3.65 per share and an expiration date of June 29, 2022. On September 30, 2017 the Company negotiated an extension of the maturity date of one of the Notes to December 31, 2017. The Company retired the second Note which had a principal balance of $350,000.Not applicable.

On September 29, 2017, the Company borrowed $300,000 under the Note with a private, third-party lender. The unsecured Note bears interest of 8% per annum with all principal and accrued interest due on or before its November 30, 2017 maturity date. In connection with the Note the Company issued the lender warrants to purchase a total of 100,000 shares common stock at an exercise of $2.75 per share and an expiration date of September 30, 2022.

The Company relied on the exemption from registration set forth in Section 4(a)(2) of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Securities Act”) for issuance of the foregoing warrants exercisable to purchase 300,000 shares of common stock. The Company did not pay any compensation or fees to any party in connection with the issuance of the Notes or the warrants.

 

Item 3. Defaults upon Senior Securities.

 

Not applicable.

 

Item 4. Mine Safety Disclosures.

 

Not applicable.

 

Item 5. Other Information.

 

Not applicable.

 

Item 6. Exhibits.

 

(a) Exhibits.

(a)Exhibits.
 31.1Certificate of Stanton E. Ross pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) under the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
   
 31.2Certificate of Thomas J. Heckman pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) under the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
   
 32.1Certificate of Stanton E. Ross pursuant to Rule 13a-14(b) under the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
   
 32.2Certificate of Thomas J. Heckman pursuant to Rule 13a-14(b) under the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

 

5648
 

 

SIGNATURESSignatures

 

Pursuant to the requirements 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.

 

Date:NovemberAugust 14, 20172019

 

 

DIGITAL ALLY, INC.,


a Nevada corporation

  
  /s/Stanton E. Ross
 Name:Stanton E. Ross
 Title:President and Chief Executive Officer
   
  /s/Thomas J. Heckman
 Name:Thomas J. Heckman
 Title:Chief Financial Officer, Secretary, Treasurer and
Principal Accounting Officer

 

5749
 

 

EXHIBIT INDEX

 

Exhibit Description
31.1 Certificate of Stanton E. Ross pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) under the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
   
31.2 Certificate of Thomas J. Heckman pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) under the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
   
32.1 Certificate of Stanton E. Ross pursuant to Rule 13a-14(b) under the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
   
32.2 Certificate of Thomas J. Heckman pursuant to Rule 13a-14(b) under the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

 

5850