sv1za
As
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
September 25, 2006.
Registration No.
333-136622
UNITED
STATES
SECURITIES
AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C.
20549
AMENDMENT
NO. 2 TO
FORM S-1
REGISTRATION
STATEMENT
UNDER
THE
SECURITIES ACT OF 1933
EMERGENT
BIOSOLUTIONS INC.
(Exact
Name of Registrant as Specified in Its Charter)
|
|
|
|
|
Delaware
|
|
2834
|
|
14-1902018
|
(State or Other Jurisdiction
of
Incorporation or Organization)
|
|
(Primary Standard Industrial
Classification Code No.)
|
|
(I.R.S. Employer
Identification No.)
|
300
Professional Drive, Suite 250
Gaithersburg,
Maryland 20879
(301) 944-0290
(Address,
including zip code, and telephone number,
including
area code, of registrants principal executive
offices)
Fuad
El-Hibri
Chief
Executive Officer
Emergent
BioSolutions Inc.
300
Professional Drive, Suite 250
Gaithersburg,
Maryland 20879
(301) 944-0290
(Name,
address, including zip code, and telephone number,
including
area code, of agent for service)
Copies
to:
|
|
|
|
|
David E. Redlick, Esq.
Wilmer Cutler Pickering
Hale and Dorr LLP
1875 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20006
(202) 663-6000
|
|
Daniel J.
Abdun-Nabi, Esq.
General Counsel
Emergent BioSolutions Inc.
300 Professional Drive, Suite 250
Gaithersburg, Maryland 20879
(301) 944-0290
|
|
James A. Lebovitz, Esq.
Brian D. Short, Esq.
Dechert LLP
2929 Arch Street
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104
(215) 994-4000
|
Approximate
date of commencement of proposed sale to the
public: As
soon as practicable after this Registration Statement is
declared effective.
If any of
the securities being registered on this form are offered on a
delayed or continuous basis pursuant to Rule 415 under the
Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the Securities
Act), please check the following box.
o
If this form
is filed to register additional securities for an offering
pursuant to Rule 462(b) under the Securities Act, please
check the following box and list the Securities Act registration
statement number of the earlier effective registration statement
for the same
offering.
o _
_
If this form
is a post-effective amendment filed pursuant to Rule 462(c)
under the Securities Act, please check the following box and
list the Securities Act registration statement number of the
earlier effective registration statement for the same offering.
o _
_
If this form
is a post-effective amendment filed pursuant to Rule 462(d)
under the Securities Act, please check the following box and
list the Securities Act registration statement number of the
earlier effective registration statement for the same offering.
o _
_
CALCULATION
OF REGISTRATION FEE
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proposed
Maximum
|
|
|
Amount of
|
Title of Each
Class of
|
|
|
Aggregate
Offering
|
|
|
Registration
|
Securities to be
Registered
|
|
|
Price(1)
|
|
|
Fee(2)
|
Common stock, $0.001 par value per
share
|
|
|
$86,250,000
|
|
|
$9,229
|
Series A junior participating
preferred stock purchase rights(3)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
Estimated
solely for the purpose of computing the registration fee
pursuant to Rule 457(o) under the Securities Act.
|
|
(2)
|
Calculated
pursuant to Rule 457(o) based on an estimate of the
proposed maximum aggregate offering price. This amount has been
paid previously.
|
|
(3)
|
Each share
of common stock includes one series A junior participating
preferred stock purchase right pursuant to a rights agreement to
be entered into between the Registrant and the rights agent. The
series A junior participating preferred stock purchase
rights will initially trade together with the common stock. The
value attributable to the series A junior participating
preferred stock purchase rights, if any, is reflected in the
offering price of the common stock.
|
The
Registrant hereby amends this Registration Statement on such
date or dates as may be necessary to delay its effective date
until the Registrant shall file a further amendment which
specifically states that this Registration Statement shall
thereafter become effective in accordance with Section 8(a)
of the Securities Act or until the Registration Statement shall
become effective on such date as the Commission, acting pursuant
to Section 8(a), may determine.
The
information in this preliminary prospectus is not complete and
may be changed. We may not sell these securities until the
registration statement filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission is effective. This preliminary prospectus is not an
offer to sell these securities, and we are not soliciting an
offer to buy these securities in any state where the offer or
sale is not permitted.
|
Subject to
completion, dated September 25, 2006
Prospectus
shares
Common stock
This is an initial public offering of common stock by Emergent
BioSolutions Inc. No public market currently exists for our
common stock. We are
offering shares
of our common stock. The estimated initial public offering price
is between
$
and
$
per share.
We have applied to have our common stock listed on The NASDAQ
Global Market under the symbol EBSI.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Per
share
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Initial public offering price
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Underwriting discounts and
commissions
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds to Emergent, before
expenses
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The selling stockholders identified in this prospectus have
granted the underwriters an option for a period of 30 days
to purchase up
to
additional shares of common stock to cover over-allotments. We
will not receive any proceeds from the sale of shares by the
selling stockholders.
Investing in our common stock involves a high degree of risk.
See Risk factors beginning on page 9.
Neither the Securities and Exchange Commission nor any state
securities commission has approved or disapproved of these
securities or passed on the adequacy or accuracy of this
prospectus. Any representation to the contrary is a criminal
offense.
The underwriters expect to deliver the shares on or
about ,
2006.
JPMorgan
Cowen and Company
HSBC
,
2006
Table of
contents
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page
|
|
|
Prospectus summary
|
|
|
1
|
|
Risk factors
|
|
|
9
|
|
Special note regarding
forward-looking statements
|
|
|
44
|
|
Use of proceeds
|
|
|
45
|
|
Dividend policy
|
|
|
46
|
|
Capitalization
|
|
|
47
|
|
Dilution
|
|
|
49
|
|
Selected consolidated financial
data
|
|
|
51
|
|
Managements discussion and
analysis of financial condition and results of operations
|
|
|
53
|
|
Business
|
|
|
79
|
|
Management
|
|
|
127
|
|
Certain relationships and related
party transactions
|
|
|
147
|
|
Principal and selling stockholders
|
|
|
153
|
|
Description of capital stock
|
|
|
160
|
|
Shares eligible for future
sale
|
|
|
168
|
|
Underwriting
|
|
|
171
|
|
Legal matters
|
|
|
174
|
|
Experts
|
|
|
175
|
|
Where you can find more information
|
|
|
175
|
|
Index to consolidated financial
statements
|
|
|
F-1
|
|
You should rely only on the information contained in this
prospectus or to which we have referred you. We and the selling
stockholders have not authorized anyone to provide you with
different information. We and the selling stockholders are
offering to sell, and are seeking offers to buy, shares of
common stock only in jurisdictions where offers and sales are
permitted. The information contained in this prospectus is
accurate only as of the date of this prospectus, regardless of
the time of delivery of this prospectus or of any sale of the
common stock. Our business, financial conditions, results of
operations and prospects may have changed since that date.
No action is being taken in any jurisdiction outside the
United States to permit a public offering of the common stock or
possession or distribution of this prospectus in that
jurisdiction. Persons who come into possession of this
prospectus in any jurisdictions outside the United States are
required to inform themselves about and to observe any
restrictions as to this offering and the distribution of this
prospectus applicable to that jurisdiction.
Prospectus
summary
This summary highlights information contained elsewhere in
this prospectus. This summary may not contain all of the
information that is important to you. Before investing in our
common stock, you should read this prospectus carefully in its
entirety, especially the risks of investing in our common stock
that we discuss under Risk factors, and our
financial statements and related notes beginning on
page F-1.
Our
business
We are a biopharmaceutical company focused on the development,
manufacture and commercialization of immunobiotics.
Immunobiotics are pharmaceutical products, such as vaccines and
immune globulins, that induce or assist the bodys immune
system to prevent or treat disease. We operate in two business
segments: biodefense and commercial. In our biodefense business,
we develop and commercialize immunobiotics for use against
biological agents that are potential weapons of bioterrorism. In
our commercial business, we develop immunobiotics for use
against infectious diseases with significant unmet or
underserved medical needs.
BioThrax. We manufacture and market
BioThrax®,
also referred to as anthrax vaccine adsorbed, the only anthrax
vaccine approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration,
or FDA. Our total revenues from BioThrax sales were
$55.5 million in 2003, $81.0 million in 2004 and
$127.3 million in 2005. The U.S. Department of
Defense, or DoD, and the U.S. Department of Health and
Human Services, or HHS, have been the principal customers for
BioThrax. Since 1998, we have been a party to two supply
agreements for BioThrax with the DoD. Pursuant to these
contracts, we have supplied over eight million doses of BioThrax
through August 2006 to the DoD for immunization of military
personnel. Since March 1998, the DoD has vaccinated more than
1.5 million military personnel with more than
5.5 million doses of BioThrax. Our current contract with
the DoD provides for the supply of BioThrax to the DoD through
September 30, 2006. We expect to be able to provide all of
the remaining doses of BioThrax under our contract with the DoD
within the contract term. In April 2006, the DoD issued a notice
that it intends to negotiate a sole source fixed price contract
for the purchase of up to an additional 11 million doses of
BioThrax over one base contract year plus four option years. In
May 2005, we entered into an agreement to supply five million
doses of BioThrax to HHS for placement into the strategic
national stockpile for a fixed price of $123 million. We
completed delivery of all five million doses by February 2006,
seven months earlier than required. In May 2006, we entered into
a contract modification with HHS for the delivery of an
additional five million doses of BioThrax to HHS by May 2007 for
a fixed price of $120 million. We have delivered
approximately one million doses of BioThrax under this contract
modification through August 2006.
The National Institutes of Health, or NIH, originally approved
the manufacture and sale of BioThrax in 1970. In December 2005,
in reaffirming the approval of BioThrax, the FDA concluded that
BioThrax is safe and effective for the prevention of anthrax
infection by all routes of exposure, including inhalation. A
study published in 2002 by the Institute of Medicine, which is a
component of The National Academy of Sciences, supports the FDA
ruling. In its study, the Institute of Medicine found that
BioThrax is an effective vaccine for protection against anthrax,
including inhalational anthrax, caused by any known or plausible
engineered strains.
Biodefense market opportunity. The biodefense market
for immunobiotics has grown dramatically as a result of the
increased awareness of the threat of global terror activity in
the wake of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks and
the October 2001 anthrax letter attacks. The letter attacks
involved the delivery of mail contaminated with anthrax spores
to government officials and members of the media in the
1
United States. As a result of the letter attacks, 22 people
became infected with anthrax, including 11 with inhalational
anthrax, and five people died.
The U.S. government is the principal source of worldwide
biodefense spending. Most U.S. government spending on
biodefense programs results from procurement of countermeasures
by HHS, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, or CDC,
and the DoD and development funding from the National Institute
of Allergy and Infectious Diseases of NIH, or NIAID, and the
DoD. In 2004, the Project BioShield Act became law, providing
$5.6 billion in appropriations over ten years and
authorizing the procurement of countermeasures for biological,
chemical, radiological and nuclear attacks.
Biodefense product development. In addition to
BioThrax, our biodefense product portfolio includes three
biodefense product candidates in preclinical development. We are
developing all of our biodefense product candidates to address
category A biological agents, which are the class of biological
agents that the CDC has identified as the greatest possible
threat to public health. Our biodefense product candidates in
preclinical development are:
|
|
|
Anthrax immune globulin for post-exposure
treatment of anthrax infection, which we are developing in part
with funding from NIAID;
|
|
|
|
Botulinum immune globulin for post-exposure
treatment of illness caused by botulinum toxin, which we are
developing based on a new botulinum toxoid vaccine that we are
developing in collaboration with the U.K. Health Protection
Agency, or HPA; and
|
|
|
Recombinant bivalent botulinum vaccine a
prophylaxis for illness caused by botulinum toxin, which we also
are developing in collaboration with HPA.
|
We are evaluating several potential product candidates in
connection with development of a next generation anthrax
vaccine, featuring attributes such as self-administration and a
longer shelf life.
Commercial market opportunity. Vaccines have long
been recognized as a safe and cost-effective method for
preventing infection caused by various bacteria and viruses.
Because of an increased emphasis on preventative medicine in
industrialized countries, vaccines are now well recognized as an
important part of public health management strategies. According
to Frost & Sullivan, a market research organization,
from 2002 to 2005, annual worldwide vaccine sales increased from
$6.7 billion to $9.9 billion, a compound annual growth
rate of approximately 14%. Frost & Sullivan estimates
that the worldwide sales of vaccines will grow at a compound
annual rate of approximately 10.5% from 2005 through 2012.
Commercial product development. Our commercial product
portfolio includes two product candidates in Phase II
clinical development, one vaccine candidate in Phase I
clinical development and two vaccine candidates in preclinical
development. Our commercial product candidates in clinical
development are:
|
|
|
Typhoid vaccine a single dose, drinkable
vaccine, for which we have completed a Phase I clinical
program, including trials in the United States, the United
Kingdom and Vietnam, and expect to initiate a Phase II
clinical trial in Vietnam in the fourth quarter of 2006;
|
|
|
|
Hepatitis B therapeutic vaccine a multiple
dose, drinkable vaccine for treatment of chronic carriers of
hepatitis B infection, for which we have completed a
Phase I clinical trial in the United Kingdom and expect to
initiate a Phase II clinical trial in the United Kingdom in
the fourth quarter of 2006; and
|
|
|
|
Group B streptococcus vaccine a multiple
dose, injectable vaccine for administration to women of
childbearing age for protection of the fetus and newborn babies,
for which we have completed a Phase I clinical trial in the
United Kingdom.
|
2
Our commercial product candidates in preclinical development are
a chlamydia vaccine and a meningitis B vaccine.
The Wellcome Trust provided funding for our Phase I
clinical trial of our typhoid vaccine candidate in Vietnam and
has agreed to provide funding for our Phase II clinical
trial of this vaccine candidate in Vietnam. In May 2006, we
entered into a license and co-development agreement with Sanofi
Pasteur, the vaccines business of
Sanofi-Aventis,
under which we granted Sanofi Pasteur an exclusive, worldwide
license under our proprietary technology to develop and
commercialize a meningitis B vaccine candidate.
Our strategy. Our goal is to become a worldwide
leader in developing, manufacturing and commercializing
immunobiotics that target diseases with significant unmet or
underserved medical needs. Key elements of our strategy to
achieve this goal are:
|
|
|
Maximize the commercial potential of BioThrax. We
are focused on increasing sales of BioThrax to
U.S. government customers, expanding the market for
BioThrax to other customers and pursuing label expansions and
improvements for BioThrax. The potential label expansions and
improvements for BioThrax include an extension of shelf life,
reductions in the number of required doses, addition of another
method of administration and use as a post-exposure prophylaxis
for anthrax infection in combination with antibiotic therapy.
|
|
|
Continue to develop a balanced portfolio of immunobiotic
products. We seek to maintain a balanced product
portfolio that includes both biodefense and commercial
immunobiotic product candidates and both vaccines and
therapeutics to diversify product development and
commercialization risk. We expect that biodefense product
candidates may generate revenues from product sales sooner than
commercial product candidates because of Project BioShield,
which allows the U.S. government to purchase biodefense products
for the strategic national stockpile before they are approved by
the FDA.
|
|
|
Focus on core capabilities in product development and
manufacturing. We focus our efforts on immunobiotic
product development and manufacturing, which we believe are our
core capabilities. We seek to obtain marketed products and
development stage product candidates through acquisitions and
licensing arrangements with third parties.
|
|
|
|
Build large scale manufacturing infrastructure. To
augment our existing manufacturing capabilities, we are
constructing a new 50,000 square foot manufacturing
facility on our Lansing, Michigan campus. We anticipate that we
will initiate large scale manufacturing of BioThrax for
commercial sale at our new Lansing facility in 2008. We also own
two buildings in Frederick, Maryland that we plan to build out
as future manufacturing facilities.
|
|
|
|
Selectively establish collaborations. For each of
our product candidates, we plan to evaluate the merits of
retaining commercialization rights or entering into
collaboration arrangements with leading pharmaceutical or
biotechnology companies or non-governmental organizations. We
currently have collaborations with HPA and Sanofi Pasteur.
|
|
|
|
Seek governmental and other third party grants and
support. To date, the CDC, NIAID and the Wellcome Trust
have provided product development support or funding. We plan to
encourage government entities and non-government and
philanthropic organizations to continue to conduct studies of,
and pursue other development efforts and provide development
funding for, BioThrax and our product candidates.
|
Our ability to successfully implement these strategies and
achieve our goal is subject to substantial risks and
uncertainties, including those described below under
Risks associated with our business and
in the Risk factors section of this prospectus.
3
Our history. We commenced operations in September
1998 through an acquisition from the Michigan Biologic Products
Institute of rights to BioThrax, vaccine manufacturing
facilities at a multi-building campus on approximately
12.5 acres in Lansing, Michigan and vaccine development and
production know-how. We acquired our pipeline of commercial
vaccine candidates through our acquisition of Microscience
Limited in 2005 and our acquisition of substantially all of the
assets of Antex Biologics, Inc. in 2003.
Risks associated
with our business
Our business is subject to numerous risks, as more fully
described in the section entitled Risk factors
immediately following this prospectus summary. We have derived
substantially all of our revenue from sales of BioThrax under
contracts with the DoD and HHS. Our ongoing U.S. government
contracts do not necessarily increase the likelihood that we
will secure future comparable contracts with the
U.S. government. We expect that a significant portion of
the business that we will seek in the near future, in particular
for BioThrax, will be under government contracts that present a
number of risks that are not typically present in the commercial
contracting process. Our U.S. government contracts for
BioThrax require annual funding decisions by the government and
are subject to unilateral termination and modification by the
government. We may fail to achieve significant sales of BioThrax
to customers in addition to the U.S. government, which
would harm our growth opportunities. We may not be able to
sustain or increase profitability. We are spending significant
amounts for the expansion of our manufacturing facilities. We
may not be able to manufacture BioThrax consistently in
accordance with FDA specifications. Other than BioThrax, all of
our product candidates are undergoing clinical trials or are in
early stages of development, and failure is common and can occur
at any stage of development. None of our product candidates
other than BioThrax has received regulatory approval.
Our corporate
information
We were incorporated as BioPort Corporation under the laws of
Michigan in May 1998. In June 2004, we completed a corporate
reorganization in which Emergent BioSolutions Inc., a Delaware
corporation formed in December 2003, issued shares of
class A common stock to stockholders of BioPort in exchange
for an equal number of outstanding shares of common stock of
BioPort. As a result of this reorganization, BioPort became a
wholly owned subsidiary of Emergent.
Our principal executive offices are located at 300 Professional
Drive, Suite 250, Gaithersburg, Maryland 20879, and
our telephone number is
(301) 944-0290.
Our website address is www.emergentbiosolutions.com. We have
included our website address as an inactive textual reference
only. The information contained on, or that can be accessed
through, our website is not a part of this prospectus.
In this prospectus, unless otherwise stated or the context
otherwise requires, references to Emergent,
we, us, our and similar
references refer to Emergent BioSolutions Inc.
BioThrax®
and
spi-Vec®
are our registered trademarks. Other trademarks, trade names or
service marks appearing in this prospectus are the property of
their respective owners.
4
The
offering
|
|
|
Common stock offered by us |
|
shares |
|
Common stock offered by the selling stockholders |
|
shares
if the underwriters exercise their over-allotment option in full |
|
Common stock to be outstanding after this offering |
|
shares |
|
|
|
Preferred stock purchase rights |
|
Each share of common stock offered hereby will have associated
with it one preferred stock purchase right under a rights
agreement that we will enter into in connection with this
offering. The preferred stock purchase rights will initially
trade together with the common stock. See Description of
capital stock Stockholder rights plan. |
|
|
|
Use of proceeds |
|
We expect to use the net proceeds from this offering, together
with our existing cash and cash equivalents, revenues from
BioThrax product sales and other committed sources of funds, to
fund development of our biodefense and commercial product
candidates, a portion of the construction costs of our new
manufacturing facility in Lansing, Michigan and the balance for
general corporate purposes. See Use of proceeds. |
|
|
|
|
|
We will not receive any proceeds from the sale of shares of
common stock by the selling stockholders as a result of the
exercise by the underwriters of their over-allotment option. |
|
|
|
Risk factors |
|
See Risk factors and other information in this
prospectus for a discussion of factors you should carefully
consider before deciding to invest in shares of our common stock. |
|
Proposed NASDAQ Global Market symbol |
|
EBSI |
The number of shares of our common stock to be outstanding
immediately after this offering is based on
7,782,016 shares outstanding as of August 31, 2006,
and excludes:
|
|
|
1,061,679 shares of common stock issuable upon the exercise
of stock options outstanding as of August 31, 2006 at a
weighted average exercise price of $6.38 per share;
|
|
|
|
158,306 additional shares of common stock reserved for issuance
under our employee stock option plan as of August 31, 2006;
and
|
|
|
|
175,000 additional shares of common stock that will be reserved
for issuance under our 2006 stock incentive plan immediately
prior to completion of this offering.
|
Except in our financial statements included in this prospectus,
in the table set forth under Capitalization, in
Certain relationships and related party transactions
or where otherwise expressly indicated, all information in this
prospectus assumes that, prior to the completion of this
offering, our
5
previously existing class A common stock, $0.01 par value
per share, has been reclassified as common stock, $0.001 par
value per share, all previously outstanding shares of
class B common stock have been converted into shares of
common stock and each outstanding option to purchase
class B common stock has become an option to purchase
common stock.
Unless otherwise indicated, all information in this prospectus
assumes:
|
|
|
no exercise of the outstanding options described above; and
|
|
|
no exercise by the underwriters of their option to purchase up
to shares
of common stock from the selling stockholders to cover
over-allotments.
|
In addition, unless otherwise indicated, all information in this
prospectus gives effect to
the -for-one
stock split of our common stock that will be effective prior to
the completion of this offering.
6
Summary
consolidated financial data
You should read the following summary consolidated financial
data together with our consolidated financial statements and the
related notes appearing at the end of this prospectus and the
Managements discussion and analysis of financial
condition and results of operations section of this
prospectus.
The summary consolidated financial data for the years ended
December 31, 2003, 2004 and 2005 have been derived from our
historical audited consolidated financial statements. The
summary consolidated financial data for the six-month periods
ended June 30, 2005 and 2006 and as of June 30, 2006
have been derived from our unaudited consolidated financial
statements. The unaudited summary consolidated financial data
include, in the opinion of our management, all adjustments,
consisting only of normal recurring adjustments, that are
necessary for a fair presentation of our financial position and
results of operations for these periods. Our historical results
for any prior period are not necessarily indicative of results
to be expected in any future period, and our results for any
interim period are not necessarily indicative of results for a
full fiscal year. The as adjusted consolidated balance sheet
data set forth below give effect to the sale by us
of shares
of common stock in this offering at an assumed initial public
offering price of $ per
share, which is the midpoint of the price range set forth on the
cover page of this prospectus, after deducting estimated
underwriting discounts and commissions and offering expenses
payable by us.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year ended
December 31,
|
|
|
Six months ended
June 30,
|
|
(in thousands,
except share and per share data)
|
|
2003
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(unaudited)
|
|
|
Statements of operations
data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Product sales
|
|
$
|
55,536
|
|
|
$
|
81,014
|
|
|
$
|
127,271
|
|
|
$
|
58,506
|
|
|
$
|
20,408
|
|
Milestones and grants
|
|
|
233
|
|
|
|
2,480
|
|
|
|
3,417
|
|
|
|
813
|
|
|
|
3,261
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenues
|
|
|
55,769
|
|
|
|
83,494
|
|
|
|
130,688
|
|
|
|
59,319
|
|
|
|
23,669
|
|
Operating expenses (income):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of product sales
|
|
|
22,342
|
|
|
|
30,102
|
|
|
|
31,603
|
|
|
|
16,490
|
|
|
|
4,370
|
|
Research and development
|
|
|
6,327
|
|
|
|
10,117
|
|
|
|
18,381
|
|
|
|
4,157
|
|
|
|
14,210
|
|
Selling, general &
administrative
|
|
|
19,547
|
|
|
|
30,323
|
|
|
|
42,793
|
|
|
|
17,974
|
|
|
|
20,681
|
|
Purchased in-process research and
development
|
|
|
1,824
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
26,575
|
|
|
|
26,575
|
|
|
|
|
|
Settlement of State of Michigan
obligation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3,819
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Litigation settlement
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(10,000
|
)
|
|
|
(10,000
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating expenses
|
|
|
50,040
|
|
|
|
66,723
|
|
|
|
109,352
|
|
|
|
55,196
|
|
|
|
39,261
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) from operations
|
|
|
5,729
|
|
|
|
16,771
|
|
|
|
21,336
|
|
|
|
(4,123
|
)
|
|
|
(15,592
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other income (expense):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest income
|
|
|
100
|
|
|
|
65
|
|
|
|
485
|
|
|
|
103
|
|
|
|
326
|
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
(293
|
)
|
|
|
(241
|
)
|
|
|
(767
|
)
|
|
|
(402
|
)
|
|
|
(232
|
)
|
Other income (expense), net
|
|
|
168
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
55
|
|
|
|
(25
|
)
|
|
|
124
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total other income (expense)
|
|
|
(25
|
)
|
|
|
(170
|
)
|
|
|
(227
|
)
|
|
|
(324
|
)
|
|
|
218
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) before provision for
income taxes
|
|
|
5,704
|
|
|
|
16,601
|
|
|
|
21,109
|
|
|
|
3,799
|
|
|
|
(15,374
|
)
|
Provision for (benefit from) income
taxes
|
|
|
1,250
|
|
|
|
5,129
|
|
|
|
5,325
|
|
|
|
958
|
|
|
|
(7,684
|
)
|
Net income (loss)
|
|
$
|
4,454
|
|
|
$
|
11,472
|
|
|
$
|
15,784
|
|
|
$
|
2,841
|
|
|
$
|
(7,690
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earnings (loss) per
share basic
|
|
$
|
0.68
|
|
|
$
|
1.74
|
|
|
$
|
2.21
|
|
|
$
|
0.44
|
|
|
$
|
(0.99
|
)
|
Earnings (loss) per
share diluted
|
|
$
|
0.63
|
|
|
$
|
1.61
|
|
|
$
|
2.00
|
|
|
$
|
0.39
|
|
|
$
|
(0.99
|
)
|
Weighted average number of
shares basic
|
|
|
6,570,856
|
|
|
|
6,576,019
|
|
|
|
7,136,866
|
|
|
|
6,505,085
|
|
|
|
7,771,830
|
|
Weighted average number of
shares diluted
|
|
|
7,061,537
|
|
|
|
7,104,172
|
|
|
|
7,908,023
|
|
|
|
7,200,595
|
|
|
|
7,771,830
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of
June 30, 2006
|
|
(in
thousands)
|
|
Actual
|
|
|
As
adjusted
|
|
|
|
|
|
(unaudited)
|
|
|
Balance sheet data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$
|
15,737
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Working capital
|
|
|
5,995
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets
|
|
|
119,113
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total long-term liabilities
|
|
|
18,364
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total stockholders equity
|
|
|
52,141
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The balance sheet data above do not reflect the receipt of
proceeds from and the incurrence of indebtedness under a
$10.0 million term loan with HSBC Realty Credit Corporation
that we entered into in August 2006 to finance a portion of the
costs of our facility expansion in Lansing, Michigan.
8
Risk
factors
Investing in our common stock involves a high degree of risk.
You should carefully consider the risks and uncertainties
described below together with all of the other information
included in this prospectus, including the financial statements
and related notes appearing at the end of this prospectus,
before deciding to invest in our common stock. If any of the
following risks actually occurs, our business, prospects,
financial condition and operating results could be materially
harmed. In that event, the market price of our common stock
could decline and you could lose part or all of your
investment.
Risks related to
our dependence on U.S. government contracts for
BioThrax
We have
derived substantially all of our revenue from sales of our
BioThrax anthrax vaccine, our only marketed product, under
contracts with the U.S. Department of Defense and the
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. If we are
unable to obtain new contracts with and deliver BioThrax to
these customers, our business, financial condition and operating
results could be materially harmed.
We have derived and expect for the foreseeable future to
continue to derive substantially all of our revenue from sales
of BioThrax, our FDA approved anthrax vaccine and our only
marketed product. We currently supply BioThrax to the DoD for
immunization of military personnel and to HHS for placement into
the strategic national stockpile. In 2005, we derived
substantially all of our revenue from our BioThrax contracts
with the DoD and HHS. Our current contract with the DoD expires
on September 30, 2006. Although the DoD issued a notice
that it intends to pursue a sole source fixed price contract to
purchase up to an additional 11 million doses of BioThrax
over one base contract year plus four option years, we may not
be awarded a follow-on contract on favorable terms or at all. We
have delivered all of the five million doses of BioThrax that
HHS agreed to purchase under a contract that we entered into
with HHS in May 2005. In May 2006, we entered into a contract
modification with HHS for the delivery of an additional five
million doses of BioThrax to HHS by May 2007. Our ongoing
contracts do not necessarily increase the likelihood that we
will secure future comparable contracts with the
U.S. government. The success of our business and our
operating results for the foreseeable future are substantially
dependent on the number of doses of BioThrax that the
U.S. government purchases from us.
Our business
may be harmed as a result of the government contracting process,
which is a competitive bidding process that involves risks not
present in the commercial contracting process.
We expect that a significant portion of the business that we
will seek in the near future will be under government contracts
or subcontracts awarded through competitive bidding. Competitive
bidding for government contracts presents a number of risks that
are not typically present in the commercial contracting process,
including:
|
|
|
the need to devote substantial time and attention of management
and key employees to the preparation of bids and proposals for
contracts that may not be awarded to us;
|
|
|
the need to accurately estimate the resources and cost structure
that will be required to perform any contract that we might be
awarded; and
|
|
|
the expenses that we might incur and the delays that we might
suffer if our competitors protest or challenge contract awards
made to us pursuant to competitive bidding, and the risk that
any such
|
9
|
|
|
protest or challenge could result in the resubmission of bids
based on modified specifications, or in termination, reduction
or modification of the awarded contract.
|
The U.S. government may choose to award future contracts
for the supply of anthrax vaccines and other biodefense product
candidates that we are developing to our competitors instead of
to us. If we are unable to win particular contracts, we may not
be able to operate in the market for products that are provided
under those contracts for a number of years. For example, in
November 2004, HHS awarded VaxGen, Inc., one of our competitors
in the anthrax vaccine market, a contract for the supply of
75 million doses of a recombinant protective antigen
anthrax vaccine for inclusion in the strategic national
stockpile. If VaxGen is able to deliver product under its
contract, HHS may eliminate or reduce future orders for other
anthrax vaccines, including BioThrax.
If we are unable to consistently win new contract awards over an
extended period, or if we fail to anticipate all of the costs
and resources that will be required to secure such contract
awards, our growth strategy and our business, financial
condition, and operating results could be materially adversely
affected.
Our
U.S. government contracts for BioThrax require annual
funding decisions by the government. The failure to fund one or
more of these contracts could cause our financial condition and
operating results to suffer materially.
Our principal customer for BioThrax, our only marketed product,
is the U.S. government. We sell to the U.S. government
under contracts with the DoD and HHS. In addition, we anticipate
that the U.S. government will be the principal customer for
any other biodefense products that we successfully develop.
Accordingly, we are subject to a range of risks arising out of
being a contractor to the U.S. government under
U.S. government programs.
Over its lifetime, a U.S. government program may be
implemented through the award of many different individual
contracts and subcontracts. The funding of government programs
is subject to Congressional appropriations. Congress generally
appropriates funds on a fiscal year basis even though a program
may continue for several years. For example, our DoD contracts
for BioThrax have been structured with one base year during
which the DoD agrees to purchase a minimum number of doses of
BioThrax with options for the DoD to purchase further quantities
in future years. Government programs are often only partially
funded initially, and additional funds are committed only as
Congress makes further appropriations. The termination of a
program or failure to commit funds to a program would result in
a loss of anticipated future revenues attributable to that
program, which could materially harm our business. Our
government customers are subject to stringent budgetary
constraints and political considerations. If annual levels of
government expenditures and authorizations for biodefense
decrease or shift to programs in areas where we do not offer
products or are not developing product candidates, our business,
revenues and operating results may suffer.
The success of
our business with the U.S. government depends on our
compliance with additional regulations and obligations under our
U.S. government contracts.
Our business with the U.S. government is subject to
specific procurement regulations and a variety of other legal
compliance obligations. These obligations include those related
to:
|
|
|
procurement integrity;
|
|
|
export control;
|
|
|
government security regulations;
|
10
|
|
|
employment practices;
|
|
|
protection of the environment;
|
|
|
accuracy of records and the recording of costs; and
|
|
|
foreign corrupt practices.
|
Compliance with these obligations increases our performance and
compliance costs. Failure to comply with these regulations and
requirements could lead to suspension or debarment, for cause,
from government contracting or subcontracting for a period of
time. The termination of a government contract or relationship
as a result of our failure to satisfy any of these obligations
would have a negative impact on our operations and harm our
reputation and ability to procure other government contracts in
the future.
The pricing
under our fixed price government contracts is based on estimates
of the time, resources and expenses required to deliver the
specified doses of BioThrax. If our estimates are not accurate,
we may not be able to earn an adequate return under these
contracts.
Our current contracts for the supply of BioThrax with the DoD
and HHS are fixed price contracts. In addition, we expect that
our future contracts with the U.S. government for
biodefense product candidates that we successfully develop may
be fixed price contracts. Under a fixed price contract, we are
required to deliver our products at a fixed price regardless of
the actual costs we incur and absorb any costs in excess of the
fixed price. Estimating costs that are related to performance in
accordance with contract specifications is difficult. Our
failure to anticipate technical problems, estimate costs
accurately or control costs during performance of a fixed price
contract could reduce the profitability of a fixed price
contract or cause a loss.
Unfavorable
provisions in government contracts may harm our business,
financial condition and operating results.
Government contracts customarily contain provisions that give
the government rights and remedies that are not typically found
in commercial contracts, including provisions that allow the
government to:
|
|
|
terminate existing contracts, in whole or in part, for any
reason or no reason;
|
|
|
reduce or modify contracts or subcontracts;
|
|
|
cancel multi-year contracts and related orders if funds for
contract performance for any subsequent year become unavailable;
|
|
|
decline to exercise an option to renew a contract;
|
|
|
|
claim rights in products, including intellectual property,
developed under the contract;
|
|
|
|
suspend or debar the contractor from doing business with the
government or a specific government agency;
|
|
|
pursue criminal or civil remedies under the False Claims Act and
False Statements Act; and
|
|
|
control or prohibit the export of products.
|
Generally, government contracts, including our
U.S. government contracts for BioThrax, contain provisions
permitting unilateral termination or modification, in whole or
in part, at the governments convenience. Under general
principles of government contracting law, if the government
terminates a
11
contract for convenience, the terminated company may recover
only its incurred or committed costs, settlement expenses and
profit on work completed prior to the termination. If the
government terminates a contract for default, the defaulting
company is entitled to recover costs incurred and associated
profits on accepted items only and may be liable for excess
costs incurred by the government in procuring undelivered items
from another source. One or more of our government contracts
could be terminated under these circumstances.
Some government contracts grant the government the right to use,
for or on behalf of the U.S. government, any technologies
developed by the contractor under the government contract. If we
were to develop technology under a contract with such a
provision, we might not be able to prohibit third parties,
including our competitors, from using that technology in
providing products and services to the government.
Ongoing legal
proceedings or any future similar lawsuits could limit future
purchases of BioThrax by the U.S. government.
The results of ongoing legal proceedings could reduce demand for
BioThrax by the U.S. government. Prior to the issuance of
an order in December 2005 by the FDA and an appellate court
ruling in February 2006, the DoD had been enjoined by a
court order from administering BioThrax without informed consent
of the recipient or a Presidential waiver. Although we are not a
party to this lawsuit, if further proceedings or any similar
lawsuits result in another injunction or otherwise restrict the
administration of BioThrax by the DoD, the amount of future
purchases of BioThrax by the DoD could be limited. Furthermore,
lawsuits brought against us by third parties, even if not
successful, require us to spend time and money defending the
related litigation.
Risks related to
our financial position and need for additional
financing
We have a
limited operating history and may not maintain profitability in
future periods or on a consistent basis.
We have a limited operating history. We commenced operations in
1998, and the FDA approved the manufacture of BioThrax at our
renovated facilities in Lansing, Michigan in December 2001.
Although we were profitable for each of the last three fiscal
years, we have not been profitable for every quarter during that
time. In addition, we were not profitable for the six months
ended June 30, 2006. We may not be able to achieve
consistent profitability on a quarterly basis or sustain or
increase profitability on an annual basis. Our profitability is
substantially dependent on revenues from BioThrax product sales.
Revenues from BioThrax product sales have fluctuated
significantly in recent quarters and may continue to fluctuate
significantly from quarter to quarter based on the timing of our
fulfilling orders from the U.S. government. If we are
unable to maintain profitability on a consistent basis, the
market price of our common stock may decline, and you could lose
part or all of your investment.
Our
indebtedness may limit cash flow available to invest in the
ongoing needs of our business.
As of August 31, 2006, we had $39.5 million principal
amount of debt outstanding and remaining borrowing availability
of $5.0 million under our revolving lines of credit. Our
business plan also contemplates that we will raise
$10 million to $20 million of additional external debt
financing to fund our facility expansion in Lansing, Michigan
and to provide additional financial flexibility. We also may
incur additional indebtedness beyond such amount.
12
Our leverage could have significant adverse consequences,
including:
|
|
|
requiring us to dedicate a substantial portion of any cash flow
from operations to the payment of interest on, and principal of,
our debt, which will reduce the amounts available to fund
working capital, capital expenditures, product development
efforts and other general corporate purposes;
|
|
|
increasing the amount of interest that we have to pay on debt
with variable interest rates if market rates of interest
increase;
|
|
|
increasing our vulnerability to general adverse economic and
industry conditions;
|
|
|
limiting our flexibility in planning for, or reacting to,
changes in our business and the industry in which we
compete; and
|
|
|
placing us at a competitive disadvantage compared to our
competitors that have less debt.
|
We may not have sufficient funds or may be unable to arrange for
additional financing to pay the amounts due under our existing
debt. In addition, a failure to comply with the covenants under
our existing debt instruments could result in an event of
default under those instruments. In the event of an acceleration
of amounts due under our debt instruments as a result of an
event of default, we may not have sufficient funds or may be
unable to arrange for additional financing to repay our
indebtedness or to make any accelerated payments, and the
lenders could seek to enforce security interests in the
collateral securing such indebtedness. Because of the covenants
under our existing debt instruments and the pledge of our
existing assets as collateral, we have a limited ability to
obtain additional debt financing.
We expect to
require additional funding and may be unable to raise capital
when needed, which would harm our business, financial condition
and operating results.
We expect our development expenses to increase in connection
with our ongoing activities, particularly as we conduct
additional and later stage clinical trials for our product
candidates. In addition, we incur significant commercialization
expenses for BioThrax product sales, marketing and
manufacturing. We expect these commercialization expenses to
increase in the future as we seek to broaden the market for
BioThrax and if we receive marketing approval for additional
products. We also are committed to substantial capital
expenditures in connection with our facility expansion in
Lansing, Michigan. We expect the construction of the facility to
cost approximately $75 million, including approximately
$55 million for the building and associated capital
equipment, with the balance related to validation and
qualification activities required for regulatory approval and
initiation of manufacturing. We anticipate that we will incur
approximately $42 million for these purposes during 2006.
In addition, we expect to incur substantial capital expenditures
in connection with our planned build out of two buildings in
Frederick, Maryland as future manufacturing facilities. We
anticipate that we will incur up to $5 million during 2006
related to initial engineering design and preliminary utility
build out for these facilities. Because we are in the
preliminary planning stages of our Frederick build out, we
cannot reasonably estimate the timing and costs that will be
necessary to complete this project. If we proceed with this
project, we expect the costs to be substantial and to likely
require external sources of funds to finance the project.
We expect to continue to fund a significant portion of our
development and commercialization costs for our product
candidates with internally generated funds from sales of
BioThrax. If we do not obtain future contracts with, and deliver
BioThrax to, the DoD and HHS, we may be forced to find
additional sources of funding and to do so earlier than we
currently anticipate. Our business plan currently contemplates
that we will raise $10 million to $20 million of
additional external debt financing to fund our facility
expansion in Lansing and to provide additional financial
flexibility. We may not be able to obtain this financing or
13
otherwise be able to raise capital when needed or on attractive
terms, which would force us to delay, reduce the scope of or
eliminate our research and development programs or reduce our
planned commercialization efforts.
As of August 31, 2006, we had $15.4 million of cash
and cash equivalents. We believe that the net proceeds from this
offering, together with our existing cash and cash equivalents,
revenues from BioThrax product sales and other committed sources
of funds, will be sufficient to enable us to fund our
anticipated operating expenses and capital expenditure and debt
service requirements for at least the next 24 months. Our
future capital requirements will depend on many factors,
including:
|
|
|
the level and timing of BioThrax product sales and cost of
product sales;
|
|
|
|
the timing of, and the costs involved in, constructing our new
manufacturing facility in Lansing, Michigan and the build out of
our manufacturing facilities in Frederick, Maryland;
|
|
|
the scope, progress, results and costs of our preclinical and
clinical development activities;
|
|
|
the costs, timing and outcome of regulatory review of our
product candidates;
|
|
|
the number of, and development requirements for, other product
candidates that we may pursue;
|
|
|
the costs of commercialization activities, including product
marketing, sales and distribution;
|
|
|
the costs involved in preparing, filing, prosecuting,
maintaining and enforcing patent claims and other patent-related
costs, including litigation costs and the results of such
litigation;
|
|
|
|
the extent to which we acquire or invest in businesses, products
and technologies;
|
|
|
|
our ability to obtain development funding from government
entities and non-government and philanthropic organizations; and
|
|
|
|
our ability to establish and maintain collaborations, such as
our collaboration with Sanofi Pasteur.
|
To the extent our capital resources are insufficient to meet our
future capital requirements, we will need to finance our cash
needs through public or private equity offerings, debt
financings or corporate collaboration and licensing
arrangements. Our only committed external sources of funds are
remaining borrowing availability under our revolving lines of
credit, development funding under our collaboration agreement
with Sanofi Pasteur, funding from NIAID for animal efficacy
studies of our anthrax immune globulin candidate and funding
from the Wellcome Trust for our Phase II clinical trial of
our typhoid vaccine candidate in Vietnam. Our ability to borrow
additional amounts under our loan agreements is subject to our
satisfaction of specified conditions. Additional equity or debt
financing, grants, or corporate collaboration and licensing
arrangements, may not be available on acceptable terms, if at
all.
If we raise additional funds by issuing equity securities, our
stockholders may experience dilution. Debt financing, if
available, may involve agreements that include covenants
limiting or restricting our ability to take specific actions,
such as incurring additional debt, making capital expenditures
or declaring dividends. Any debt financing or additional equity
that we raise may contain terms, such as liquidation and other
preferences, that are not favorable to us or our stockholders.
If we raise additional funds through collaboration and licensing
arrangements with third parties, it may be necessary to
relinquish valuable rights to our technologies or product
candidates or grant licenses on terms that may not be favorable
to us.
14
Risks related to
manufacturing and manufacturing facilities
We have
initiated a manufacturing facility expansion program. Delays in
completing and receiving regulatory approvals for these
manufacturing facility projects could limit our potential
revenues and growth.
We are spending significant amounts for the construction of a
new 50,000 square foot manufacturing facility on our
Lansing, Michigan campus, which is being designed to enable us
to manufacture BioThrax on a large scale for our existing and
potential future customers. We are also constructing this new
facility to accommodate large scale commercial manufacturing of
multiple vaccine products, subject to complying with appropriate
change-over procedures. We expect the construction of the
facility to cost approximately $75 million, including
approximately $55 million for the building and associated
capital equipment, with the balance related to validation and
qualification activities required for regulatory approval and
initiation of manufacturing. We anticipate that we will incur
approximately $42 million for these purposes during 2006.
In addition, we own two buildings in Frederick, Maryland that we
plan to build out as future manufacturing facilities. We
anticipate that we will incur up to $5 million during 2006
related to initial engineering design and preliminary utility
build out for these facilities. Because we are in the
preliminary planning stages of our Frederick build out, we
cannot reasonably estimate the timing and costs that will be
necessary to complete this project. If we proceed with this
project, we expect the costs to be substantial and to likely
require external sources of funds to finance the project.
Constructing and preparing a facility for commercial vaccine
manufacturing is a significant project. For example,
constructing the new Lansing facility with increased
manufacturing capacity requires that we scale up both
fermentation and downstream processing compared to levels at our
existing production facility. These projects may result in
unanticipated delays and cost more than expected due to a number
of factors, including regulatory requirements. The FDA must
approve our new manufacturing facilities before they can be used
to commercially manufacture our products. For example, we are
required to show that the product we manufacture in our new
Lansing facility is comparable to BioThrax manufactured in our
existing production facility. The costs and time required to
comply with the FDAs current Good Manufacturing Practice,
or cGMP, regulations, or similar regulatory requirements for
sales of our products outside the United States, may be
significant. If construction or regulatory approval of our new
facility in Lansing is delayed, we may not be able to
manufacture sufficient quantities of BioThrax to allow us to
increase sales of BioThrax to the U.S. government and other
customers, which would limit our opportunities for growth. If
construction or regulatory approval of our new manufacturing
facilities at our Frederick site is delayed, we may not be able
to independently manufacture our commercial product candidates
for clinical trials or commercial sale. Cost overruns associated
with constructing either our Lansing or Frederick facilities
could require us to raise additional funds from external
sources. We may not be able to do so on favorable terms or at
all.
BioThrax and
our immunobiotic product candidates are difficult to manufacture
on a large scale commercial basis, which could cause us to delay
product launches or experience shortages of
products.
BioThrax and all our product candidates are biologics.
Manufacturing biologic products, especially in large quantities,
is complex. The products must be made consistently and in
substantial compliance with a clearly defined manufacturing
process. Accordingly, it is essential to be able to validate and
control the manufacturing process to assure that it is
reproducible. Slight deviations anywhere in the manufacturing
process, including filling, labeling and packaging and quality
control and testing, may result in lot failures or product
recalls. From time to time, we experience deviations during the
manufacturing process of BioThrax that can affect our release of
the production lot according to our release protocols and other
15
acceptance criteria. Lot failures or product recalls could cause
us to fail to satisfy customer orders or contractual
commitments, lead to a termination of one or more of our
contracts or result in litigation or regulatory action against
us, any of which could be costly to us and otherwise harm our
business.
For example, in late 2005, our standard product release testing
identified BioThrax production lots for which follow up testing
was required to determine whether we can submit these lots to
the FDA for release for sale. We waited to conduct final release
testing of these lots pending FDA review of an application that
we submitted to amend the BioThrax release specifications. The
FDA approved our amendment to the release specifications in May
2006, and we subsequently reinitiated release testing of these
BioThrax lots. We will not be able to sell any lots that fail to
satisfy the amended release testing specifications or that are
not released for sale by the FDA.
Disruption at,
damage to or destruction of our manufacturing facilities could
impede our ability to manufacture BioThrax, which would harm our
business, financial condition and operating
results.
We currently rely on our manufacturing facilities at a single
location in Lansing, Michigan for the production of BioThrax.
Any interruption in manufacturing operations at this location
could result in our inability to satisfy the product demands of
our customers. A number of factors could cause interruptions,
including:
|
|
|
equipment malfunctions or failures;
|
|
|
technology malfunctions;
|
|
|
work stoppages;
|
|
|
damage to or destruction of the facility due to natural
disasters;
|
|
|
regional power shortages;
|
|
|
product tampering; or
|
|
|
terrorist activities.
|
Any disruption that impedes our ability to manufacture and ship
BioThrax in a timely manner could reduce our revenues and
materially harm our business, financial condition and operating
results.
Our business
may be harmed if we do not adequately forecast customer
demand.
The timing and amount of customer demand is difficult to
predict. We may not be able to scale up our production quickly
enough to fill any new customer orders on a timely basis. This
could cause us to lose new business and possibly existing
business. In addition, we may not be able to scale up
manufacturing processes for our product candidates to allow
production of commercial quantities at a reasonable cost or at
all. Furthermore, if we overestimate customer demand, we could
incur significant unrecoverable costs from creating excess
capacity. For example, if we do not maintain and increase sales
of BioThrax to the U.S. government and other customers, we
may not be able to generate an adequate return on the
significant amounts that we are spending for construction of our
new manufacturing facility in Lansing. In addition, if we do not
successfully develop and commercialize any of our product
candidates, we may never require the production capacity that we
expect to have available at our Frederick site.
16
If third
parties do not manufacture our product candidates in sufficient
quantities and at an acceptable cost or in compliance with
regulatory requirements and specifications, the development and
commercialization of our product candidates could be delayed,
prevented or impaired.
We currently rely on third parties to manufacture the supplies
of our immunobiotic product candidates that we require for
preclinical and clinical development. Any significant delay in
obtaining adequate supplies of our product candidates could
adversely affect our ability to develop or commercialize these
product candidates. Although we recently commissioned a new
pilot plant manufacturing facility on our Lansing campus and
plan to construct a pilot plant in Maryland for production of
preclinical and clinical supplies of our product candidates, we
expect that we will continue to use third parties for these
purposes. In addition, we expect that we will rely on third
parties for a portion of the manufacturing process for
commercial supplies of product candidates that we successfully
develop, including fermentation for some of our vaccine product
candidates, plasma fractionation and purification for our immune
globulin product candidates and contract fill and finish
operations. Our current and anticipated future dependence upon
others for the manufacture of our product candidates may
adversely affect our ability to develop product candidates and
commercialize any products that receive regulatory approval on a
timely and competitive basis.
Our only long-term manufacturing agreements are our agreement
with Talecris Biotherapeutics, Inc., for purification and
fractionation of plasma for our anthrax immune globulin
candidate, and our collaboration with HPA, under which HPA
provides specialized manufacturing capabilities for our
recombinant bivalent botulinum vaccine candidate and the
bivalent botulinum toxoid vaccine that we plan to use as the
basis for our botulinum immune globulin candidate. Third party
manufacturers under our short-term supply agreements are not
obligated to accept any purchase orders we may submit. If any
third party terminates its agreement with us, based on its own
business priorities, or otherwise fails to fulfill our purchase
orders, we would need to rely on alternative sources to satisfy
our requirements. If these alternative suppliers are not
available or are delayed in fulfilling our requirements, we may
not be able to obtain adequate supplies of our product
candidates on a timely basis. A change of manufacturers may
require review from the FDA and satisfaction of comparable
foreign requirements. This review may be costly and time
consuming. There are a limited number of manufacturers that
operate under the FDAs cGMP requirements and that are both
capable of manufacturing for us and willing to do so.
We currently rely on third parties for regulatory compliance and
quality assurance with respect to the supplies of our product
candidates that they produce for us. We also will rely for these
purposes on any third party that we use for production of
commercial supplies of product candidates that we successfully
develop. Manufacturers are subject to ongoing, periodic,
unannounced inspection by the FDA and corresponding state and
foreign agencies or their designees to ensure strict compliance
with cGMP regulations and other governmental regulations and
corresponding foreign standards. We cannot be certain that our
present or future manufacturers will be able to comply with cGMP
regulations and other FDA regulatory requirements or similar
regulatory requirements outside the United States. We do not
control compliance by manufacturers with these regulations and
standards. If we or these third parties fail to comply with
applicable regulations, sanctions could be imposed on us, which
could significantly and adversely affect supplies of our product
candidates. The sanctions that might be imposed include:
|
|
|
fines, injunctions and civil penalties;
|
|
|
refusal by regulatory authorities to grant marketing approval of
our product candidates;
|
|
|
delays, suspension or withdrawal of regulatory approvals,
including license revocation;
|
17
|
|
|
seizures or recalls of product candidates or products;
|
|
|
operating restrictions; and
|
|
|
criminal prosecutions.
|
If as a result of regulatory requirements or otherwise we or
third parties are unable to manufacture our product candidates
at an acceptable cost, our product candidates may not be
commercially viable.
Our use of
hazardous materials, chemicals, bacteria and viruses requires us
to comply with regulatory requirements and exposes us to
significant potential liabilities.
Our development and manufacturing processes involve the use of
hazardous materials, including chemicals, bacteria, viruses and
radioactive materials, and produce waste products. Accordingly,
we are subject to federal, state, local and foreign laws and
regulations governing the use, manufacture, distribution,
storage, handling, disposal and recordkeeping of these
materials. In addition to complying with environmental and
occupational health and safety laws, we must comply with special
regulations relating to biosafety administered by the CDC, HHS
and the DoD.
The Public Health Security and Bioterrorism Preparedness and
Response Act and the Agricultural Protection Act require us to
register with the CDC and the Department of Agriculture our
possession, use or transfer of select biological agents or
toxins that could pose a threat to public health and safety, to
animal or plant health or to animal or plant products. This
legislation requires increased safeguards and security measures
for these select agents and toxins, including controlled access
and the screening of entities and personnel, and establishes a
comprehensive national database of registered entities.
We also are subject to export control regulations governing the
export of BioThrax and technology and materials used to develop
and manufacture BioThrax and our product candidates. If we fail
to comply with environmental, occupational health and safety,
biosafety and export control laws, we could be held liable for
fines, penalties and damages that result, and any such liability
could exceed our assets and resources. In addition, we could be
required to cease immediately all use of a select agent or
toxin, and we could be prohibited from exporting our products,
technology and materials.
Our general liability and umbrella insurance policies provide
for coverage up to annual aggregate limits of $12 million
with a deductible of $15,000 per occurrence, but exclude
coverage for liabilities relating to the release of pollutants.
We do not currently hold insurance policies expressly providing
for coverage relating to our use of hazardous materials other
than storage tank liability insurance for our Lansing, Michigan
facility with a $1 million annual aggregate limit and a
deductible of $10,000 per claim. The insurance that we
currently hold may not be adequate to cover all liabilities
relating to accidental contamination or injury as a result of
pollution conditions or other extraordinary or unanticipated
events.
If the company
on whom we rely for filling BioThrax vials is unable to perform
these services for us, our business may suffer.
We have outsourced the operation for filling BioThrax into vials
to a single company, Hollister-Stier Laboratories LLC. Our
contract with Hollister-Stier expires on December 31, 2007.
We have not established internal redundancy for our filling
functions and currently have no substitute provider that can
handle our filling needs. If Hollister-Stier is unable to
perform filling services for us or we are unable to enter into a
new contract with Hollister-Stier, we would need to identify and
engage an alternative filling company. Any new contract filling
company will need to obtain FDA approval for filling BioThrax at
its
18
facilities. Identifying and engaging a new contract filling
company and obtaining FDA approval could involve significant
cost and delay. As a result, we might not be able to deliver
BioThrax orders on a timely basis and our revenues could
decrease.
Risks related to
product development
Our business
depends significantly on our success in completing development
and commercializing product candidates that are still under
development. If we are unable to commercialize these product
candidates, or experience significant delays in doing so, our
business will be materially harmed.
We have invested a significant portion of our efforts and
financial resources in the development of our immunobiotic
product candidates. In addition to BioThrax product sales, our
ability to generate near term revenue is particularly dependent
on the success of our anthrax immune globulin candidate, which
is currently in preclinical development. The commercial success
of our product candidates will depend on many factors, including:
|
|
|
successful completion of preclinical development;
|
|
|
successful completion of clinical trials;
|
|
|
receipt of marketing approvals from the FDA and similar foreign
regulatory authorities;
|
|
|
a determination by the Secretary of HHS that our biodefense
product candidates should be purchased for the strategic
national stockpile prior to FDA approval;
|
|
|
establishing commercial manufacturing processes or arrangements;
|
|
|
launching commercial sales of the product, whether alone or in
collaboration with others; and
|
|
|
acceptance of the product by potential government customers,
physicians, patients, healthcare payors and others in the
medical community.
|
We expect to rely on FDA regulations known as the animal rule to
obtain approval for our biodefense product candidates. The
animal rule permits the use of animal efficacy studies together
with human clinical safety and immunogenicity trials to support
an application for marketing approval. These regulations are
relatively new, and we have limited experience in the
application of these rules to the product candidates that we are
developing. It is possible that results from these animal
efficacy studies may not be predictive of the actual efficacy of
our immunobiotic product candidates in humans. In addition, our
development plans for our botulinum immune globulin candidate
require the development of a new botulinum toxoid vaccine that
we would use to vaccinate individuals who would then donate
plasma for use in our botulinum immune globulin candidate. If
the development of this new botulinum toxoid vaccine is delayed
or not completed, for regulatory or other reasons, we may not be
able to successfully develop our botulinum immune globulin
candidate.
If we are not successful in completing the development and
commercialization of our immunobiotic product candidates, or if
we are significantly delayed in doing so, our business will be
materially harmed.
19
We will not be
able to commercialize our product candidates if our preclinical
development efforts are not successful, our clinical trials do
not demonstrate safety or our clinical or animal trials do not
demonstrate efficacy.
Before obtaining regulatory approval for the sale of our product
candidates, we must conduct extensive preclinical development,
clinical trials to demonstrate the safety of our product
candidates and clinical or animal trials to demonstrate the
efficacy of our product candidates. Preclinical and clinical
testing is expensive, difficult to design and implement, can
take many years to complete and is uncertain as to outcome.
Success in preclinical testing and early clinical trials does
not ensure that later clinical trials or animal efficacy trials
will be successful, and interim results of a clinical trial or
animal efficacy trial do not necessarily predict final results.
A failure of one or more of our clinical trials or animal
efficacy trials can occur at any stage of testing. We may
experience numerous unforeseen events during, or as a result of,
preclinical testing and the clinical or animal efficacy trial
process that could delay or prevent our ability to receive
regulatory approval or commercialize our product candidates,
including:
|
|
|
regulators or institutional review boards may not authorize us
to commence a clinical trial or conduct a clinical trial at a
prospective trial site;
|
|
|
we may decide, or regulators may require us, to conduct
additional preclinical testing or clinical trials, or we may
abandon projects that we expect to be promising, if our
preclinical tests, clinical trials or animal efficacy trials
produce negative or inconclusive results;
|
|
|
we might have to suspend or terminate our clinical trials if the
participating patients are being exposed to unacceptable health
risks;
|
|
|
regulators or institutional review boards may require that we
hold, suspend or terminate clinical development for various
reasons, including noncompliance with regulatory requirements;
|
|
|
the cost of our clinical trials may be greater than we currently
anticipate;
|
|
|
any regulatory approval we ultimately obtain may be limited or
subject to restrictions or post-approval commitments that render
the product not commercially viable; and
|
|
|
the effects of our product candidates may not be the desired
effects or may include undesirable side effects or the product
candidates may have other unexpected characteristics.
|
If we are required to conduct additional clinical trials or
other testing of our product candidates beyond those that we
currently contemplate, if we are unable to successfully complete
our clinical trials or other testing or if the results of these
trials or tests are not positive, we may:
|
|
|
be delayed in obtaining marketing approval for our product
candidates;
|
|
|
not be able to obtain marketing approval; or
|
|
|
obtain approval for indications that are not as broad as
intended.
|
For example, the FDA could require us to conduct additional
clinical development in our botulinum immune globulin program
that we currently do not plan to conduct. We expect to rely on
safety and immunogenicity data from a pentavalent botulinum
toxoid vaccine previously manufactured by the State of Michigan
in the development of a new bivalent botulinum toxoid vaccine
that we plan to use as the basis for our botulinum immune
globulin candidate. We plan to conduct a Phase I clinical
trial to evaluate the safety of the botulinum toxoid vaccine. If
the results are favorable, we expect that the Phase I
clinical trial will provide data sufficient to support an
acceptable dose for the vaccine and the optimal dosing schedule.
As a result, we anticipate that the FDA will not require us to
conduct a Phase II clinical trial for
20
the botulinum toxoid vaccine before permitting us to initiate a
donor stimulation program for our botulinum immune globulin
candidate. If the FDA requires us to conduct a Phase II
clinical trial for the botulinum toxoid vaccine, the development
plans for our botulinum immune globulin candidate will be
delayed.
Our product development costs will also increase if we
experience delays in testing or approvals. Significant clinical
trial delays also could allow our competitors to bring products
to market before we do and impair our ability to commercialize
our products or product candidates.
Under Project BioShield, the Secretary of HHS can contract to
purchase countermeasures for the strategic national stockpile
prior to FDA approval of the countermeasure in specified
circumstances. Project BioShield also allows the Secretary of
HHS to authorize the emergency use of medical products that have
not yet been approved by the FDA. However, our product
candidates may not be selected by the Secretary under this
authority. Moreover, this authority could result in increased
competition for our products and product candidates, as has
occurred in the case of the HHS procurement contract for
VaxGens anthrax vaccine candidate and as discussed below
under Risks related to
commercialization We face substantial competition,
which may result in others developing or commercializing
products before or more successfully than we do.
Risks related to
commercialization
If we fail to
achieve significant sales of BioThrax to customers in addition
to the U.S. government, our opportunities for growth could
be harmed.
An element of our business strategy is to establish a market for
sales of BioThrax to customers in addition to the
U.S. government. These potential customers include the
U.S. Postal Service, foreign governments, state and local
governments, which we expect will be interested in BioThrax to
protect first responders, such as police, fire and emergency
medical personnel, multinational companies, non-governmental
organizations and hospitals. The market for sales of BioThrax to
customers other than the U.S. government is new and
undeveloped, and we may not be successful in generating
meaningful sales of BioThrax to these potential customers. To
date, we have made only minimal sales to these customers. In
particular, we have supplied small amounts of BioThrax directly
to several foreign governments. In 2005, our sales of BioThrax
to customers other than the U.S. government represented
only one percent of our revenue. If we fail to significantly
increase our sales of BioThrax to these customers, our business
and opportunities for growth could be materially harmed.
Government regulations and the terms of our U.S. government
contracts may make it difficult for us to achieve significant
sales of BioThrax to customers other than the
U.S. government. For example, we are subject to export
control laws imposed by the U.S. government. Although there
are currently only limited restrictions on the export of
BioThrax, the U.S. government may decide, particularly in
the current environment of elevated concerns about global
terrorism, to increase the scope of export prohibitions. These
controls could limit our sales of BioThrax to foreign
governments and other foreign customers.
In addition, the DoD has contractual and statutory rights that
could interfere with sales of BioThrax to customers other than
the U.S. government. For example, our efforts to develop
domestic commercial and international sales may be impeded by
the DoDs right under the Defense Production Act to require
us to deliver more doses than are otherwise specified in our
contract with the DoD. If the DoD required delivery of these
additional doses, it could affect our production schedule and
deplete BioThrax supplies that would otherwise be available for
commercial sales. In addition, the DoD could either sell
BioThrax directly to foreign governments at a lower price than
we may offer or donate BioThrax to foreign governments under the
DoDs Foreign Military Sales program.
21
Our ability to meet any increased demand that develops for sales
of BioThrax to customers other than the U.S. government
depends on our available production capacity. We use
substantially all of our current production capacity at our
facility in Lansing, Michigan to manufacture BioThrax for sale
to U.S. government customers. We expect to complete
construction of our new manufacturing facility in Lansing in mid
2007. We anticipate that we will initiate large scale
manufacturing of BioThrax for commercial sale at the new
facility in 2008. Until the new manufacturing facility is
available for commercial use, we will not have sufficient
available production capacity to allow us to significantly
increase sales of BioThrax to customers other than the
U.S. government.
The commercial
success of BioThrax and any products that we may develop will
depend upon the degree of market acceptance by the government,
physicians, patients, healthcare payors and others in the
medical community.
Any products that we bring to the market may not gain or
maintain market acceptance by potential government customers,
physicians, patients, healthcare payors and others in the
medical community. In particular, our biodefense immunobiotic
products and product candidates are subject to the product
criteria that may be specified by potential U.S. government
customers. The product specifications in any government
procurement request may prohibit or preclude us from
participating in the government program if our products or
product candidates do not satisfy the stated criteria. For
example, in 2004, HHS issued a request for proposals for the
supply of anthrax vaccine for the strategic national stockpile.
The HHS request was limited to a recombinant anthrax vaccine.
Recombinant technology comprises scientific techniques that
allow for the manipulation of genetic material. Scientists apply
these techniques to disease-causing organisms known as
pathogens. Using recombinant technology, it is possible to
delete a virulent gene from a pathogen or isolate the gene
directing the production of the component of a pathogen known as
an antigen and move the antigen into a harmless organism that
can be purified and used as a vaccine. Because BioThrax is not a
recombinant vaccine, BioThrax was precluded from consideration
under that procurement program.
In May 2006, an HHS official stated in Congressional testimony
that HHS maintains a commitment to develop a next generation
recombinant protective antigen anthrax vaccine. A significant
portion of future government anthrax vaccine procurement
requests may specify a recombinant anthrax vaccine, which would
limit, possibly significantly, the market for BioThrax. In May
2006, NIAID issued a notice seeking statements of capability for
the advanced development and testing of next generation anthrax
vaccine candidates with specified properties, including the
ability to generate protective immune response in one or two
doses, the ability to be self administered or rapidly inoculated
into large numbers of people and a superior safety profile to
BioThrax. Although we are evaluating several potential product
candidates in connection with development of a next generation
anthrax vaccine with these properties, we may not be successful
in our development efforts.
In addition, notwithstanding favorable findings regarding the
safety and efficacy of BioThrax by the FDA in its final ruling
in December 2005, the U.S. Government Accountability Office
reiterated concerns regarding BioThrax in Congressional
testimony in May 2006 that it had previously identified
beginning in 1999. These concerns include the need for a six
dose regimen and annual booster doses, questions about the
long-term and short-term safety of the vaccine, including how
safety is affected by gender differences, and uncertainty about
the vaccines efficacy.
The use of vaccines carries a risk of adverse health effects
that must be weighed against the expected health benefit of the
product. The adverse reactions that have been associated with
the administration of BioThrax are similar to those observed
following the administration of other adult vaccines and include
local reactions, such as redness, swelling and limitation of
motion in the inoculated arm, and systemic
22
reactions, such as headache, fever, chills, nausea and general
body aches. In addition, some serious adverse events have been
reported to the vaccine adverse event reporting system database
maintained by the CDC and the FDA with respect to BioThrax. The
report of any such adverse event to the vaccine adverse event
reporting system database is not proof that the vaccine caused
such event. These serious adverse events, including diabetes,
heart attacks, autoimmune diseases, including Guillian Barre
syndrome, lupus and multiple sclerosis, lymphoma and death, have
not been causally linked to the administration of BioThrax.
If any products that we develop do not achieve an adequate level
of acceptance, we may not generate material revenues with
respect to these products. The degree of market acceptance of
our product candidates, if approved for commercial sale, will
depend on a number of factors, including:
|
|
|
the prevalence and severity of any side effects;
|
|
|
the efficacy and potential advantages over alternative
treatments;
|
|
|
the ability to offer our product candidates for sale at
competitive prices;
|
|
|
relative convenience and ease of administration;
|
|
|
the willingness of the target patient population to try new
products and of physicians to prescribe these products;
|
|
|
the strength of marketing and distribution support; and
|
|
|
sufficient third party coverage or reimbursement.
|
Political or
social factors, including related litigation, may delay or
impair our ability to market BioThrax and our biodefense product
candidates and may require us to spend time and money to address
these issues.
Products developed to treat diseases caused by or to combat the
threat of bioterrorism will be subject to changing political and
social environments. The political and social responses to
bioterrorism have been highly charged and unpredictable.
Political or social pressures or changes in the perception of
the risk that military personnel or civilians could be exposed
to biological agents as weapons of bioterrorism may delay or
cause resistance to bringing our products to market or limit
pricing or purchases of our products, which would harm our
business. In addition, substantial delays or cancellations of
purchases could result from protests or challenges from third
parties. Furthermore, lawsuits brought against us by third
parties or activists, even if not successful, require us to
spend time and money defending the related litigation. The need
to address political and social issues may divert our
managements time and attention from other business
concerns.
For example, between 2001 and 2004, members of the military and
various activist groups filed a citizens petition with the
FDA and various lawsuits seeking the revocation of the license
for BioThrax and the termination of the DoD program for the
mandatory administration of BioThrax to military personnel. In
October 2004, a federal court ruled that the FDA, as part of its
review of all biological products approved prior to 1972, had
not properly issued a final order determining that BioThrax is
safe and effective and not misbranded. As a result, the court
issued an injunction prohibiting the DoD from administering
BioThrax to military personnel without informed consent of the
recipient or a Presidential waiver. Although the FDA issued a
final order in December 2005 determining that BioThrax is safe
and effective and not misbranded and, as a result, an appellate
court ruled in February 2006 that the injunction was dissolved,
these actions created negative publicity about BioThrax. Similar
or other such
23
lawsuits or publicity campaigns could limit demand for BioThrax
and our biodefense product candidates and harm our future
business.
We have a
small marketing and sales group. If we are unable to expand our
sales and marketing capabilities or enter into sales and
marketing agreements with third parties, we may be unable to
generate product sales revenue from sales to customers other
than the U.S. government.
To achieve commercial success for any approved product, we must
either develop a sales and marketing organization or outsource
these functions to third parties. We currently market and sell
BioThrax directly to the DoD and HHS through a small, targeted
marketing and sales group. We plan to continue to do so and
expect that we will use a similar approach for sales to the
U.S. government of any other biodefense product candidates
that we successfully develop. However, to increase our sales of
BioThrax to state and local governments and foreign governments
and create an infrastructure for future sales of other
biodefense products to these customers, we plan to expand our
sales and marketing organization. In addition, we expect to
establish a separate internal organization to market and sell
commercial products for which we retain commercialization or
co-commercialization rights.
We may not be able to attract, hire, train and retain qualified
sales and marketing personnel to build a significant or
effective marketing and sales force for sales of biodefense
product candidates to customers other than the
U.S. government or for sales of our commercial product
candidates. If we are not successful in our efforts to expand
our internal sales and marketing capability, our ability to
independently market and sell BioThrax and any other product
candidates that we successfully develop will be impaired.
Expanding our internal sales and marketing capability will be
expensive and time consuming and could delay any product launch.
If the commercial launch of a product candidate for which we
recruit a sales force and establish marketing capabilities is
delayed as a result of FDA requirements or other reasons, we
would incur related expenses too early relative to the product
launch. This may be costly, and our investment would be lost if
we cannot retain our sales and marketing personnel.
We face
substantial competition, which may result in others developing
or commercializing products before or more successfully than we
do.
The development and commercialization of new immunobiotics is
highly competitive. We face competition with respect to
BioThrax, our current product candidates and any products we may
seek to develop or commercialize in the future from major
pharmaceutical companies and biotechnology companies worldwide.
Potential competitors also include academic institutions,
government agencies, and other public and private research
institutions that conduct research, seek patent protection and
establish collaborative arrangements for research, development,
manufacturing and commercialization. Our competitors may develop
products that are safer, more effective, have fewer side
effects, are more convenient or are less costly than any
products that we may develop. Our competitors may also obtain
FDA or other regulatory approval for their products more rapidly
than we may obtain approval for ours. We believe that our most
significant competitors in the area of immunobiotics are a
number of pharmaceutical companies that have vaccine programs,
including GlaxoSmithKline, Sanofi-Aventis, Wyeth, Merck and
Novartis, as well as smaller more focused companies engaged in
immunobiotic development, such as VaxGen, Cangene, Human Genome
Sciences, Acambis, Avant Immunotherapeutics and Avecia Group.
Any immunobiotic product candidate that we successfully develop
and commercialize is likely to compete with currently marketed
products, such as vaccines and therapeutics, including
antibiotics, and with other product candidates that are in
development for the same indications. In many cases, the
currently marketed products have well known brand names, are
distributed by large pharmaceutical companies
24
with substantial resources and have achieved widespread
acceptance among physicians and patients. In addition, we are
aware of product candidates of third parties that are in
development, which, if approved, would compete against product
candidates for which we receive marketing approval.
Although BioThrax is the only anthrax vaccine approved by the
FDA for the prevention of anthrax infection, we face significant
competition for the supply of this vaccine to the
U.S. government. We believe our most significant competitor
for the supply of BioThrax to the U.S. government is VaxGen. HHS
has awarded VaxGen a contract to supply 75 million doses of
recombinant protective antigen vaccine for the strategic
national stockpile.
We also face significant competition for our biodefense
immunobiotic product candidates. HHS has awarded strategic
national stockpile supply contracts to Cangene for an anthrax
immune globulin and Human Genome Sciences for a monoclonal
antibody to Bacillus anthracis as a post-exposure
therapeutic for anthrax infection. Several companies have
botulinum vaccines in early clinical or preclinical development.
HHS has awarded Cangene a contract to develop a heptavalent
botulinum immune globulin derived from equine plasma and supply
a botulinum immune globulin for the strategic national stockpile.
One oral typhoid vaccine and one injectable typhoid vaccine are
currently approved and administered in the United States and
Europe. Numerous companies have vaccine candidates in
development that would compete with any of our commercial
immunobiotic product candidates for which we obtain marketing
approval.
Many of our competitors have significantly greater financial
resources and expertise in research and development,
manufacturing, preclinical testing, conducting clinical trials,
obtaining regulatory approvals and marketing approved products
than we do. Smaller or early stage companies may also prove to
be significant competitors, particularly through collaborative
arrangements with large and established companies. These
competitors also compete with us in recruiting and retaining
qualified scientific and management personnel, as well as in
acquiring products, product candidates and technologies
complementary to, or necessary for, our programs or advantageous
to our business.
Legislation
and contractual provisions limiting or restricting liability of
manufacturers, such as us, may not be adequate to protect us
from all liabilities associated with the manufacture, sale and
use of our products.
Provisions of our BioThrax contracts with the DoD and HHS and
federal legislation enacted to protect manufacturers of
biodefense and anti-terrorism countermeasures may limit our
potential liability related to the manufacture, sale and use of
BioThrax and our biodefense product candidates. However, these
contractual provisions and legislation may not fully protect us
from all related liabilities.
The Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act, which was
signed into law in December 2005, creates general immunity for
manufacturers of biodefense countermeasures, including security
countermeasures, when the Secretary of HHS issues a declaration
for their manufacture, administration or use. The declaration is
meant to provide general immunity from all claims under state or
federal law for loss arising out of the administration or use of
a covered countermeasure. Manufacturers are not entitled to this
protection in cases of willful misconduct.
Upon a declaration by the Secretary, a compensation fund is
created to provide timely, uniform, and adequate
compensation to eligible individuals for covered injuries
directly caused by the administration or use of a covered
countermeasure. The covered injuries to which
the program applies are defined as serious physical injuries or
death. Individuals are permitted to bring a willful misconduct
action against a
25
manufacturer only after they have exhausted their remedies under
the compensation program. However, a willful misconduct action
could be brought against us if any individuals exhausted their
remedies under the compensation program and thereby expose us to
liability. Although we may petition the Secretary to make such a
declaration with respect to anthrax generally and BioThrax
specifically, we do not know if any such petition would be
successful or that, if successful, the Act will provide adequate
coverage or survive anticipated legal challenges to its validity.
In August 2006, the Department of Homeland Security approved our
application under the Safety Act enacted by the
U.S. Congress in 2002 for liability protection for sales of
BioThrax. The Safety Act creates product liability limitations
for qualifying anti-terrorism technologies for claims arising
from or related to an act of terrorism. In addition, the Safety
Act provides a process by which an anti-terrorism technology may
be certified as an approved product by the
Department of Homeland Security and therefore entitled to a
rebuttable presumption that the government contractor defense
applies to sales of the product. The government contractor
defense, under specified circumstances, extends the sovereign
immunity of the United States to government contractors who
manufacture a product for the government. Specifically, for the
government contractor defense to apply, the government must
approve reasonably precise specifications, the product must
conform to those specifications and the supplier must warn the
government about known dangers arising from the use of the
product. Although we are entitled to the benefits of the Safety
Act, it may not provide adequate protection from any claims made
against us.
In addition, although our existing contracts with the DoD and
HHS provide that the government will indemnify us for any
damages resulting from product liability claims, we cannot be
certain that we will be able to continue to negotiate similar
rights in future contracts or that the U.S. government will
honor this obligation. For example, although we have notified
the DoD of the lawsuits filed against us by current and former
members of the U.S. military claiming damages as the result
of personal injuries allegedly suffered from vaccination with
BioThrax, the DoD has not yet acted on our claim for
indemnification pending resolution of our claims under our
product liability insurance.
In addition, members of Congress have proposed and may in the
future propose legislation that reduces or eliminates these and
other liability protections for manufacturers of biodefense
countermeasures.
Product
liability lawsuits could cause us to incur substantial
liabilities and require us to limit commercialization of any
products that we may develop.
We face an inherent risk of product liability exposure related
to the sale of BioThrax and any other products that we
successfully develop and the testing of our product candidates
in clinical trials. We currently are a defendant in three
federal lawsuits filed on behalf of three individuals vaccinated
with BioThrax by the U.S. Army that claim damages resulting
from personal injuries allegedly suffered because of the
vaccination. The plaintiff in each of these three lawsuits
claims different injuries and seeks varying amounts of damages.
The first plaintiff alleges that the vaccine caused erosive
rheumatoid arthritis and requests damages in excess of
$1 million. The second plaintiff alleges that the vaccine
caused Bells palsy and other related conditions and
requests damages in excess of $75,000. The third plaintiff
alleges that the vaccine caused a condition that originally was
diagnosed as encephalitis related to a gastrointestinal
infection and caused him to fall into a coma for many weeks and
requests damages in excess of $10 million.
26
If we cannot successfully defend ourselves against claims that
our product or product candidates caused injuries and we are not
entitled to indemnity by the U.S. government, we will incur
substantial liabilities. Regardless of merit or eventual
outcome, liability claims may result in:
|
|
|
decreased demand for any product candidates or products that we
may develop;
|
|
|
injury to our reputation;
|
|
|
withdrawal of clinical trial participants;
|
|
|
withdrawal of a product from the market;
|
|
|
costs to defend the related litigation;
|
|
|
substantial monetary awards to trial participants or patients;
|
|
|
loss of revenue; and
|
|
|
the inability to commercialize any products that we may develop.
|
We have product liability insurance for coverage up to a
$10 million annual aggregate limit with a deductible of
$75,000 per claim. The amount of insurance that we
currently hold may not be adequate to cover all liabilities that
may occur. Insurance coverage is increasingly expensive. We may
not be able to maintain insurance coverage at a reasonable cost
and we may not be able to obtain insurance coverage that will be
adequate to satisfy any liability that may arise. For example,
from 2002 through February 2006, we were unable to obtain
product liability insurance for sales of BioThrax on
commercially reasonable terms. We do not believe that the amount
of insurance we have been able to obtain for BioThrax is
sufficient to manage the risk associated with the potential
deployment of BioThrax as a countermeasure to bioterrorism
threats. We rely on contractual indemnification provisions and
statutory protections to limit our liability for BioThrax.
If we are
unable to obtain adequate reimbursement from governments or
third party payors for any products that we may develop or to
obtain acceptable prices for those products, our revenues will
suffer.
Our revenues and profits from any products that we successfully
develop, other than with respect to sales of our biodefense
products under government contracts, will depend heavily upon
the availability of adequate reimbursement for the use of such
products from governmental and other third party payors, both in
the United States and in other markets. Reimbursement by a third
party payor may depend upon a number of factors, including the
third party payors determination that use of a product is:
|
|
|
a covered benefit under its health plan;
|
|
|
safe, effective and medically necessary;
|
|
|
appropriate for the specific patient;
|
|
|
cost-effective; and
|
|
|
neither experimental nor investigational.
|
Obtaining a determination that a product is covered is a
time-consuming and costly process that could require us to
provide supporting scientific, clinical and cost-effectiveness
data for the use of our products to each payor. We may not be
able to provide data sufficient to gain coverage. Even when a
payor determines that a product is covered, the payor may impose
limitations that preclude payment for some
27
uses that are approved by the FDA or comparable authorities but
are determined by the payor to not be medically reasonable and
necessary. Moreover, eligibility for coverage does not imply
that any product will be covered in all cases or that
reimbursement will be available at a rate that permits the
health care provider to cover its costs of using the product. We
expect that the success of some of our commercial vaccine
candidates for which we obtain marketing approval will depend on
inclusion of those product candidates in government immunization
programs.
Most non-pediatric commercial vaccines are purchased and paid
for, or reimbursed by, managed care organizations, other private
health plans or public insurers or paid for directly by
patients. In the United States, pediatric vaccines are funded by
a variety of federal entitlements and grants, as well as state
appropriations. Foreign governments also commonly fund pediatric
vaccination programs through national health programs. In
addition, with respect to some diseases affecting the public
health generally, particularly in developing countries, public
health authorities or nongovernmental, charitable or
philanthropic organizations fund the cost of vaccines.
Federal legislation, enacted in December 2003, has altered the
way in which physician-administered drugs and biologics covered
by Medicare are reimbursed. Under the new reimbursement
methodology, physicians are reimbursed based on a products
average sales price. This new reimbursement
methodology has generally led to lower reimbursement levels. The
new federal legislation also has added an outpatient
prescription drug benefit to Medicare, which went into effect
January 2006. These benefits will be provided primarily through
private entities, which we expect will attempt to negotiate
price concessions from pharmaceutical manufacturers.
Any products we may develop may also be eligible for
reimbursement under Medicaid. If the state-specific Medicaid
programs do not provide adequate coverage and reimbursement for
any products we may develop, it may have a negative impact on
our operations.
The scope of coverage and payment policies varies among third
party private payors, including indemnity insurers, employer
group health insurance programs and managed care plans. These
third party carriers may base their coverage and reimbursement
on the coverage and reimbursement rate paid by carriers for
Medicare beneficiaries. Furthermore, many such payors are
investigating or implementing methods for reducing health care
costs, such as the establishment of capitated or prospective
payment systems. Cost containment pressures have led to an
increased emphasis on the use of cost-effective products by
health care providers. If third party payors do not provide
adequate coverage or reimbursement for any products we may
develop, it could have a negative effect on revenues and results
of operations.
Foreign
governments tend to impose strict price controls, which may
adversely affect our revenues.
In some foreign countries, particularly the countries of the
European Union, the pricing of prescription pharmaceuticals is
subject to governmental control. In these countries, pricing
negotiations with governmental authorities can take considerable
time after the receipt of marketing approval for a product. To
obtain reimbursement or pricing approval in some countries, we
may be required to conduct a clinical trial that compares the
cost-effectiveness of our product candidate to other available
therapies. If reimbursement of our products is unavailable or
limited in scope or amount, or if pricing is set at
unsatisfactory levels, our business could be adversely affected.
Legislation has been introduced into Congress that, if enacted,
would permit more widespread
re-importation
of drugs from foreign countries into the United States, which
may include
re-importation
from foreign countries where the drugs are sold at lower prices
than in the United States. Such
28
legislation, or similar regulatory changes, could decrease the
price we receive for any approved products which, in turn, could
adversely affect our operating results and our overall financial
condition.
If we fail to
attract and keep senior management and key scientific personnel,
we may be unable to successfully sustain or expand our BioThrax
operations or develop or commercialize our product
candidates.
Our success depends on our continued ability to attract, retain
and motivate highly qualified managerial and key scientific
personnel. We consider Fuad El-Hibri, our president, chief
executive officer and chairman of our board of directors, Steven
N. Chatfield, our chief scientific officer and president of
Emergent Product Development UK Limited, Edward J. Arcuri, our
executive vice president and chief operating officer, and Robert
G. Kramer, president and chief executive officer of BioPort, to
be key to our BioThrax operations and our efforts to develop and
commercialize our product candidates. All of these key
employees, other than Dr. Chatfield, are at will employees
and can terminate their employment at any time. Our employment
agreement with Dr. Chatfield is terminable by him on short
notice. We do not maintain key person insurance on
any of our employees.
In addition, our growth will require us to hire a significant
number of qualified scientific and commercial personnel,
including clinical development, regulatory, marketing and sales
executives and field sales personnel, as well as additional
administrative personnel. There is intense competition from
other companies and research and academic institutions for
qualified personnel in the areas of our activities. If we cannot
continue to attract and retain, on acceptable terms, the
qualified personnel necessary for the continued development of
our business, we may not be able to sustain our operations or
grow.
Additional risks
related to sales of biodefense products to the
U.S. government
Our business
could be adversely affected by a negative audit by the
U.S. government.
U.S. government agencies such as the Defense Contract Audit
Agency, or the DCAA, routinely audit and investigate government
contractors. These agencies review a contractors
performance under its contracts, cost structure and compliance
with applicable laws, regulations and standards. The DCAA also
reviews the adequacy of, and a contractors compliance
with, its internal control systems and policies, including the
contractors purchasing, property, estimating, compensation
and management information systems. Any costs found to be
improperly allocated to a specific contract will not be
reimbursed, while such costs already reimbursed must be
refunded. If an audit uncovers improper or illegal activities,
we may be subject to civil and criminal penalties and
administrative sanctions, including:
|
|
|
termination of contracts;
|
|
|
forfeiture of profits;
|
|
|
suspension of payments;
|
|
|
fines; and
|
|
|
suspension or prohibition from doing business with the
U.S. government.
|
In addition, we could suffer serious reputational harm if
allegations of impropriety were made against us.
29
Laws and
regulations affecting government contracts make it more costly
and difficult for us to successfully conduct our
business.
We must comply with numerous laws and regulations relating to
the formation, administration and performance of government
contracts, which can make it more difficult for us to retain our
rights under these contracts. These laws and regulations affect
how we do business with federal, state and local government
agencies. Among the most significant government contracting
regulations that affect our business are:
|
|
|
the Federal Acquisition Regulations, and agency-specific
regulations supplemental to the Federal Acquisition Regulations,
which comprehensively regulate the procurement, formation,
administration and performance of government contracts;
|
|
|
the business ethics and public integrity obligations, which
govern conflicts of interest and the hiring of former government
employees, restrict the granting of gratuities and funding of
lobbying activities and incorporate other requirements such as
the Anti-Kickback Act and Foreign Corrupt Practices Act;
|
|
|
export and import control laws and regulations; and
|
|
|
laws, regulations and executive orders restricting the use and
dissemination of information classified for national security
purposes and the exportation of certain products and technical
data.
|
In addition, qui tam lawsuits have been brought against
us in which the plaintiffs argued that we defrauded the
U.S. government by distributing non-compliant doses of
BioThrax. This litigation was brought against us under a
provision of the False Claims Act that allows a private citizen
to file a suit in the name of the U.S. government charging
fraud by government contractors and other entities who receive
or use government funds and share in any money recovered.
Although a federal district court dismissed the litigation, and
a federal appeals court subsequently upheld that decision, we
spent significant time and money defending the litigation.
The states, many municipalities and foreign governments
typically also have laws and regulations governing contracts
with their respective agencies. These domestic and foreign laws
and regulations affect how we and our customers can do business
and, in some instances, impose added costs on our business. Any
changes in applicable laws and regulations could restrict our
ability to maintain our existing contracts and obtain new
contracts, which could limit our ability to conduct our business
and materially adversely affect our revenues and results of
operations.
We rely on
property and equipment owned by the Department of Defense in the
manufacturing process for BioThrax.
Our BioThrax supply contract with the DoD grants us the right to
use property and equipment owned by the DoD in the manufacture
of BioThrax. This property and equipment, referred to as
government furnished equipment, is in service at our Lansing
site. Some of this government furnished equipment is important
to our business. We pay the DoD a small usage fee for the
government furnished equipment based on the number of doses of
BioThrax that we produce for sale to customers other than the
U.S. government. We have the option to purchase all or part
of the government furnished equipment at any time during the
contract period for approximately $21 million. If the DOD
modifies the terms under which we use the government furnished
equipment in a manner unfavorable to us, including raising the
usage fee, our business could be harmed. If DoD terminated our
contract, we could be required to rent or purchase all or a part
of the government furnished equipment to continue production of
BioThrax in our current facility.
30
Risks related to
regulatory approvals
If we are not
able to obtain required regulatory approvals, we will not be
able to commercialize our product candidates, and our ability to
generate revenue will be materially impaired.
Our product candidates and the activities associated with their
development and commercialization, including their testing,
manufacture, safety, efficacy, recordkeeping, labeling, storage,
approval, advertising, promotion, sale and distribution, are
subject to comprehensive regulation by the FDA and other
regulatory agencies in the United States and by comparable
authorities in other countries. Failure to obtain regulatory
approval for a product candidate will prevent us from
commercializing the product candidate. We have only limited
experience in preparing, filing and prosecuting the applications
necessary to gain regulatory approvals and expect to rely on
third party contract research organizations and consultants to
assist us in this process. Securing FDA approval requires the
submission of extensive preclinical and clinical data,
information about product manufacturing processes and inspection
of facilities and supporting information to the FDA to establish
the product candidates safety and efficacy. Our future
products may not be effective, may be only moderately effective
or may prove to have significant side effects, toxicities or
other characteristics that may preclude our obtaining regulatory
approval or prevent or limit commercial use.
In the United States, BioThrax, our biodefense product
candidates and our commercial product candidates are regulated
by the FDA as biologics. To obtain approval from the FDA to
market these product candidates, other than biodefense products
purchased by HHS for the strategic national stockpile, we will
be required to submit to the FDA a biologics license
application, or BLA. Ordinarily, the FDA requires a sponsor to
support a BLA application with substantial evidence of the
products safety and effectiveness in treating the targeted
indication based on data derived from adequate and well
controlled clinical trials, including Phase III safety and
efficacy trials conducted in patients with the disease or
condition being targeted.
Because humans are rarely exposed to anthrax or botulinum toxins
under natural conditions, and cannot be intentionally exposed,
statistically significant effectiveness of our biodefense
product candidates cannot be demonstrated in humans, but instead
must be demonstrated, in part, by utilizing animal models before
they can be approved for marketing. We believe that, according
to the FDAs current BLA requirements for biologics that
cannot be ethically or feasibly tested in humans in
Phase III efficacy trials, we may instead be able to obtain
BLA approval based on clinical data from Phase II and
Phase III trials in healthy subjects that demonstrate
adequate safety and immune response and effectiveness data from
studies in animals. Specifically, we intend to pursue FDA
approval of our immune globulin candidates and our recombinant
bivalent botulinum vaccine candidate under the FDA animal rule.
Under the animal rule, if human efficacy trials are not ethical
or feasible, the FDA can approve drugs or biologics used to
treat or prevent serious or life threatening conditions caused
by exposure to lethal or permanently disabling toxic chemical,
biological, radiological or nuclear substances based on human
clinical data demonstrating safety and immunogenicity and
evidence of efficacy from appropriate non-clinical animal
studies and any additional supporting data. Products approved
under the animal rule are subject to additional regulation not
normally required of other products. Additional regulation may
include post-marketing study requirements, restrictions imposed
on marketing or distribution or requirements to provide
information to patients.
Based on an interim analysis of data from an ongoing clinical
trial of BioThrax being conducted by the CDC, we have applied to
the FDA to reduce the number of required doses of BioThrax for
pre-exposure prophylaxis from six to five, with an annual
booster dose thereafter. In April 2006, the FDA issued a
complete response letter to our application, requesting
clarification and requiring additional analysis of the data that
we submitted. We are in the process of responding to this letter
and amending our
31
application. If the FDA does not find our response to be
adequate, we might be required to conduct additional independent
testing to continue to pursue the development of this dosing
regimen. Responding to the FDAs complete response letter
will delay potential approval of our application. If we are
unable ultimately to respond satisfactorily to the FDA, our
application will not be approved.
The process of obtaining regulatory approvals is expensive,
often takes many years, if approval is obtained at all, and can
vary substantially based upon the type, complexity and novelty
of the product candidates involved. Changes in the regulatory
approval policy during the development period, changes in or the
enactment of additional statutes or regulations, or changes in
regulatory review for each submitted product application, may
cause delays in the approval or rejection of an application. The
FDA has substantial discretion in the approval process and may
refuse to accept any application or may decide that our data are
insufficient for approval and require additional preclinical,
clinical or other studies. In addition, varying interpretations
of the data obtained from preclinical and clinical testing could
delay, limit or prevent regulatory approval of a product
candidate.
Our products
could be subject to restrictions or withdrawal from the market
and we may be subject to penalties if we fail to comply with
regulatory requirements or experience unanticipated problems
with our products.
Any immunobiotic product for which we obtain marketing approval,
along with the manufacturing processes, post-approval clinical
data, labeling, advertising and promotional activities for such
product, will be subject to continual requirements of and review
by the FDA and other regulatory bodies, including through
inspections of our facilities. As an approved product, BioThrax
is subject to these requirements and ongoing review. These
requirements include submissions of safety and other
post-marketing information and reports, registration
requirements, cGMP requirements relating to quality control,
quality assurance and corresponding maintenance of records and
documents, and recordkeeping. The FDA enforces its cGMP and
other requirements through periodic unannounced inspections of
manufacturing facilities. The FDA is authorized to inspect
manufacturing facilities without a warrant at reasonable times
and in a reasonable manner.
After we acquired BioThrax and related vaccine manufacturing
facilities in Lansing, Michigan in 1998 from the Michigan
Biologic Products Institute, we spent significant amounts of
time and money renovating those facilities before the FDA
approved a supplement to our manufacturing facility license in
December 2001. The State of Michigan had initiated renovations
after the FDA issued a notice of intent to revoke the FDA
license to manufacture BioThrax in 1997. The notice of intent to
revoke cited significant deviations by the Michigan Biologic
Products Institute from cGMP requirements, including quality
control failures. After approving the renovated Lansing
facilities in December 2001, the FDA conducted routine, biannual
inspections of the Lansing facilities in September 2002, May
2004 and May 2006. Following each of these inspections, the FDA
issued inspectional observations on Form FDA 483. We
responded to the FDA regarding the inspectional observations
relating to each inspection and, where necessary, implemented
corrective action. In December 2005, the FDA stated in its final
order on BioThrax that at that time we were in compliance with
all regulatory requirements related to the manufacture of
BioThrax and that the FDA would continue to evaluate the
production of BioThrax to assure compliance with federal
standards and regulations. Although we have filed with the FDA
our response to the inspectional observations relating to the
May 2006 inspection, the FDA may not find our response to be
adequate. If the FDA finds that we are not in substantial
compliance with cGMP requirements, the FDA may undertake
enforcement action against us.
Even if regulatory approval of a product is granted, the
approval may be subject to limitations on the indicated uses for
which the product may be marketed or to the conditions of
approval, or contain
32
requirements for costly post-marketing testing and surveillance
to monitor the safety or efficacy of the product. Later
discovery of previously unknown problems with our products or
manufacturing processes, or failure to comply with regulatory
requirements, may result in:
|
|
|
restrictions on the marketing or manufacturing of a product;
|
|
|
warning letters;
|
|
|
withdrawal of the product from the market;
|
|
|
refusal to approve pending applications or supplements to
approved applications;
|
|
|
voluntary or mandatory product recall;
|
|
|
fines or disgorgement of profits or revenue;
|
|
|
suspension or withdrawal of regulatory approvals, including
license revocation;
|
|
|
refusal to permit the import or export of products;
|
|
|
product seizure; and
|
|
|
injunctions or the imposition of civil or criminal penalties.
|
We may not be
able to obtain orphan drug exclusivity for our products. If our
competitors are able to obtain orphan drug exclusivity for their
products that are the same as our products, we may not be able
to have competing products approved by the applicable regulatory
authority for a significant period of time.
Regulatory authorities in some jurisdictions, including the
United States and Europe, may designate drugs and biologics for
relatively small patient populations as orphan drugs. Generally,
if a product with an orphan drug designation subsequently
receives the first marketing approval for the indication for
which it has such designation, the product is entitled to a
seven-year period of marketing exclusivity, which precludes the
FDA from approving another marketing application for the same
drug or biologic for that time period for the same indication.
Orphan drug exclusivity in Europe lasts for ten years, but can
be reduced to six years if a drug or biologic no longer meets
the criteria for orphan drug designation or if the drug or
biologic is sufficiently profitable so that market exclusivity
is no longer justified. If a competitor obtains orphan drug
exclusivity for an indication for a product that competes with
one of the indications for one of our product candidates before
we obtain orphan drug designation, and if the competitors
product is the same drug as ours, the FDA would be prohibited
from approving our product candidate for the same orphan
indication unless we demonstrate that our product is clinically
superior. None of our products or product candidates have been
designated as orphan drugs. Even if we obtain orphan drug
exclusivity for one or more indications for one of our product
candidates, we may not be able to maintain it. For example, if a
competitive product that is the same drug or biologic as our
product is shown to be clinically superior to our product, any
orphan drug exclusivity we have obtained will not block the
approval of that competitive product.
Failure to
obtain regulatory approval in international jurisdictions would
prevent us from marketing our products abroad.
We intend to have our products marketed outside the United
States. To market our products in the European Union and many
other foreign jurisdictions, we may need to obtain separate
regulatory approvals and comply with numerous and varying
regulatory requirements. With respect to some of our
33
product candidates, we expect that a future collaborator will
have responsibility to obtain regulatory approvals outside the
United States, and we will depend on our collaborators to obtain
these approvals. The approval procedure varies among countries
and can involve additional testing. The time required to obtain
approval may differ from that required to obtain FDA approval.
The foreign regulatory approval process may include all of the
risks associated with obtaining FDA approval. We may not obtain
foreign regulatory approvals on a timely basis, if at all.
Approval by the FDA does not ensure approval by regulatory
authorities in other countries or jurisdictions, and approval by
one foreign regulatory authority does not ensure approval by
regulatory authorities in other foreign countries or
jurisdictions or by the FDA. We and our collaborators may not be
able to file for regulatory approvals and may not receive
necessary approvals to commercialize our products in any market.
Risks related to
our dependence on third parties
We may not be
successful in maintaining and establishing collaborations, which
could adversely affect our ability to develop and, particularly
in international markets, commercialize our product
candidates.
For each of our product candidates, we plan to evaluate the
merits of retaining commercialization rights for ourselves or
entering into collaboration arrangements with leading
pharmaceutical or biotechnology companies or non-governmental
organizations, such as our collaboration agreement with Sanofi
Pasteur for our meningitis B vaccine candidate. We expect that
we will selectively pursue collaboration arrangements in
situations in which the collaborator has particular expertise or
resources for the development or commercialization of our
products and product candidates or to access particular markets.
If we are unable to reach agreements with suitable
collaborators, we may fail to meet our business objectives for
the affected product or program. We face, and will continue to
face, significant competition in seeking appropriate
collaborators. Moreover, collaboration arrangements are complex
and time consuming to negotiate, document and implement. We may
not be successful in our efforts to establish and implement
collaborations or other alternative arrangements. The terms of
any collaborations or other arrangements that we establish may
not be favorable to us.
Any collaboration that we enter into may not be successful. The
success of our collaboration arrangements will depend heavily on
the efforts and activities of our collaborators. It is likely
that our collaborators will have significant discretion in
determining the efforts and resources that they will apply to
these collaborations. In particular, the successful development
of our meningitis B vaccine candidate will initially depend on
the success of our research collaboration with Sanofi Pasteur
and whether Sanofi Pasteur selects one or more viable candidates
pursuant to the collaboration for development of a product.
Thereafter, Sanofi Pasteur will have significant discretion in
the development and commercialization of any such candidate.
Sanofi Pasteur may choose not to pursue further development and
commercialization of any candidate that it selects based on many
factors outside our control. Sanofi Pasteur has the ability to
suspend development of a candidate under the collaboration in
various circumstances. The risks that we are subject to in our
current collaborations, and anticipate being subject to in
future collaborations, include the following:
|
|
|
our collaboration agreements are likely to be for fixed terms
and subject to termination by our collaborators in the event of
a material breach by us;
|
|
|
|
our collaborators may have the first right to maintain or defend
our intellectual property rights and, although we would have the
right to assume the maintenance and defense of our intellectual
property rights if our collaborators do not do so, our ability
to maintain and defend our intellectual property rights may be
compromised by our collaborators acts or
omissions; and
|
34
|
|
|
our collaborators may utilize our intellectual property rights
in such a way as to invite litigation that could jeopardize or
invalidate our intellectual property rights or expose us to
potential liability.
|
Collaborations with pharmaceutical companies and other third
parties often are terminated or allowed to expire by the other
party. For example, Sanofi Pasteur has the right to terminate
our meningitis B vaccine collaboration at any time after
April 1, 2007 upon six months prior written notice.
Sanofi Pasteur can also terminate the collaboration upon a
change of control or insolvency event involving us or upon our
uncured material breach. Those terminations or expirations would
adversely affect us financially and could harm our business
reputation.
If third
parties on whom we rely for clinical trials do not perform as
contractually required or as we expect, we may not be able to
obtain regulatory approval for or commercialize our product
candidates, and our business may suffer.
We do not have the ability to independently conduct the clinical
trials required to obtain regulatory approval for our products.
We depend on independent clinical investigators, contract
research organizations and other third party service providers
to conduct the clinical trials of our product candidates and
expect to continue to do so.
We rely heavily on these third parties for successful execution
of our clinical trials, but do not exercise
day-to-day
control over their activities. We are responsible for ensuring
that each of our clinical trials is conducted in accordance with
the general investigational plan and protocols for the trial.
Moreover, the FDA requires us to comply with standards, commonly
referred to as Good Clinical Practices, for conducting and
recording and reporting the results of clinical trials to assure
that data and reported results are credible and accurate and
that the rights, integrity and confidentiality of trial
participants are protected. Our reliance on third parties that
we do not control does not relieve us of these responsibilities
and requirements. Third parties may not complete activities on
schedule, or may not conduct our clinical trials in accordance
with regulatory requirements or our stated protocols. The
failure of these third parties to carry out their obligations
could delay or prevent the development, approval and
commercialization of our product candidates.
In addition, we encourage government entities and non-government
organizations to conduct studies of, and pursue other
development efforts for, our product candidates. For example,
the CDC is currently conducting an independent clinical trial to
evaluate the administration of BioThrax in a regimen of fewer
doses. We participate in monthly meetings with the trial
investigators and in the annual review meeting for this trial
and provide input to the CDC for responses to FDA questions and
requests for additional information. We expect to rely on data
from these development efforts in seeking marketing approval for
our product candidates. For example, our BLA supplement for a
label expansion of BioThrax for a regimen of fewer doses is
based on the interim trial report provided to us by the CDC from
its ongoing clinical trial. However, these government entities
and non-government organizations have no obligation or
commitment to us to conduct or complete any of these studies or
clinical trials and may choose to discontinue these development
efforts at any time. In addition, government entities depend on
annual Congressional appropriations to fund these development
efforts. In prior years, there has been some uncertainty whether
Congress would choose to fund the CDC trial. Although the trial
has been funded to date, Congress may not continue to fund the
trial.
35
Risks related to
our intellectual property
We may fail to
protect our intellectual property rights, which would harm our
business.
Our success, particularly with respect to our commercial
business, will depend in large part on our ability to obtain and
maintain protection in the United States and other countries for
the intellectual property covering or incorporated into our
technology and products. The patent situation in the field of
immunobiotics and other pharmaceuticals generally is highly
uncertain and involves complex legal and scientific questions.
We may not be able to obtain additional issued patents relating
to our technology or products. Even if issued, patents may be
challenged, narrowed, invalidated or circumvented, which could
limit our ability to stop competitors from marketing similar
products or limit the length of term of patent protection we may
have for our products. Changes in patent laws or administrative
patent office rules or changes in interpretations of patent laws
in the United States and other countries may diminish the value
of our intellectual property or narrow the scope of our patent
protection.
Our patents also may not afford us protection against
competitors with similar technology. Because patent applications
in the United States and many foreign jurisdictions are
typically not published until 18 months after filing, or in
some cases not at all, and because publications of discoveries
in the scientific literature often lag behind actual
discoveries, neither we nor our licensors can be certain that we
or they were the first to make the inventions claimed in issued
patents or pending patent applications, or that we or they were
the first to file for protection of the inventions set forth in
these patent applications. In addition, patents generally
expire, regardless of their date of issue, 20 years from
the earliest claimed non-provisional filing date. As a result,
the time required to obtain regulatory approval for a product
candidate may consume part or all of the patent term. We are not
able to accurately predict the remaining length of the
applicable patent term following regulatory approval of any of
our product candidates.
Our collaborators and licensors may not adequately protect our
intellectual property rights. These third parties may have the
first right to maintain or defend our intellectual property
rights and, although we would have the right to assume the
maintenance and defense of our intellectual property rights if
these third parties do not do so, our ability to maintain and
defend our intellectual property rights may be compromised by
the acts or omissions of these third parties. Under our
collaboration agreement with Sanofi Pasteur for our meningitis B
vaccine candidate, we have the right to prosecute and maintain
our patent rights under the collaboration agreement. Sanofi
Pasteur is responsible for prosecuting and maintaining joint
patent rights under the collaboration agreement, although we
have the right to support the continued prosecution or
maintenance of the joint patent rights if Sanofi Pasteur fails
to do so. In addition, Sanofi Pasteur has the first right to
pursue claims against third parties for infringement of the
patent rights under the collaboration agreement and assume the
defense of any infringement claims that may arise, although we
have the right to pursue infringement claims against third
parties and assume the defense of infringement claims if Sanofi
Pasteur fails to do so. Under our licenses with HPA relating to
our recombinant bivalent botulinum vaccine candidate and the
botulinum toxoid vaccine that we plan to use as the basis for
our botulinum immune globulin candidate, HPA is responsible for
prosecuting and maintaining patent rights, although we have the
right to support the continued prosecution or maintenance of the
patent rights if HPA fails to do so. In addition, we have the
first right to pursue claims against third parties for
infringement of the patent rights and assume the defense of any
infringement claims that may arise.
36
If we fail to
comply with our obligations in our intellectual property
licenses with third parties, we could lose license rights that
are important to our business.
We are a party to a number of license agreements. We consider
our licenses with HPA relating to our recombinant bivalent
botulinum vaccine candidate and the botulinum toxoid vaccine
that we plan to use as the basis for our botulinum immune
globulin candidate to be material to our business. Under these
license agreements, we obtained the exclusive, worldwide right
to develop, manufacture and commercialize pharmaceutical
products that consist of botulinum toxoid components or
recombinant botulinum toxin components for the prevention or
treatment of illness in humans caused by exposure to the
botulinum toxin, subject to HPAs non-exclusive right to
make, use or sell recombinant botulinum products to meet public
health requirements in the United Kingdom. We expect to enter
into additional licenses in the future. Our existing licenses
impose, and we expect future licenses will impose, various
diligence, milestone payment, royalty, insurance and other
obligations on us. If we fail to comply with these obligations,
the licensor may have the right to terminate the license, in
which event we might not be able to market any product that is
covered by the licensed patents.
If we are
unable to protect the confidentiality of our proprietary
information and know-how, the value of our technology and
products could be adversely affected.
In addition to patented technology, we rely upon unpatented
proprietary technology, processes and know-how, particularly as
to our proprietary manufacturing processes. Because we do not
have patent protection for BioThrax, the label expansions and
improvements that we are pursuing for BioThrax or our anthrax
immune globulin candidate, our only intellectual property
protection for BioThrax and our anthrax immune globulin
candidate is confidentiality regarding our manufacturing
capability and specialty know-how, such as techniques, processes
and biological starting materials. However, these types of trade
secrets can be difficult to protect. We seek to protect this
confidential information, in part, with agreements with our
employees, consultants and third parties. These agreements may
be breached, and we may not have adequate remedies for any such
breach. In addition, our trade secrets may otherwise become
known or be independently developed by competitors. If we are
unable to protect the confidentiality of our proprietary
information and know-how, competitors may be able to use this
information to develop products that compete with our products,
which could adversely impact our business.
If we infringe
or are alleged to infringe intellectual property rights of third
parties, it will adversely affect our business.
Our development and commercialization activities, as well as any
product candidates or products resulting from these activities,
may infringe or be claimed to infringe patents or patent
applications under which we do not hold licenses or other
rights. Third parties may own or control these patents and
patent applications in the United States and abroad. These third
parties could bring claims against us or our collaborators that
would cause us to incur substantial expenses and, if successful
against us, could cause us to pay substantial damages. Further,
if a patent infringement suit were brought against us or our
collaborators, we or they could be forced to stop or delay
development, manufacturing or sales of the product or product
candidate that is the subject of the suit.
As a result of patent infringement claims, or to avoid potential
claims, we or our collaborators may choose or be required to
seek a license from the third party and be required to pay
license fees or royalties or both. These licenses may not be
available on acceptable terms, or at all. Even if we or our
collaborators were able to obtain a license, the rights may be
nonexclusive, which could result in our competitors gaining
access to the same intellectual property. Ultimately, we could
be prevented from
37
commercializing a product, or be forced to cease some aspect of
our business operations, if, as a result of actual or threatened
patent infringement claims, we or our collaborators are unable
to enter into licenses on acceptable terms. This could harm our
business significantly.
There has been substantial litigation and other proceedings
regarding patent and other intellectual property rights in the
biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries. In addition to
infringement claims against us, we may become a party to other
patent litigation and other proceedings, including interference
and reexamination proceedings declared by the United States
Patent and Trademark Office and opposition proceedings in the
European Patent Office, regarding intellectual property rights
with respect to our products and technology. We may also become
a party to trademark invalidation and interference proceedings
in foreign trademark offices. The cost to us of any patent
litigation or other proceeding, even if resolved in our favor,
could be substantial. Some of our competitors may be able to
sustain the costs of such litigation or proceedings more
effectively than we can because of their substantially greater
financial resources. Uncertainties resulting from the initiation
and continuation of patent litigation or other proceedings could
have a material adverse effect on our ability to compete in the
marketplace. Patent litigation and other proceedings may also
absorb significant management time.
Risks related to
our acquisition strategy
Our strategy
of generating growth through acquisitions may not be
successful.
We have pursued an acquisition strategy since our inception to
build our business of developing, manufacturing and
commercializing immunobiotics. We commenced operations in
September 1998 through an acquisition of rights to BioThrax,
vaccine manufacturing facilities at a multi-building campus on
approximately 12.5 acres in Lansing, Michigan and vaccine
development and production know-how from the Michigan Biologic
Products Institute. We acquired our pipeline of commercial
vaccine candidates through our acquisition of Microscience in
2005 and our acquisition of substantially all of the assets of
Antex in 2003.
In the future, we may be unable to license or acquire suitable
products or product candidates from third parties for a number
of reasons. In particular, the licensing and acquisition of
pharmaceutical and biological products is a competitive area. A
number of more established companies are also pursuing
strategies to license or acquire products in the immunobiotics
field. These established companies may have a competitive
advantage over us due to their size, cash resources and greater
clinical development and commercialization capabilities. Other
factors that may prevent us from licensing or otherwise
acquiring suitable products and product candidates include the
following:
|
|
|
we may be unable to license or acquire the relevant technology
on terms that would allow us to make an appropriate return on
the product;
|
|
|
companies that perceive us to be their competitor may be
unwilling to assign or license their product rights to
us; or
|
|
|
we may be unable to identify suitable products or product
candidates within our areas of expertise.
|
In addition, we expect competition for acquisition candidates in
the immunobiotic field to increase, which may mean fewer
suitable acquisition opportunities for us as well as higher
acquisition prices. If we are unable to successfully obtain
rights to suitable products and product candidates, our
business, financial condition and prospects for growth could
suffer.
38
If we fail to
successfully manage any acquisitions, our ability to develop our
product candidates and expand our product candidate pipeline may
be harmed.
As part of our business strategy, we intend to continue to seek
to obtain marketed products and development stage product
candidates through acquisitions and licensing arrangements with
third parties. The failure to adequately address the financial,
operational or legal risks of these transactions could harm our
business. Financial aspects of these transactions that could
alter our financial position, reported operating results or
stock price include:
|
|
|
use of cash resources;
|
|
|
higher than anticipated acquisition costs and expenses;
|
|
|
potentially dilutive issuances of equity securities;
|
|
|
the incurrence of debt and contingent liabilities, impairment
losses or restructuring charges;
|
|
|
large write-offs and difficulties in assessing the relative
percentages of in-process research and development expense that
can be immediately written off as compared to the amount that
must be amortized over the appropriate life of the
asset; and
|
|
|
amortization expenses related to other intangible assets.
|
Operational risks that could harm our existing operations or
prevent realization of anticipated benefits from these
transactions include:
|
|
|
challenges associated with managing an increasingly diversified
business;
|
|
|
disruption of our ongoing business;
|
|
|
difficulty and expense in assimilating the operations, products,
technology, information systems or personnel of the acquired
company;
|
|
|
diversion of managements time and attention from other
business concerns;
|
|
|
inability to maintain uniform standards, controls, procedures
and policies;
|
|
|
the assumption of known and unknown liabilities of the acquired
company, including intellectual property claims; and
|
|
|
subsequent loss of key personnel.
|
If we are unable to successfully manage our acquisitions, our
ability to develop new products and continue to expand our
product pipeline may be limited.
Risks related to
the offering
Fuad El-Hibri,
our president, chief executive officer and chairman of our board
of directors, will continue to have substantial control over us
after this offering, including through his ability to control
the election of the members of our board of directors, and could
delay or prevent a change of control.
Even after this offering, Mr. El-Hibri will be able to
control the election of the members of our board of directors
through his ownership interests and voting arrangements among
our significant stockholders. Immediately prior to this
offering, Mr. El-Hibri was the beneficial owner of 99.6% of
our outstanding
39
common stock. Immediately following this offering,
Mr. El-Hibri will be the beneficial owner of %
of our outstanding common stock, or % of our
outstanding common stock if the underwriters exercise their
over-allotment option in full.
Because Mr. El-Hibri will be able to control the election
of the members of our board, and because of his substantial
control of our capital stock, Mr. El-Hibri will likely have
the ability to delay or prevent a change of control of our
company that may be favored by other directors or stockholders
and otherwise exercise substantial control over all corporate
actions requiring board or stockholder approval, including any
amendment of our certificate of incorporation or by-laws. The
control by Mr. El-Hibri may prevent other stockholders from
influencing significant corporate decisions and may result in
conflicts of interest that could cause our stock price to
decline.
Provisions in
our corporate charter documents and under Delaware law may
prevent or frustrate attempts by our stockholders to change our
management and hinder efforts to acquire a controlling interest
in us.
Provisions of our certificate of incorporation and by-laws may
discourage, delay or prevent a merger, acquisition or other
change in control that stockholders may consider favorable,
including transactions in which you might otherwise receive a
premium for your shares. These provisions may also prevent or
frustrate attempts by our stockholders to replace or remove our
management. These provisions include:
|
|
|
the classification of our directors;
|
|
|
limitations on changing the number of directors then in office;
|
|
|
limitations on the removal of directors;
|
|
|
limitations on filling vacancies on the board;
|
|
|
limitations on the removal and appointment of the chairman of
our board of directors;
|
|
|
following the second anniversary of the completion of this
offering, advance notice requirements for stockholder
nominations for election of directors and other proposals;
|
|
|
the inability of stockholders to act by written consent;
|
|
|
the inability of stockholders to call special meetings; and
|
|
|
the ability of our board of directors to designate the terms of
and issue new series of preferred stock without stockholder
approval.
|
Until the second anniversary of the completion of this offering,
the affirmative vote of holders of our capital stock
representing a majority of the voting power of all outstanding
stock entitled to vote is required to amend or repeal the above
provisions of our certificate of incorporation. Following the
second anniversary of the completion of this offering, the
affirmative vote of holders of our capital stock representing at
least 75% of the voting power of all outstanding stock entitled
to vote is required to amend or repeal the above provisions of
our certificate of incorporation. Until the second anniversary
of the completion of this offering, the affirmative vote of
either at least 75% of the directors then in office or holders
of our capital stock representing a majority of the voting power
of all outstanding stock entitled to vote is required to amend
or repeal our by-laws. Following the second anniversary of the
completion of this offering, the affirmative vote of either a
majority of the directors present at a meeting of our board of
directors or holders of our capital stock representing at least
75% of the voting power of all outstanding stock entitled to
vote is required to amend or repeal or by-laws.
40
In addition, Section 203 of the General Corporation Law of
Delaware prohibits a publicly held Delaware corporation from
engaging in a business combination with an interested
stockholder, generally a person which together with its
affiliates owns or within the last three years has owned 15% of
our voting stock, for a period of three years after the date of
the transaction in which the person became an interested
stockholder, unless the business combination is approved in a
prescribed manner. Accordingly, Section 203 may discourage,
delay or prevent a change in control of our company.
Our
stockholder rights plan could prevent a change in control of our
company in instances in which some stockholders may believe a
change in control is in their best interests.
In connection with this offering, we will enter into a rights
agreement that establishes our stockholder rights plan. Under
the rights agreement, we will issue to our stockholders one
preferred stock purchase right for each outstanding share of our
common stock. Each right, when exercisable, will entitle its
holder to purchase from us a unit consisting of one
one-thousandth of a share of series A junior participating
preferred stock at a purchase price to be determined by our
board of directors at the same time the initial public offering
price of our common stock is determined. Our stockholder rights
plan is intended to protect stockholders in the event of an
unfair or coercive offer to acquire our company and to provide
our board of directors with adequate time to evaluate
unsolicited offers. The rights plan may have anti-takeover
effects. The rights plan will cause substantial dilution to a
person or group that attempts to acquire us on terms that our
board of directors does not believe are in our best interests
and those of our stockholders and may discourage, delay or
prevent a merger or acquisition that stockholders may consider
favorable, including transactions in which stockholders might
otherwise receive a premium for their shares.
If you
purchase shares of our common stock in this offering, you will
suffer immediate and substantial dilution of your
investment.
The initial public offering price of our common stock is
substantially higher than the net tangible book value per share
of our common stock. Therefore, if you purchase shares of our
common stock in this offering, your interest will be diluted
immediately to the extent of the difference between the initial
public offering price per share of our common stock and the net
tangible book value per share of our common stock after this
offering. Based on an assumed initial public offering price of
$ per share, which is the
midpoint of the price range set forth on the cover page of this
prospectus, investors in this offering will incur immediate
dilution of $ per share. To
the extent outstanding options are exercised, you will incur
further dilution. In addition, based on an assumed initial
public offering price of
$ per share, which is the
midpoint of the price range set forth on the cover page of this
prospectus, investors in this offering will have contributed
approximately % of the total consideration paid by
all purchasers of our common stock but will own only
approximately % of our common stock outstanding after
this offering. See Dilution.
An active
trading market for our common stock may not
develop.
Prior to this offering, there has been no public market for our
common stock. The initial public offering price for our common
stock was determined through negotiations with the underwriters.
Although we have applied to have our common stock listed on The
NASDAQ Global Market, an active trading market for our shares
may never develop or be sustained following this offering. If an
active market for our common stock does not develop, it may be
difficult to sell shares you purchase in this offering without
depressing the market price for the shares or at all.
41
If our stock
price is volatile, purchasers of our common stock could incur
substantial losses.
Our stock price is likely to be volatile. The stock market in
general and the market for biotechnology companies in particular
have experienced extreme volatility that has often been
unrelated to the operating performance of particular companies.
As a result of this volatility, investors may not be able to
sell their common stock at or above the initial public offering
price. The market price for our common stock may be influenced
by many factors, including:
|
|
|
the success of competitive products or technologies;
|
|
|
results of clinical trials of our product candidates or those of
our competitors;
|
|
|
decisions and procurement policies by the U.S. government
affecting BioThrax and our biodefense product candidates;
|
|
|
regulatory developments in the United States and foreign
countries;
|
|
|
developments or disputes concerning patents or other proprietary
rights;
|
|
|
the recruitment or departure of key personnel;
|
|
|
variations in our financial results or those of companies that
are perceived to be similar to us;
|
|
|
market conditions in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology
sectors and issuance of new or changed securities analysts
reports or recommendations;
|
|
|
general economic, industry and market conditions; and
|
|
|
the other factors described in this Risk factors
section.
|
We have broad
discretion in the use of the net proceeds from this offering and
may not use them effectively.
Our management will have broad discretion in the application of
the net proceeds from this offering and could spend the proceeds
in ways that do not improve our results of operations or enhance
the value of our common stock. The failure by our management to
apply these funds effectively could result in financial losses
that could have a material adverse effect on our business, cause
the price of our common stock to decline and delay the
development of our product candidates. Pending their use, we may
invest our net proceeds from this offering in a manner that does
not produce income or that loses value.
We do not
anticipate paying any cash dividends in the foreseeable
future.
We currently intend to retain our future earnings, if any, to
fund the development and growth of our business. Any future debt
agreements that we enter into may limit our ability to pay
dividends. As a result, capital appreciation, if any, of our
common stock will be your sole source of gain for the
foreseeable future.
A significant
portion of our total outstanding shares are restricted from
immediate resale but may be sold into the market in the near
future. This could cause the market price of our common stock to
drop significantly, even if our business is doing
well.
Sales of a substantial number of shares of our common stock in
the public market, or the perception in the market that the
holders of a large number of shares intend to sell shares, could
reduce the market
42
price of our common stock. Upon the completion of this
offering, we will have
outstanding shares
of common stock, after giving effect to the issuance
of shares
of common stock in this offering and assuming no exercise of
options outstanding as of August 31, 2006. Of the shares to
be outstanding after the completion of this offering,
the shares
of common stock sold in this offering will be freely tradable
without restriction under the Securities Act unless purchased by
our affiliates, as that term is defined in
Rule 144 under the Securities Act. The remaining shares of
our common stock are restricted securities under
Rule 144. Substantially all of these restricted securities
will be subject to the
180-day
lock-up
period described below. After the
180-day
lock-up
period, these restricted securities may be sold in the public
market only if registered or if they qualify for an exemption
from registration under Rule 144 or 701 under the
Securities Act.
We expect that the holders of substantially all of our currently
outstanding capital stock will agree that, without the prior
written consent of J.P. Morgan Securities Inc., they will
not, during the period ending 180 days after the date of
this prospectus, subject to exceptions specified in the
lock-up
agreements, offer, pledge, announce the intention to sell, sell,
contract to sell, sell any option or contract to purchase,
purchase any option or contract to sell, grant any option, right
or warrant to purchase, or otherwise transfer or dispose of,
directly or indirectly, any shares of our common stock or any
securities convertible into or exercisable or exchangeable for
our common stock or enter into any swap or other agreement that
transfers, in whole or in part, any of the economic consequences
of ownership of our common stock. Further, these holders have
agreed that, during this period, they will not make any demand
for, or exercise any right with respect to, the registration of
our common stock or any security convertible into or exercisable
or exchangeable for our common stock. The
180-day
lock-up
period may be extended under specified circumstances. The
lock-up
restrictions, specified exceptions and the circumstances under
which the
180-day
lock-up
period may be extended are described in more detail under
Underwriting.
Upon expiration of the
180-day
lock-up
period, 7,782,016 shares of our common stock outstanding as
of August 31, 2006, representing approximately %
of our common stock outstanding after this offering, will be
eligible for sale under Rule 144. In general, shares
eligible for sale under Rule 144 are subject to volume
limitations. However, within 180 days after the date of
this prospectus, 30,015 shares of our common stock
outstanding as of August 31, 2006 will be eligible for sale
under Rule 144(k) without regard to volume limitations.
Mr. El-Hibri has the power to dispose of or direct the
disposition of 5,108,718 shares of our common stock
outstanding as of August 31, 2006, representing
approximately % of our common stock outstanding after
this offering. These shares are eligible for sale under
Rule 144, subject to volume limitations.
Moreover, after this offering, holders of an aggregate of
7,752,001 shares of our common stock outstanding as of
August 31, 2006 will have the right to require us to
register these shares of common stock under specified
circumstances.
In addition, of the 1,061,679 shares of our common stock
that may be issued upon the exercise of options outstanding as
of August 31, 2006,
approximately shares
will be vested and eligible for sale within 180 days after
the date of this prospectus, subject to any lock-up agreements
applicable to these shares. Promptly following this offering, we
intend to file a registration statement on
Form S-8
registering the sale of up to 2,678,985 shares of common
stock subject to outstanding options and options and other
awards issuable pursuant to our equity incentive plans. Shares
registered under this registration statement on
Form S-8
will be available for sale in the open market, subject to
Rule 144 volume limitations applicable to affiliates, and
subject to any vesting restrictions and
lock-up
agreements applicable to these shares.
For a further description of the eligibility of shares for sale
into the public market following this offering, see Shares
eligible for future sale.
43
Special
note regarding forward-looking statements
This prospectus contains forward-looking statements that involve
substantial risks and uncertainties. All statements, other than
statements of historical facts, included in this prospectus
regarding our strategy, future operations, future financial
position, future revenues, projected costs, prospects, plans and
objectives of management are forward-looking statements. The
words anticipate, believe,
estimate, expect, intend,
may, plan, predict,
project, will, would and
similar expressions are intended to identify forward-looking
statements, although not all forward-looking statements contain
these identifying words. These forward-looking statements
include, among other things, statements about:
|
|
|
our performance under existing BioThrax sales contracts with HHS
and DoD, including the timing of deliveries under these
contracts;
|
|
|
our plans for future sales of BioThrax;
|
|
|
our plans to pursue label expansions and improvements for
BioThrax;
|
|
|
our plans to expand our manufacturing facilities and
capabilities;
|
|
|
the rate and degree of market acceptance and clinical utility of
our products;
|
|
|
our ongoing and planned development programs, preclinical
studies and clinical trials;
|
|
|
our ability to identify and acquire or in license products and
product candidates that satisfy our selection criteria;
|
|
|
the potential benefits of our existing collaboration agreements
and our ability to enter into selective additional collaboration
arrangements;
|
|
|
the timing of and our ability to obtain and maintain regulatory
approvals for our product candidates;
|
|
|
our commercialization, marketing and manufacturing capabilities
and strategy;
|
|
|
our intellectual property portfolio; and
|
|
|
our estimates regarding expenses, future revenues, capital
requirements and needs for additional financing.
|
We may not actually achieve the plans, intentions or
expectations disclosed in our forward-looking statements, and
you should not place undue reliance on our forward-looking
statements. Actual results or events could differ materially
from the plans, intentions and expectations disclosed in the
forward-looking statements we make. We have included important
factors in the cautionary statements included in this
prospectus, particularly in the Risk factors
section, that we believe could cause actual results or events to
differ materially from the forward-looking statements that we
make. Our forward-looking statements do not reflect the
potential impact of any future acquisitions, mergers,
dispositions, joint ventures or investments we may make.
You should read this prospectus and the documents that we
reference in this prospectus and have filed as exhibits to the
registration statement, of which this prospectus is a part,
completely and with the understanding that our actual future
results may be materially different from what we expect. We do
not assume any obligation to update any forward-looking
statements.
44
Use of
proceeds
We estimate that the net proceeds to us from this offering will
be approximately $ million,
assuming an initial public offering price of
$ per share, which is the
midpoint of the price range set forth on the cover page of this
prospectus, after deducting estimated underwriting discounts and
commissions and offering expenses payable by us. A $1.00
increase (decrease) in the assumed initial public offering price
of $ per share would increase
(decrease) our net proceeds from this offering by approximately
$ million, assuming that the
number of shares offered by us, as set forth on the cover page
of this prospectus, remains the same and after deducting
estimated underwriting discounts and commissions. We will not
receive any proceeds from the sale of shares of common stock by
the selling stockholders as a result of the exercise by the
underwriters of their over-allotment option.
We currently estimate that we will use:
|
|
|
approximately $10 million to $15 million of these net
proceeds to fund development of our biodefense product
candidates, principally for BioThrax label expansions and
improvements and animal efficacy trials and clinical development
of our anthrax immune globulin and botulinum immune globulin
candidates;
|
|
|
|
approximately $15 million to $20 million of these net
proceeds to fund development of our commercial product
candidates, principally for clinical development of our typhoid
and hepatitis B therapeutic vaccine candidates;
|
|
|
|
approximately $15 million to $20 million of these net
proceeds to fund a portion of the construction costs of our new
manufacturing facility in Lansing, Michigan; and
|
|
|
|
the balance of these net proceeds for general corporate
purposes, which may include the build out of our manufacturing
facilities in Frederick, Maryland, the expansion of our sales
and marketing organization, the acquisition or in license of
technologies, products or businesses, working capital and
capital expenditures.
|
This expected use of proceeds from this offering represents our
intentions based upon our current plans and business conditions.
The amounts and timing of our actual expenditures may vary
significantly depending upon numerous factors, including the
progress of our development and commercialization efforts, the
progress of our clinical trials and our operating costs and
capital expenditures, including the timing of, and the costs
involved in, constructing our new manufacturing facility in
Lansing, Michigan and the build out of our manufacturing
facilities in Frederick, Maryland. As a result, we will retain
broad discretion in the allocation of the net proceeds from this
offering. We have no current understandings, commitments or
agreements to acquire or in license any technologies, products
or businesses.
We do not expect that our existing cash and cash equivalents,
committed sources of funds and net proceeds from this offering
alone will be sufficient to enable us to fund the completion of
the development of all of our product candidates or all of the
construction costs of our new manufacturing facility in Lansing.
We expect to continue to fund a significant portion of our
development and commercialization costs with internally
generated funds from sales of BioThrax. Accordingly, our need
for additional external sources of funds for these purposes will
depend significantly on the level and timing of our sales of
this product. Our business plan also contemplates that we will
raise $10 million to $20 million of additional
external debt financing to fund the Lansing facility
construction and to provide additional financial flexibility. If
we do not obtain this additional debt financing, we may need to
reduce spending for other purposes in order to complete this
construction project.
45
Pending use of the proceeds from this offering, we intend to
invest the proceeds in a variety of capital preservation
investments, including short-term, investment-grade,
interest-bearing instruments.
Dividend
policy
We currently intend to retain all of our future earnings to
finance the growth and development of our business. We do not
intend to pay cash dividends to our stockholders in the
foreseeable future.
On June 15, 2005, our board of directors declared a special
cash dividend to the holders of our outstanding shares of common
stock in an aggregate amount of approximately $5.4 million.
Our board of directors declared this special dividend in order
to distribute the net proceeds of a payment that we received as
a result of the settlement of litigation that we initiated
against Elan Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Athena Neurosciences, Inc.
and Solstice Neurosciences, Inc. We paid the special cash
dividend on July 13, 2005 to stockholders of record as of
June 15, 2005. Prior to this special cash dividend, we had
never declared or paid any cash dividends on our common stock.
46
Capitalization
The following table sets forth our capitalization as of
June 30, 2006:
|
|
|
on an actual basis; and
|
|
|
on an as adjusted basis to give effect to:
|
|
|
|
|
|
the reclassification of our class A common stock, $0.01 par
value per share, as common stock, $0.001 par value per share,
and the conversion of each outstanding share of our class B
common stock into one share of common stock prior to the
completion of this offering; and
|
|
|
|
|
|
the sale
of shares
of common stock that we are offering at an assumed initial
public offering price of
$ per share, which is the
midpoint of the price range set forth on the cover page of this
prospectus, after deducting estimated underwriting discounts and
commissions and offering expenses payable by us.
|
Our capitalization following this offering will be adjusted
based on the actual initial public offering price and other
terms of this offering determined at pricing. You should read
this table together with our financial statements and the
related notes appearing at the end of this prospectus and the
Managements discussion and analysis of financial
condition and results of operations section of this
prospectus.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of
June 30, 2006
|
(in thousands,
except share and per share data)
|
|
Actual
|
|
|
As
adjusted(1)
|
|
|
|
(unaudited)
|
|
Long-term indebtedness, including
current portion
|
|
$
|
19,533
|
|
|
$
|
|
Notes payable to employees
|
|
|
63
|
|
|
|
|
Stockholders equity:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock, class A,
$0.01 par value per share; 10,000,000 shares
authorized and 7,752,001 shares issued and outstanding,
actual; no shares authorized, issued or outstanding, as adjusted
|
|
|
78
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock, class B,
$0.01 par value per share; 2,000,000 shares authorized
and 30,015 shares issued and outstanding, actual; no shares
authorized, issued or outstanding, as adjusted
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock, $0.001 par
value per share; no shares authorized, issued or outstanding,
actual; 100,000,000 shares authorized
and shares
issued and outstanding, as adjusted
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred stock, $0.01 par value
per share, 3,000,000 shares authorized, actual; $0.001 par
value per share, 15,000,000 shares authorized, as adjusted;
no shares issued or outstanding, actual and as adjusted
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additional paid-in capital
|
|
|
34,871
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated other comprehensive
loss
|
|
|
(313
|
)
|
|
|
|
Retained earnings
|
|
|
17,505
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total stockholders equity
|
|
|
52,141
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total capitalization
|
|
$
|
71,737
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
A $1.00 increase (decrease) in the assumed initial public
offering price of $ per share
would increase (decrease) each of additional paid-in capital,
total stockholders equity and total capitalization by
approximately $ million,
assuming that the number of shares offered by us, as |
47
|
|
|
|
|
set forth on the cover page of this prospectus, remains the same
and after deducting estimated underwriting discounts and
commissions. |
The table above does not include:
|
|
|
the receipt of proceeds from and the incurrence of indebtedness
under a $10.0 million term loan with HSBC Realty Credit
Corporation that we entered into in August 2006 to finance a
portion of the costs of our facility expansion in Lansing,
Michigan;
|
|
|
|
1,087,479 shares of common stock issuable upon the exercise
of stock options outstanding as of June 30, 2006 at a
weighted average exercise price of $6.46 per share;
|
|
|
|
132,506 additional shares of common stock reserved for
issuance under our employee stock option plan as of
June 30, 2006; and
|
|
|
|
175,000 additional shares of common stock that will be reserved
for issuance under our 2006 stock incentive plan immediately
prior to completion of this offering.
|
48
Dilution
If you invest in our common stock, your interest will be diluted
immediately to the extent of the difference between the public
offering price per share of our common stock and the net
tangible book value per share of our common stock after this
offering.
Our actual net tangible book value as of June 30, 2006 was
$52.1 million or $6.70 per share of our common stock. Net
tangible book value per share represents the amount of our total
tangible assets less total liabilities, divided by the number of
shares of common stock outstanding.
After giving effect to the issuance and sale by us
of shares
of common stock in this offering, at an assumed initial public
offering price of $ per share,
which is the midpoint of the price range set forth on the cover
page of this prospectus, less estimated underwriting discounts
and commissions and offering expenses payable by us, our net
tangible book value as of June 30, 2006 would have been
$ million, or
$ per share of common stock.
This represents an immediate increase in net tangible book value
per share of $ to existing
stockholders and immediate dilution of
$ per share to new investors.
Dilution per share to new investors is determined by subtracting
the net tangible book value per share after this offering from
the initial public offering price per share paid by a new
investor. The following table illustrates this dilution on a per
share basis:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assumed initial public offering
price per share of common stock
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Actual net tangible book value per
share as of June 30, 2006
|
|
$
|
6.70
|
|
|
|
Increase in net tangible book
value per share attributable to new investors
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Adjusted net tangible book value
per share after this offering
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dilution per share to new investors
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
A $1.00 increase (decrease) in the assumed initial public
offering price of $ per share
would increase (decrease) our adjusted net tangible book value
per share after this offering by approximately
$ and dilution per share to new
investors by approximately $ ,
assuming that the number of shares offered by us, as set forth
on the cover page of this prospectus, remains the same and after
deducting estimated underwriting discounts and commissions.
If any shares are issued in connection with outstanding options,
you will experience further dilution.
The following table summarizes as of June 30, 2006 the
number of shares of common stock purchased from us, the total
consideration paid and the average price per share paid by
existing stockholders and by new investors in this offering at
an assumed initial public offering price of
$ per share, which is the
midpoint of the price range set forth on the cover page of this
prospectus, before deducting estimated underwriting discounts
and commissions and offering expenses payable by us.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares
purchased
|
|
Total
consideration
|
|
Average price
|
|
|
Number
|
|
Percentage
|
|
Amount
|
|
Percentage
|
|
per
share
|
|
|
Existing stockholders
|
|
|
7,782,016
|
|
|
%
|
|
$
|
34,949,011
|
|
|
%
|
|
$
|
4.49
|
New investors
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
|
|
100%
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
100%
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
49
A $1.00 increase (decrease) in the assumed initial public
offering price of $ per share
would increase (decrease) the total consideration paid by new
investors by $ million and
increase (decrease) the percentage of total consideration paid
by new investors by approximately %, assuming that
the number of shares offered by us, as set forth on the cover
page of this prospectus, remains the same.
The table above is based on shares outstanding as of
June 30, 2006 and excludes:
|
|
|
1,087,479 shares of common stock issuable upon the exercise
of stock options outstanding as of June 30, 2006 at a
weighted average exercise price of $6.46 per share;
|
|
|
|
132,506 additional shares of common stock reserved for issuance
under our employee stock option plan as of June 30,
2006; and
|
|
|
|
175,000 additional shares of common stock that will be reserved
for issuance under our 2006 stock incentive plan immediately
prior to completion of this offering.
|
If the underwriters exercise their over-allotment option in
full, the following will occur:
|
|
|
the number of shares of common stock held by existing
stockholders will decrease
to ,
or approximately % of the total number of shares of
our common stock outstanding after this offering; and
|
|
|
the number of shares of common stock held by new investors will
increase
to ,
or approximately % of the total number of shares of
our common stock outstanding after this offering.
|
50
Selected
consolidated financial data
You should read the following selected consolidated financial
data together with our consolidated financial statements and the
related notes appearing at the end of this prospectus and the
Managements discussion and analysis of financial
condition and results of operations section of this
prospectus.
We have derived the consolidated statement of operations data
for the years ended December 31, 2003, 2004 and 2005 and
the consolidated balance sheet data as of December 31, 2004
and 2005 from our audited consolidated financial statements,
which are included in this prospectus. We have derived the
consolidated statements of operations data for the years ended
December 31, 2001 and 2002 and the consolidated balance
sheets data as of December 31, 2001, 2002 and 2003 from our
audited consolidated financial statements, which are not
included in this prospectus. We have derived the consolidated
statement of operations data for the six-month periods ended
June 30, 2005 and 2006 and the consolidated balance sheet
data as of June 30, 2006 from our unaudited consolidated
financial statements, which are included in this prospectus. The
unaudited consolidated financial data include, in the opinion of
our management, all adjustments, consisting only of normal
recurring adjustments, that are necessary for a fair
presentation of our financial position and results of operations
for these periods. Our historical results for any prior period
are not necessarily indicative of results to be expected in any
future period, and our results for any interim period are not
necessarily indicative of results for a full fiscal year.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year ended
December 31,
|
|
|
Six months ended
June 30,
|
|
(in thousands,
except share and per share data)
|
|
2001
|
|
|
2002
|
|
|
2003
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(unaudited)
|
|
|
Statements of operations
data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Product sales
|
|
$
|
45,309
|
|
|
$
|
78,541
|
|
|
$
|
55,536
|
|
|
$
|
81,014
|
|
|
$
|
127,271
|
|
|
$
|
58,506
|
|
|
$
|
20,408
|
|
Milestones and grants
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
233
|
|
|
|
2,480
|
|
|
|
3,417
|
|
|
|
813
|
|
|
|
3,261
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenues
|
|
|
45,309
|
|
|
|
78,541
|
|
|
|
55,769
|
|
|
|
83,494
|
|
|
|
130,688
|
|
|
|
59,319
|
|
|
|
23,669
|
|
Operating expenses (income):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of product sales
|
|
|
34,367
|
|
|
|
24,569
|
|
|
|
22,342
|
|
|
|
30,102
|
|
|
|
31,603
|
|
|
|
16,490
|
|
|
|
4,370
|
|
Research and development
|
|
|
382
|
|
|
|
2,808
|
|
|
|
6,327
|
|
|
|
10,117
|
|
|
|
18,381
|
|
|
|
4,157
|
|
|
|
14,210
|
|
Selling, general &
administrative
|
|
|
10,924
|
|
|
|
13,397
|
|
|
|
19,547
|
|
|
|
30,323
|
|
|
|
42,793
|
|
|
|
17,974
|
|
|
|
20,681
|
|
Purchased in-process research and
development
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,824
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
26,575
|
|
|
|
26,575
|
|
|
|
|
|
Settlement of State of Michigan
Obligation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3,819
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Litigation settlement
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(10,000
|
)
|
|
|
(10,000
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating expenses
|
|
|
45,673
|
|
|
|
40,774
|
|
|
|
50,040
|
|
|
|
66,723
|
|
|
|
109,352
|
|
|
|
55,196
|
|
|
|
39,261
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) from operations
|
|
|
(364
|
)
|
|
|
37,767
|
|
|
|
5,729
|
|
|
|
16,771
|
|
|
|
21,336
|
|
|
|
4,123
|
|
|
|
(15,592
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other income (expense):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest income
|
|
|
122
|
|
|
|
80
|
|
|
|
100
|
|
|
|
65
|
|
|
|
485
|
|
|
|
103
|
|
|
|
326
|
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
(193
|
)
|
|
|
(451
|
)
|
|
|
(293
|
)
|
|
|
(241
|
)
|
|
|
(767
|
)
|
|
|
(402
|
)
|
|
|
(232
|
)
|
Other income (expense), net
|
|
|
(119
|
)
|
|
|
(271
|
)
|
|
|
168
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
55
|
|
|
|
(25
|
)
|
|
|
124
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total other income (expense)
|
|
|
(190
|
)
|
|
|
(642
|
)
|
|
|
(25
|
)
|
|
|
(170
|
)
|
|
|
(227
|
)
|
|
|
(324
|
)
|
|
|
218
|
|
Income (loss) before provision for
income taxes
|
|
|
(554
|
)
|
|
|
37,125
|
|
|
|
5,704
|
|
|
|
16,601
|
|
|
|
21,109
|
|
|
|
3,799
|
|
|
|
(15,374
|
)
|
Provision for (benefit from) income
taxes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
733
|
|
|
|
1,250
|
|
|
|
5,129
|
|
|
|
5,325
|
|
|
|
958
|
|
|
|
(7,684
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss)
|
|
$
|
(554
|
)
|
|
$
|
36,392
|
|
|
$
|
4,454
|
|
|
$
|
11,472
|
|
|
$
|
15,784
|
|
|
$
|
2,841
|
|
|
$
|
(7,690
|
)
|
|
|
|
Earnings (loss) per
share basic
|
|
$
|
(0.10
|
)
|
|
$
|
5.68
|
|
|
$
|
0.68
|
|
|
$
|
1.74
|
|
|
$
|
2.21
|
|
|
$
|
0.44
|
|
|
$
|
(0.99
|
)
|
Earnings (loss) per
share diluted
|
|
$
|
(0.10
|
)
|
|
$
|
5.05
|
|
|
$
|
0.63
|
|
|
$
|
1.61
|
|
|
$
|
2.00
|
|
|
$
|
0.39
|
|
|
$
|
(0.99
|
)
|
Weighted average number of
shares basic
|
|
|
5,651,192
|
|
|
|
6,409,661
|
|
|
|
6,570,856
|
|
|
|
6,576,019
|
|
|
|
7,136,866
|
|
|
|
6,505,085
|
|
|
|
7,771,830
|
|
Weighted average number of
shares diluted
|
|
|
5,561,192
|
|
|
|
7,212,903
|
|
|
|
7,061,537
|
|
|
|
7,104,172
|
|
|
|
7,908,023
|
|
|
|
7,200,595
|
|
|
|
7,771,830
|
|
|
|
51
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of
December 31,
|
|
As of
|
(in
thousands)
|
|
2001
|
|
|
2002
|
|
2003
|
|
|
2004
|
|
2005
|
|
June 30,
2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(unaudited)
|
|
Balance sheet data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$
|
5,854
|
|
|
$
|
4,891
|
|
$
|
7,119
|
|
|
$
|
6,821
|
|
$
|
36,294
|
|
$
|
15,737
|
Working capital
|
|
|
(35,299
|
)
|
|
|
1,130
|
|
|
(3,147
|
)
|
|
|
7,509
|
|
|
29,023
|
|
|
5,995
|
Total assets
|
|
|
25,423
|
|
|
|
22,790
|
|
|
37,127
|
|
|
|
69,056
|
|
|
100,332
|
|
|
119,113
|
Total long-term liabilities
|
|
|
4,857
|
|
|
|
4,592
|
|
|
1,228
|
|
|
|
11,921
|
|
|
10,502
|
|
|
18,364
|
Total stockholders equity
(deficit)
|
|
|
(32,295
|
)
|
|
|
4,155
|
|
|
8,448
|
|
|
|
22,949
|
|
|
59,737
|
|
|
52,141
|
|
|
The balance sheet data above do not reflect the receipt of
proceeds from and the incurrence of indebtedness under a
$10.0 million term loan with HSBC Realty Credit Corporation
that we entered into in August 2006 to finance a portion of the
costs of our facility expansion in Lansing, Michigan.
52
Managements
discussion and analysis of
financial condition and results of operations
You should read the following discussion and analysis of our
financial condition and results of operations together with our
financial statements and the related notes and other financial
information included elsewhere in this prospectus. Some of the
information contained in this discussion and analysis or set
forth elsewhere in this prospectus, including information with
respect to our plans and strategy for our business and related
financing, includes forward-looking statements that involve
risks and uncertainties. You should review the Risk
factors section of this prospectus for a discussion of
important factors that could cause actual results to differ
materially from the results described in or implied by the
forward-looking statements contained in the following discussion
and analysis.
Overview
We are a biopharmaceutical company focused on the development,
manufacture and commercialization of immunobiotics. We operate
in two business segments: biodefense and commercial. We
commenced operations as BioPort Corporation in September 1998
through an acquisition from the Michigan Biologic Products
Institute of rights to our marketed product, BioThrax, vaccine
manufacturing facilities at a multi-building campus on
approximately 12.5 acres in Lansing, Michigan and vaccine
development and production know-how. Following this acquisition,
we completed renovations at the Lansing facilities that had been
initiated by the State of Michigan. In December 2001, the FDA
approved a supplement to our manufacturing facility license for
the manufacture of BioThrax at the renovated facilities.
In June 2004, we completed a corporate reorganization in which
we:
|
|
|
issued 6,487,950 shares of class A common stock in
exchange for 6,262,554 shares of BioPort class A
common stock and 225,396 shares of BioPort class B
common stock;
|
|
|
repurchased and retired all other issued and outstanding shares
of BioPort class B common stock; and
|
|
|
assumed all outstanding stock options to purchase BioPort
class B common stock and granted option holders replacement
stock options to purchase an equal number of shares of our
class B common stock.
|
As a result of the reorganization, BioPort became a wholly owned
subsidiary of Emergent. We acquired our portfolio of commercial
vaccine candidates through our acquisition of Microscience in a
share exchange in June 2005 and our acquisition of substantially
all of the assets of Antex for cash in May 2003. We subsequently
renamed Microscience as Emergent Product Development UK. We
expect to continue to seek to obtain marketed products and
development stage product candidates through acquisitions and
licensing arrangements with third parties.
Our biodefense business has generated net income for each of the
last three fiscal years. However, in our commercial business, we
have not received approval to market any of our product
candidates and, to date, have received no product sales
revenues. Our only sources of revenue in our commercial business
are development grant funding and an upfront license fee and
additional payments for development work under a collaboration
agreement with Sanofi Pasteur. As a result, our commercial
business has incurred a net loss for each of the last three
fiscal years.
53
Biodefense
In our biodefense business, we develop and commercialize
immunobiotics for use against biological agents that are
potential weapons of bioterrorism. Our marketed product,
BioThrax, is the only vaccine approved by the FDA for the
prevention of anthrax infection. In addition to BioThrax, our
biodefense product portfolio includes three biodefense product
candidates in preclinical development. The DoD and HHS have been
the principal customers for BioThrax. In addition, we have
supplied small amounts of BioThrax directly to several foreign
governments. Since 1998, we have been a party to two supply
agreements for BioThrax with the DoD. Pursuant to these
contracts, we have supplied over eight million doses of
BioThrax through August 2006 for immunization of military
personnel. Under a contract that we entered into with HHS in May
2005, we have supplied five million doses of BioThrax to HHS for
placement into the strategic national stockpile for a fixed
price of $123 million. In May 2006, we entered into a
contract modification with HHS for the delivery of an additional
five million doses of BioThrax to HHS by May 2007 for a fixed
price of $120 million. We have delivered approximately one
million doses of BioThrax under this contract modification
through August 2006.
We have derived and expect for the foreseeable future to
continue to derive substantially all of our revenue from sales
of BioThrax. Our total revenues from BioThrax sales were
$55.5 million in 2003, $81.0 million in 2004 and
$127.3 million in 2005. We are focused on increasing sales
of BioThrax to U.S. government customers, expanding the
market for BioThrax to other customers and pursuing label
expansions and improvements for BioThrax.
We are collaborating with HPA in the development of a
recombinant bivalent botulinum vaccine candidate and a new
botulinum toxoid vaccine that we plan to use as the basis for a
botulinum immune globulin candidate. We are independently
developing an anthrax immune globulin candidate, in part with
funding from NIAID. We also are evaluating several potential
product candidates in connection with development of a next
generation anthrax vaccine, featuring attributes such as
self-administration and a longer shelf life. We are actively
pursuing additional government sponsored development grants and
working with various government agencies to encourage them to
conduct studies relating to BioThrax and our biodefense product
candidates.
Commercial
In our commercial business, we develop immunobiotics for use
against infectious diseases with significant unmet or
underserved medical needs. Our commercial product portfolio
includes a typhoid vaccine candidate and a hepatitis B
therapeutic vaccine candidate, both of which are in
Phase II clinical development, a group B streptococcus
vaccine candidate in Phase I clinical development and a
chlamydia vaccine candidate and a meningitis B vaccine
candidate, both of which are in preclinical development. In May
2006, we entered into a license and co-development agreement
with Sanofi Pasteur under which we granted Sanofi Pasteur an
exclusive, worldwide license under our proprietary technology to
develop and commercialize a meningitis B vaccine candidate.
We plan to encourage government entities and non-government and
philanthropic organizations to provide development funding for,
or to conduct clinical studies of, one or more of our commercial
product candidates. For example, the Wellcome Trust provided
funding for our Phase I clinical trial of our typhoid
vaccine candidate in Vietnam and has agreed to provide funding
for our Phase II clinical trial of this vaccine candidate
in Vietnam.
54
Manufacturing
infrastructure
To augment our existing manufacturing capabilities, we are
constructing a new 50,000 square foot manufacturing
facility on our Lansing, Michigan campus. We expect the
construction of the facility to cost approximately
$75 million, including approximately $55 million for
the building and associated capital equipment, with the balance
related to validation and qualification activities required for
regulatory approval and initiation of manufacturing. We
anticipate that we will incur approximately $42 million for
these purposes during 2006. We expect to complete construction
of this facility in mid 2007, with validation and qualification
activities required for regulatory approval continuing
thereafter. We are constructing this new facility as a large
scale manufacturing plant that we can use to produce multiple
vaccine products, subject to complying with appropriate
change-over procedures. We anticipate that we will initiate
large scale manufacturing of BioThrax for commercial sale at the
new facility in 2008. We also own two buildings in Frederick,
Maryland that we plan to build out as new manufacturing
facilities. We anticipate that we will incur up to
$5 million during 2006 related to initial engineering
design and preliminary utility build out for these facilities.
Because we are in the preliminary planning stages of our
Frederick build out, we cannot reasonably estimate the timing
and costs that will be necessary to complete this project. If we
proceed with this project, we expect the costs to be substantial
and to likely require external sources of funds to finance the
project.
Critical
accounting policies and estimates
Our discussion and analysis of our financial condition and
results of operations are based on our financial statements,
which have been prepared in accordance with accounting
principles generally accepted in the United States. The
preparation of these financial statements requires us to make
estimates and judgments that affect the reported amounts of
assets, liabilities and expenses. On an ongoing basis, we
evaluate our estimates and judgments, including those related to
accrued expenses, fair valuation of stock related to stock-based
compensation and income taxes. We based our estimates on
historical experience and on various other assumptions that we
believe to be reasonable under the circumstances, the results of
which form the basis for making judgments about the carrying
values of assets and liabilities and the reported amounts of
revenues and expenses that are not readily apparent from other
sources. Actual results may differ from these estimates under
different assumptions or conditions.
We believe the following critical accounting policies affect our
more significant judgments and estimates used in the preparation
of our financial statements.
Revenue
recognition
We recognize revenues from product sales in accordance with
Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 104, Revenue
Recognition, or SAB 104. SAB 104 requires
recognition of revenues from product sales that require no
continuing performance on our part if four basic criteria have
been met:
|
|
|
there is persuasive evidence of an arrangement;
|
|
|
delivery has occurred or title has passed to our customer based
on contract terms;
|
|
|
the fee is fixed and determinable and no further obligation
exists; and
|
|
|
collectibility is reasonably assured.
|
We have generated BioThrax sales revenues under
U.S. government contracts with the DoD and HHS. Under our
DoD contract, we invoice the DoD for progress payments upon
reaching contractually specified stages in the manufacture of
BioThrax. We record as deferred revenue the full amount of each
progress
55
payment invoice that we submit to the DoD. Title to the product
passes to the DoD upon submission of the first invoice. The
earnings process is complete upon FDA release of the product for
sale and distribution. Following FDA release of the product, we
segregate the product for later shipment and recognize as period
revenue all deferred revenue related to the released product in
accordance with the bill and hold sale requirements
under SAB 104. At that time, we also invoice the DoD for
the final progress payment and recognize the amount of that
invoice as period revenue. Our contract with HHS does not
provide for progress payments. We invoice HHS and recognize the
related revenue upon delivery of the product to the government
carrier, at which time title to the product passes to HHS. We do
not record allowances for sales returns, rebates or special
promotional programs for sales of BioThrax or provisions for
sales made in prior periods.
Under the collaboration agreement that we entered into with
Sanofi Pasteur in May 2006 for our meningitis B vaccine
candidate, we received an upfront license fee and are entitled
to additional payments for development work under the
collaboration and upon achieving contractually defined
development and commercialization milestones. We recorded the
amount of the upfront license fee as deferred revenue. We are
recognizing this revenue over the estimated development period
under the contract, currently estimated at seven years, as
adjusted from time to time for any delays or acceleration in the
development of the product candidate. We also will be entitled
to royalty payments on net sales of this product. Under the
collaboration agreement, we have contracted to perform
development work for Sanofi Pasteur for which we are entitled to
payments up to specified levels. We invoice Sanofi Pasteur in
the beginning of each quarter for the estimated work to occur in
that quarter. We record the invoice amount as deferred revenue.
As services are completed, we recognize the amount of the
related deferred revenue as period revenue. We evaluate the
various components of a collaboration in accordance with
Emerging Issues Task Force, or EITF, Issue
No. 00-21,
Accounting for Revenue Arrangements with Multiple
Deliverables, or EITF
No. 00-21,
which addresses whether, for revenue recognition purposes, there
is one or several elements in an arrangement. We concluded that
under EITF No. 00-21, the upfront license fee, the
development work and the milestone payments under our agreement
with Sanofi Pasteur should be accounted for as a single unit of
accounting. We recognize amounts received under this agreement
over the estimated development period as we perform services.
From time to time, we are awarded development grant contracts
with government entities and non-government and philanthropic
organizations. Under these contracts, we typically are
reimbursed for our costs in connection with specific development
activities and may also be entitled to additional fees. We
record the reimbursement of our costs and any associated fees as
grant revenue and the associated costs as research and
development expense. We issue invoices under these contracts
after we incur the reimbursable costs. We recognize revenue upon
invoicing the sponsoring organization.
Accounts
receivable
Accounts receivable are stated at invoice amounts and consist
primarily of amounts due from the DoD and HHS as well as amounts
due under reimbursement contracts with other government entities
and non-government and philanthropic organizations. Because the
prior collection history for receivables from these entities
indicate that collection is likely, we do not currently record
an allowance for doubtful accounts.
Inventories
Inventories are stated at the lower of cost or market, with cost
being determined using a standard cost method, which
approximates average cost. Average cost consists primarily of
material, labor and manufacturing overhead expenses and includes
the services and products of third party suppliers. We analyze
our inventory levels quarterly and write down in the applicable
period inventory that has become
56
obsolete, inventory that has a cost basis in excess of its
expected net realizable value and inventory in excess of
expected customer demand. We also write off in the applicable
period the costs related to expired inventory.
Accrued
expenses
As part of the process of preparing financial statements, we are
required to estimate accrued expenses. This process involves
identifying services that have been performed on our behalf and
estimating the level of service performed and the associated
cost incurred for such service where we have not yet been
invoiced or otherwise notified of actual cost. We make these
estimates as of each balance sheet date in our financial
statements. Examples of estimated accrued expenses include:
|
|
|
fees payable to contract research organizations in conjunction
with clinical trials;
|
|
|
fees payable to third party manufacturers in conjunction with
the production of clinical trial materials; and
|
|
|
professional service fees.
|
In accruing service fees, we estimate the time period over which
services were provided and the level of effort in each period.
If the actual timing of the provision of services or the level
of effort varies from the estimate, we will adjust the accrual
accordingly. The majority of our service providers invoice us
monthly in arrears for services performed. In the event that we
do not identify costs that have begun to be incurred or we
underestimate or overestimate the level of services performed or
the costs of such services, our actual expenses could differ
from such estimates. The date on which some services commence,
the level of services performed on or before a given date and
the cost of such services are often subjective determinations.
We make judgments based upon the facts and circumstances known
to us.
Purchased
in-process research and development
We account for purchased in-process research and development in
accordance with Statement of Financial Accounting Standards, or
SFAS, No. 2, Accounting for Research and Development
Costs along with Financial Accounting Standards Board, or
FASB, Interpretation No. 4, Applicability of FASB
Statement No. 2 to Business Combinations Accounted for by
the Purchase Method.
Under these standards, we are required to determine whether the
technology relating to a particular research and development
project we acquire has an alternative future use. If we
determine that the technology has no alternative future use, we
expense the value of the research and development project not
directly attributed to fixed assets. Otherwise, we capitalize
the value of the research and development project not
attributable to fixed assets as an intangible asset and conduct
an impairment analysis at least annually. In connection with our
acquisition of Microscience and our acquisition of substantially
all of the assets of Antex, we allocated the value of the
purchase consideration to current assets, current liabilities,
fixed assets and development programs. Because we determined
that the development programs at Microscience and Antex had no
future alternative use, we charged the value attributable to the
development programs as in-process research and development. For
the Microscience acquisition, which was a share exchange, our
board of directors determined the fair value of our shares
issued in the exchange for financial statement purposes after
taking into account the recommendations of management and the
assessments provided by a third party valuation specialist. For
the Antex acquisition, which was a cash transaction, no fair
value determination was necessary.
57
Stock-based
compensation
Through December 31, 2005, in accordance with
SFAS No. 123, Accounting for Stock-Based
Compensation, or SFAS No. 123, we elected to
account for our employee stock-based compensation using the
intrinsic value method in accordance with Accounting Principles
Board, or APB, Opinion No. 25, Accounting for Stock
Issued to Employees, and related interpretations, or APB
No. 25, rather than the alternative fair value accounting
method provided for under SFAS No. 123. Accordingly,
we did not record compensation expense on employee stock options
granted in fixed amounts and with fixed exercise prices when the
exercise prices of the options were equal to the fair value of
the underlying common stock on the date of grant. Pro forma
information regarding net loss and loss per share is required by
SFAS No. 123 and has been determined as if we had
accounted for employee stock option grants under the fair value
method prescribed by that statement. We provide this pro forma
disclosure in our financial statements. We account for
transactions in which services are received in exchange for
equity instruments based on the fair value of the services
received from non-employees or of the equity instruments issued,
whichever is more reliably measured, in accordance with
SFAS No. 123 and EITF Issue
No. 96-18,
Accounting for Equity Instruments that Are Issued to Other
than Employees for Acquiring, or in Conjunction with Selling,
Goods or Services, or EITF
No. 96-18.
In accordance with EITF
No. 96-18,
we periodically remeasure stock-based compensation for options
granted to non-employees as the underlying options vest. As of
June 30, 2006, we had no outstanding options that had been
granted to non-employees other than our directors.
In December 2004, the FASB issued SFAS No. 123
(revised 2004), Share-Based Payment, or
SFAS No. 123(R), which is a revision of
SFAS No. 123. SFAS No. 123(R) supersedes APB
No. 25 and amends SFAS No. 95, Statement of
Cash Flows. Generally, the approach in
SFAS No. 123(R) is similar to the approach described
in SFAS No. 123. However, SFAS No. 123(R)
requires all share-based payments to employees, including grants
of employee stock options, to be recognized in the income
statement based on their estimated fair values. Pro forma
disclosure is no longer an alternative. We adopted
SFAS No. 123(R) on January 1, 2006 using the
modified prospective method. We will continue to value our
share-based payment transactions using a Black-Scholes valuation
model. Under the modified prospective method, we recognize
compensation cost in our financial statements for all awards
granted after January 1, 2006 and for all awards
outstanding as of January 1, 2006 for which the requisite
service had not been rendered as of the date of adoption. Prior
period operating results have not been restated. We measure the
amount of compensation cost based on the fair value of the
underlying common stock on the date of grant. We recognize
compensation cost over the period that an employee provides
service in exchange for the award.
As a result of our adoption of SFAS No. 123(R)
effective January 1, 2006, we recorded stock-based
compensation expense of $289,000 for the six months ended
June 30, 2006. This expense related to stock options that
were outstanding and had not completely vested as of
January 1, 2006. During the six months ended June 30,
2006, we granted 57,500 stock options. We granted all of these
stock options on June 30, 2006, the last day of the period.
As such, we did not record any additional stock-based
compensation expense related to these options during the six
months ended June 30, 2006. Both basic and diluted loss per
share for the six months ended June 30, 2006 are $0.04 less
than if we had continued to account for stock-based compensation
under APB No. 25. The effect of adopting
SFAS No. 123(R) on net loss and net loss per share is
not necessarily representative of the effects in future years
due to, among other things, the vesting period of the stock
options and the fair value of additional stock option grants in
future years. Based on options granted to employees as of
June 30, 2006, total compensation expense not yet
recognized related to unvested options is approximately
$870,000, after tax. We expect to recognize that expense over a
weighted average period of 3.5 years. Based on options
granted to employees as of June 30, 2006, we expect to
recognize amortization of stock-based
58
compensation, after tax, of approximately $240,000 during the
remainder of 2006, $386,000 in 2007, $164,000 in 2008 and
$80,000 in 2009.
The factors that most affect charges or credits to operations
related to stock-based compensation are the fair value of the
common stock underlying stock options for which stock-based
compensation is recorded, the volatility of fair value of the
common stock, the expected life of the instrument and the
assumed risk free rate of return. Because shares of our common
stock have not been publicly traded, our board of directors has
determined the fair value of our common stock for accounting
purposes. There is no certainty that the results of our
boards determination would be the value at which the
shares would be traded for cash. In determining the fair value
of our common stock, our board of directors considered:
|
|
|
the history and nature of our business and results of operations;
|
|
|
|
our prospects for growth, including potential contracts for
BioThrax product sales;
|
|
|
|
our available cash, assets and financial condition;
|
|
|
|
prior determinations of the fair value of the common stock
underlying stock options granted and the effect of corporate
developments, including the progress of our product candidates,
that have occurred between the time of the grants;
|
|
|
rights and preferences of the security being granted compared to
the rights and preferences of our other outstanding equity;
|
|
|
|
values of public companies that we believe are comparable to us,
adjusted for the risks related to and the lack of a liquid
market for the shares;
|
|
|
|
the time frame in which a liquid market would likely be
available for the shares;
|
|
|
|
the assessments provided by independent valuation specialists;
|
|
|
business developments involving our direct competitors; and
|
|
|
|
general economic trends and the economic outlook and market
conditions for our industry.
|
If our estimates of the fair value of these equity instruments
are too high or too low, it would have the effect of overstating
or understating expenses.
Our board of directors considered the assessments of independent
valuation specialists in determining the fair value of our
class B common stock underlying stock options granted
during 2003, 2004, 2005 and 2006. The assessments of these
valuation specialists were based upon the application of the
income and market approaches consistent with the practice aid
issued by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants
entitled Valuation of Privately Held Company Equity
Securities Issued as Compensation. Under the income
approach, the valuation specialists used a discounted cash flow
analysis based on projections of future cash flow to determine
an estimated value. Under the market approach, the valuation
specialists analyzed comparable public companies and developed
an estimated value for the class B common stock based on
revenues, earnings and enterprise values. The values derived by
each of these methods were adjusted for lack of voting rights,
minority interest and lack of marketability of the class B
common stock.
In 2004, in connection with our reorganization, we recorded
stock-based compensation expense as a result of the issuance of
stock options to purchase our class B common stock to
replace the outstanding stock options to purchase BioPort
class B common stock. The exercise period of these
replacement options was extended to June 2007. Based upon the
guidance in APB No. 25, because the stock options
59
granted for our class B common stock provided for an
extended term over that of the cancelled BioPort options, a new
measurement date was created and we recorded as stock-based
compensation expense the excess of the intrinsic value of the
modified options over the intrinsic value of the BioPort options
when originally issued. This resulted in stock-based
compensation expense of $4.3 million for 2004. We did not
record any stock-based compensation expense for options granted
during 2003 or 2005.
Income
taxes
Our deferred tax assets include the unamortized portion of
in-process research and development expenses, the anticipated
future benefit of the net operating losses that we have incurred
and other timing differences between financial reporting basis
of assets and liabilities. We have historically incurred net
operating losses for income tax purposes in some states and in
some foreign jurisdictions, primarily the United Kingdom. The
amount of the deferred tax assets on our balance sheet reflects
our expectations regarding our ability to use our net operating
losses to offset future taxable income. The applicable tax rules
in particular jurisdictions limit our ability to use net
operating losses as a result of ownership changes. In
particular, we believe that these rules will significantly limit
our ability to use net operating losses generated by
Microscience and Antex prior to our acquisition of Microscience
in June 2005 and our acquisition of substantially all of the
assets of Antex in May 2003.
We review our deferred tax assets on a quarterly basis to assess
our ability to realize the benefit from these deferred tax
assets. If we determine that it is more likely than not that the
amount of our expected future taxable income will not be
sufficient to allow us to fully utilize our deferred tax assets,
we increase our valuation allowance against deferred tax assets
by recording a provision for income taxes on our income
statement, which reduces net income, or increases net loss, for
that period and reduces our deferred tax assets on our balance
sheet. If we determine that the amount of our expected future
taxable income will allow us to utilize net operating losses in
excess of our net deferred tax assets, we reduce our valuation
allowance by recording a benefit from income taxes on our income
statement, which increases net income, or reduces net loss, for
that period and increases our deferred tax assets on our balance
sheet.
Financial
operations overview
Revenues
We have generated substantially all of our revenues from sales
of BioThrax. BioThrax product sales accounted for 97% of our
total revenues in 2005 and 86% of our total revenues in the six
months ended June 30, 2006. The DoD and HHS have been the
principal customers for BioThrax. We also have had limited sales
of BioThrax to foreign governments and private industry. In
addition, we periodically realize revenues from grants from
government entities and non-government and philanthropic
organizations and from licensing fees, milestone payments and
development reimbursement. These items accounted for 3% of our
total revenues in 2005 and 14% of our total revenues in the six
months ended June 30, 2006. If our ongoing development
efforts are successful, we would expect to generate revenues
from sales of additional products and milestone payments,
development payments and royalties on sales of products that we
license to third parties.
In May 2005, we entered into an agreement to supply five million
doses of BioThrax to HHS for placement into the strategic
national stockpile for a fixed price of $123 million. We
completed delivery of all five million doses by February 2006,
seven months earlier than required. In May 2006, we entered into
a contract modification with HHS for the delivery of an
additional five million doses of BioThrax to HHS by May 2007 for
a fixed price of $120 million. We have delivered
approximately one million doses of BioThrax under this contract
modification through August 2006. We expect to deliver to HHS
between
60
1.25 million and 1.75 million doses of BioThrax in
each of October 2006 and December 2006, with the balance, if
any, to be delivered in the first half of 2007.
In January 2004, we entered into our current contract with the
DoD for the delivery of a minimum number of doses of BioThrax
over one base contract year plus two option periods for a
minimum fixed price of approximately $91 million. Under
this contract, we were required to deliver a minimum of
approximately 2.8 million total doses in 2004 and 2005. We
delivered approximately 4.0 million total doses in 2004 and
2005 under DoD purchase orders. We are required to deliver
approximately an additional 1.0 million doses of BioThrax
between January 1, 2006 and September 30, 2006. As of
June 30, 2006, we had not begun delivery of these
additional required doses. We expect to be able to provide all
of the remaining doses before expiration of this contract in
September 2006. We have invoiced the DoD, as contemplated under
this contract, for progress payments as doses of BioThrax are
manufactured for sale to the DoD. In accordance with our revenue
recognition policy, we record deferred revenue for invoiced
amounts until the FDA releases the product for sale and
delivery. As of June 30, 2006, the amount of our deferred
revenue for DoD sales was $26.3 million. In April 2006, the
DoD issued a notice that it intends to negotiate a sole source
fixed price contract for the purchase of up to an additional
11 million doses of BioThrax over one base year plus four
option years. Although we are in discussions with the DoD, we
have not yet entered into an agreement with the DoD for this
procurement.
In May 2006, we entered into a collaboration agreement with
Sanofi Pasteur relating to the development and commercialization
of our meningitis B vaccine candidate and received a
$3.8 million upfront license fee. This agreement also
provides for a series of milestone payments upon the achievement
of specified development and commercialization objectives,
payments for development work under the collaboration and
royalties on net sales of this product. We recognize the upfront
license fee, milestone payments and development payments under
this agreement as revenue in accordance with our revenue
recognition policies.
Our revenue, operating results and profitability have varied,
and we expect that they will continue to vary, on a quarterly
basis primarily because of the timing of our fulfilling orders
for BioThrax. We expect milestone and grant revenues to increase
in 2006 as we receive reimbursement for development expenses
under our meningitis B collaboration with Sanofi Pasteur,
funding from the Wellcome Trust for costs associated with our
completed Phase I clinical trial and planned Phase II
clinical trial of our typhoid vaccine candidate in Vietnam and
funding from NIAID for costs associated with our animal efficacy
studies in rabbits of our anthrax immune globulin candidate.
Cost of product
sales
The primary expense that we incur to deliver BioThrax to our
customers is manufacturing costs, which are primarily fixed
costs. These fixed manufacturing costs consist of attributable
facilities, utilities and salaries and personnel related
expenses for indirect manufacturing support staff. Variable
manufacturing costs for BioThrax consist primarily of costs for
materials, direct labor and contract filling operations. In
2005, we improved manufacturing efficiencies for BioThrax by
extending the hours of operation for our manufacturing facility.
As a result, the cost of product sales per dose of BioThrax
decreased in 2005 compared to 2004. We do not expect further
significant improvements in manufacturing efficiencies for
BioThrax until we complete our new manufacturing facility in
Lansing, Michigan. We currently are producing BioThrax at close
to the maximum capacity of our existing manufacturing facility.
We expect our manufacturing costs to remain relatively stable
for the remainder of 2006 and during 2007.
61
We determine the cost of product sales for doses sold for a
period based on the average manufacturing cost per dose for that
period. We calculate the average manufacturing cost per dose by
dividing the actual costs of manufacturing in the applicable
period by the number of units produced in that period. In
addition to the fixed and variable manufacturing costs described
above, the average manufacturing cost per dose depends on the
efficiency of the manufacturing process, utilization of
available manufacturing capacity and the production yield for
any period.
Research and
development expenses
We expense research and development costs as incurred. Our
research and development expenses consist primarily of:
|
|
|
salaries and related expenses for personnel;
|
|
|
fees to professional service providers for, among other things,
independently monitoring our clinical trials and acquiring and
evaluating data from our clinical trials;
|
|
|
costs of contract manufacturing services;
|
|
|
costs of materials used in clinical trials and research and
development;
|
|
|
depreciation of capital assets used to develop our
products; and
|
|
|
operating costs, such as the cost of facilities and the legal
costs of pursuing patent protection of our intellectual property.
|
The successful development of our product candidates is highly
uncertain. We believe that significant investment in product
development is a competitive necessity and plan to continue
these investments in order to be in a position to realize the
potential of our product candidates. We cannot reasonably
estimate or know the nature, timing and projected costs of the
efforts that will be necessary to complete the remainder of the
development of, or the period, if any, in which material net
cash inflows may commence from any of our product candidates.
This is due to the numerous risks and uncertainties associated
with developing drugs, including the uncertainty of:
|
|
|
the scope, rate of progress and expense of our clinical trials
and other research and development activities;
|
|
|
the potential benefits of our product candidates over other
products;
|
|
|
our ability to market, commercialize and achieve market
acceptance for any of our product candidates that we are
developing or may develop in the future;
|
|
|
future clinical trial results;
|
|
|
the terms and timing of regulatory approvals; and
|
|
|
the expense of filing, prosecuting, defending and enforcing any
patent claims and other intellectual property rights.
|
A change in the outcome of any of these variables with respect
to the development of a product candidate could mean a
significant change in the costs and timing associated with the
development of that product candidate.
We expect that development spending will increase for all of our
biodefense product candidates as our product development
activities continue and we prepare for regulatory submissions
and other regulatory
62
activities. We expect our development expenses in our commercial
business to increase in connection with our ongoing activities,
particularly as we conduct additional and later stage clinical
trials for our product candidates.
We expect that the magnitude of any increase in our research and
development spending will be dependent upon such factors as the
results from our ongoing preclinical studies and clinical
trials, the size, structure and duration of any follow on
clinical program that we may initiate, our ability to use data
generated by government agencies, such as the ongoing CDC
studies with BioThrax, and our ability to rely upon and utilize
clinical and nonclinical data, such as the data generated by CDC
from use of the pentavalent botulinum toxoid vaccine previously
manufactured by the State of Michigan. Furthermore, if the FDA
or other regulatory authority were to require us to conduct
clinical trials beyond those which we currently anticipate will
be required for the completion of clinical development of a
product candidate or if we experience significant delays in
enrollment in any of our clinical trials, we could be required
to expend significant additional financial resources and time on
the completion of clinical development.
Selling, general
and administrative expenses
General and administrative expenses consist primarily of
salaries and other related costs for personnel serving the
executive, business development, finance, accounting,
information technology, legal and human resource functions.
Other costs include facility costs not otherwise included in
cost of product sales or research and development expense and
professional fees for legal and accounting services. We expect
that our general and administrative expenses will increase as we
add personnel to support the increased scale of our operations
and become subject to the reporting obligations applicable to
public companies. Our general and administrative expenses have
increased as a result of preparing for this offering and
supporting the overall growth of the company. We currently
market and sell BioThrax directly to the DoD and HHS with a
small, targeted marketing and sales group. Accordingly, our
marketing and sales expense for these efforts has been limited.
As we seek to broaden the market for BioThrax and if we receive
marketing approval for additional products, we expect that we
will increase our spending for marketing and sales activities.
Total other
income (expense)
Total other income (expense) consists principally of interest
income and interest expense. We earn interest on our cash, cash
equivalents and short-term investments, and we incur interest
expense on our indebtedness. Our net interest expense will
increase in future periods as compared to prior periods as a
result of the mortgage loan that we entered into in April 2006
and the term loan that we entered into in August 2006, as well
as any borrowings under our revolving lines of credit. In
addition, some of our existing debt arrangements provide for
increasing amortization of principal payments in future periods.
See Liquidity and capital resources Debt
financing for additional information.
Results of
operations
Six months ended
June 30, 2006 compared to six months ended June 30,
2005
Revenues
Product sales revenues, which relate only to the biodefense
segment, decreased by $38.1 million, or 65%, to
$20.4 million for the six months ended June 30, 2006
from $58.5 million for the six months ended June 30,
2005. This decrease in product sales revenues was primarily due
to a 66% decrease in the number of doses we delivered as a
result of the timing of our fulfilling orders from the DoD and
HHS.
63
Product sales revenues in the six months ended June 30,
2006 consisted of BioThrax sales to HHS of $17.9 million,
sales to the DoD of $1.9 million and sales to the Canadian
government of $630,000. Product sales revenues in the six months
ended June 30, 2005 consisted of BioThrax sales to HHS of
$43.7 million, sales to the DoD of $14.5 million and
other sales of $282,000.
Milestone and grant revenues increased by $2.4 million to
$3.3 million for the six months ended June 30, 2006
from $813,000 for the six months ended June 30, 2005.
Milestone and grant revenues for the six months ended
June 30, 2006 consisted of $1.8 million in upfront and
development program revenue from the Sanofi Pasteur
collaboration and $1.5 million in grant revenue from the
Wellcome Trust. Milestone and grant revenues for the six months
ended June 30, 2005 resulted from reimbursement from the
DoD for expenses related to production development and supply
chain management improvements for BioThrax incurred in prior
periods, and for additional work that we performed on a project
basis for the DoDs Defense Advanced Research Projects
Agency, or DARPA, to evaluate a new vaccine adjuvant for
BioThrax.
Cost of
product sales
Cost of product sales, which relate only to the biodefense
segment, consists of expenses incurred in the manufacture of
BioThrax. Cost of product sales decreased by $12.1 million,
or 73%, to $4.4 million for the six months ended
June 30, 2006 from $16.5 million for the six months
ended June 30, 2005. This decrease was attributable to the
delivery of 1.6 million fewer doses of BioThrax in the six
months ended June 30, 2006 and improved utilization of our
manufacturing capacity for BioThrax as a result of extending the
hours of operation for our manufacturing facility. The reduction
in the number of doses delivered resulted in a reduction in
costs of approximately $11.0 million. Manufacturing
efficiencies resulted in a cost savings of approximately
$1.1 million.
Research and
development expenses
Research and development expenses increased by
$10.1 million to $14.2 million for the six months
ended June 30, 2006 from $4.2 million for the six
months ended June 30, 2005. This increase reflects
increased expenses of $5.0 million in the biodefense
segment and $6.2 million in the commercial segment, offset
by a reduction of $1.1 million in other research and
development expenses.
The increase in biodefense spending was attributable to
increased efforts on all our biodefense programs as we completed
various studies and began subsequent studies and trials. This
increase primarily reflects additional personnel and contract
service costs. The increase in spending for BioThrax
enhancements related to preparing for animal efficacy studies to
support applications for marketing approval of these
enhancements, which we expect to submit to the FDA later in 2006
and in 2007. The increase in spending for immune globulin
development related primarily to costs associated with our
plasma donor stimulation program for our anthrax immune globulin
candidate. The increase in spending for the recombinant
botulinum vaccine and next generation anthrax vaccine programs,
both of which are in preclinical development, resulted from
advancing these programs to the process development stage and
the manufacture of supplies of product candidates required for
clinical development.
The increase in commercial spending was mainly attributable to
spending on the commercial products listed in the table below
following our acquisition of Microscience in June 2005. This
increase primarily reflects additional personnel and contract
service costs. Research and development spending by Microscience
prior to our acquisition of Microscience in June 2005 is not
included in our results for the six
64
months ended June 30, 2005. The spending in the six months
ended June 30, 2006 for our typhoid vaccine candidate
resulted from ongoing work for the Phase I clinical trial
in Vietnam that we recently completed and preparing for our
Phase II clinical trial in Vietnam that we plan to initiate
in the fourth quarter of 2006. The spending in the six months
ended June 30, 2006 for our hepatitis B therapeutic vaccine
candidate resulted from preparing for our Phase II clinical
trial that we plan to initiate in the fourth quarter of 2006.
The spending in the six months ended June 30, 2006 for our
group B streptococcus vaccine candidate resulted from costs
associated with our analysis of results from the Phase I
clinical trial that we recently completed for one of the protein
components of the vaccine candidate and preparation for
Phase I clinical trials for the two other protein
components of the vaccine candidate. Both our chlamydia vaccine
and meningitis B vaccine candidates are in preclinical
development.
The decrease in spending on other research and development
expenses was attributable to our discontinuation of preclinical
programs that we acquired from Antex and determined not to
pursue.
Our principal research and development expenses for the six
months ended June 30, 2005 and 2006 are shown in the
following table:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Six months ended
|
|
|
June 30,
|
(in thousands)
|
|
2005
|
|
2006
|
|
|
Biodefense:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
BioThrax enhancements
|
|
$
|
800
|
|
$
|
1,843
|
Immune globulin development
|
|
|
957
|
|
|
3,858
|
Recombinant bivalent botulinum
vaccine
|
|
|
319
|
|
|
701
|
Next generation anthrax vaccine
|
|
|
80
|
|
|
772
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total biodefense
|
|
|
2,156
|
|
|
7,174
|
Commercial:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Typhoid vaccine
|
|
|
313
|
|
|
2,247
|
Hepatitis B therapeutic vaccine
|
|
|
52
|
|
|
1,541
|
Group B streptococcus vaccine
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
1,181
|
Chlamydia vaccine
|
|
|
156
|
|
|
624
|
Meningitis B vaccine
|
|
|
49
|
|
|
1,159
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total commercial
|
|
|
573
|
|
|
6,752
|
Other
|
|
|
1,428
|
|
|
284
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
4,157
|
|
$
|
14,210
|
|
|
Selling,
general and administrative expenses
Selling, general and administrative expenses increased by
$2.7 million, or 15%, to $20.7 million for the six
months ended June 30, 2006 from $18.0 million for the
six months ended June 30, 2005. Selling, general and
administrative expenses related to the biodefense segment
increased by $219,000, or 1%, to $15.6 million for the six
months ended June 30, 2006 from $15.4 million for the
six months ended June 30, 2005. Selling, general and
administrative expenses related to the commercial segment
increased
65
by $2.5 million, or 95%, to $5.1 million for the six
months ended June 30, 2006 from $2.6 million for the
six months ended June 30, 2005. The increase in the
biodefense segment was primarily attributable to an increase in
sales and marketing expenses of $257,000 resulting from the
establishment of a sales and marketing subsidiary in Germany in
the second half of 2005. The increase in the commercial segment
was primarily attributable to an increase in general and
administrative expenses of $2.6 million resulting from the
addition of personnel and facilities for Emergent Product
Development UK following our acquisition of Microscience in June
2005.
Purchased
in-process research and development
In June 2005, we recorded a non-cash charge for purchased
in-process research and development of $26.6 million
associated with our acquisition of Microscience. We valued the
1,264,051 shares of class A common stock that we issued in
the acquisition at $28.2 million after the inclusion of
acquisition costs. Of this amount, we identified
$1.4 million as current assets, $0.9 million as fixed
assets, $0.7 million as current liabilities and
$26.6 million as the value attributable to development
programs. Because we determined that the development programs
had no future alternative use, we charged the value attributable
to the development programs as purchased in-process research and
development. This charge is being amortized for tax purposes
over 15 years.
Litigation
settlement
In June 2005, we recorded a gain of $10.0 million relating
to a settlement of a litigation matter that we initiated to
resolve a contract and intellectual property dispute. There were
no settlements for the six months ended June 30, 2006.
Total other
income (expense)
Total other income increased by $542,000 to $218,000 for the six
months ended June 30, 2006 from a loss of $324,000 for the
six months ended June 30, 2005. The increase resulted
principally from an increase in interest income of $223,000 as a
result of higher investment return on increased average cash
balances, a decrease in interest expense of $170,000 related to
the capitalization of interest associated with our facility
expansion in Lansing and an increase in other income
(expense) of $149,000.
Income
taxes
We recorded a benefit from income taxes of $7.7 million for
the six months ended June 30, 2006 compared to a provision
for income taxes of $958,000 for the six months ended
June 30, 2005. The benefit from income taxes for the six
months ended June 30, 2006 resulted primarily from our loss
before benefit from income taxes of $15.4 million and an
estimated effective annual tax rate of 50%. The provision for
income taxes for the six months ended June 30, 2005
resulted primarily from our income before provision for income
taxes of $3.8 million and an estimated effective annual tax
rate of 25%. The increase in the estimated effective annual tax
rate by 25% is due primarily to an increase in the valuation
allowance related to foreign and state net operating losses.
While the net operating losses for foreign and state
jurisdictions have been recorded as deferred tax assets, a full
valuation allowance also has been recorded due to current
uncertainty as to whether we will generate sufficient future
taxable income in the applicable jurisdictions to fully utilize
these net operating losses.
66
Year ended
December 31, 2005 compared to year ended December 31,
2004
Revenues
Product sales revenues increased by $46.3 million, or 57%,
to $127.3 million for 2005 from $81.0 million for
2004. This increase in product sales revenues was primarily due
to a 52% increase in the number of doses delivered. Product
sales revenues in 2005 consisted of BioThrax sales to HHS of
$111.2 million, sales to the DoD of $14.5 million and
aggregate sales to the governments of Canada and Taiwan of $1.6
million. Product sales revenues in 2004 consisted of BioThrax
sales to the DoD of $80.6 million and sales to the Canadian
government of $360,000.
Milestone and grant revenues increased by $937,000, or 38%, to
$3.4 million in 2005 from $2.5 million in 2004
primarily as a result of additional work that we performed on a
project basis for DARPA to evaluate a new vaccine adjuvant for
BioThrax.
Cost of
product sales
Cost of product sales increased by $1.5 million, or 5%, to
$31.6 million for 2005 from $30.1 million for 2004.
This increase was attributable to the delivery of
1.8 million additional doses of BioThrax in 2005 and a
decrease in production yield, resulting in a higher average
manufacturing cost per dose in 2005, offset by improved
utilization of our manufacturing capacity for BioThrax as a
result of extending the hours of operation for our manufacturing
facility. The increase in the number of doses delivered combined
with the decrease in production yield resulted in additional
costs of $6.6 million. Manufacturing efficiencies resulted
in a cost savings of $5.1 million.
Research and
development expenses
Research and development expenses increased by
$8.3 million, or 82%, to $18.4 million for 2005 from
$10.1 million for 2004. This increase reflects increased
expenses of $4.0 million in the biodefense segment and
$5.8 million in the commercial segment, offset by a
reduction of $1.6 million in other research and development
expenses.
The increase in biodefense spending resulted from costs
associated with our plasma donor stimulation program for our
anthrax immune globulin candidate, process development related
to our recombinant botulinum vaccine candidate and evaluation of
third party technology related to our next generation anthrax
vaccine program for potential acquisition or in-license, offset
by decreased spending on BioThrax enhancements. In 2004, the
immune globulin program was in initial studies and we had not
yet begun work on the recombinant botulinum vaccine and next
generation anthrax vaccine candidates. The decrease in spending
on BioThrax enhancements resulted from substantial completion
during 2004 of research regarding manufacturing process
development for BioThrax to improve the stability and
consistency of production lots.
The increase in spending in the commercial segment was
attributable to spending on the commercial programs listed in
the table below following our acquisition of Microscience in
June 2005. Research and development spending by Microscience is
not included in our results prior to the acquisition date. The
commercial spending in 2005 resulted from the Phase I
clinical trial in Vietnam for our typhoid vaccine candidate,
preparation for a planned Phase II clinical trial for our
hepatitis B therapeutic vaccine candidate, including the
manufacture of clinical trial material, preparation for one of
three planned Phase I
67
clinical trials related to one of the protein components of our
group B streptococcus vaccine candidate and preclinical work for
our chlamydia vaccine and meningitis B vaccine candidates.
The decrease in spending on other research and development
expenses was attributable to our discontinuation of preclinical
programs that we acquired from Antex and determined not to
pursue.
Our principal research and development expenses for 2004 and
2005 are shown in the following table:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year ended
|
|
|
December 31,
|
(in
thousands)
|
|
2004
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Biodefense:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
BioThrax enhancements
|
|
$
|
5,929
|
|
$
|
2,883
|
Immune globulin development
|
|
|
350
|
|
|
5,309
|
Recombinant bivalent botulinum
vaccine
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,708
|
Next generation anthrax vaccine
|
|
|
|
|
|
427
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total biodefense
|
|
|
6,279
|
|
|
10,327
|
Commercial:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Typhoid vaccine
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,477
|
Hepatitis B therapeutic vaccine
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,558
|
Group B streptococcus vaccine
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,433
|
Chlamydia vaccine
|
|
|
1,136
|
|
|
837
|
Meningitis B vaccine
|
|
|
|
|
|
656
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total commercial
|
|
|
1,136
|
|
|
6,961
|
Other
|
|
|
2,702
|
|
|
1,093
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
10,117
|
|
$
|
18,381
|
|
|
Selling,
general and administrative expenses
Selling, general and administrative expenses increased by
$12.5 million, or 41%, to $42.8 million for 2005 from
$30.3 million for 2004. Selling, general and administrative
expenses related to our biodefense segment increased by
$6.4 million to $35.4 million for 2005 from
$29.0 million for 2004. Selling, general and administrative
expenses related to our commercial segment increased by
$6.0 million to $7.3 million for 2005 from
$1.3 million for 2004. The increase in the biodefense
segment was attributable to an increase in general and
administrative expenses of $5.5 million resulting from
additional personnel professional service providers for our
headquarters organization who devoted time to the biodefense
segment and an increase in sales and marketing expenses of
$1.0 million resulting from the addition of sales personnel
to investigate potential other markets for BioThrax. The
increase in the commercial segment was attributable to an
increase in general and administrative expenses of
$5.3 million resulting from the addition of personnel for
Emergent Product Development UK and legal expenses associated
with reorganizing our corporate structure following our
acquisition of Microscience in June 2005.
68
Purchased
in-process research and development
In 2005, as described above, we recorded a non-cash charge of
$26.6 million for purchased in-process research and
development associated with our acquisition of Microscience.
Litigation
settlement
In 2005, we recorded a gain of $10.0 million relating to a
settlement of a litigation matter that we initiated to resolve a
contract and intellectual property dispute. There were no
settlements in 2004.
Total other
income (expense)
Total other expense increased by $57,000 to $227,000 for 2005
from $170,000 for 2004. This increase resulted primarily from an
increase in interest expense associated with our financing of
the acquisition costs for one building at our Frederick facility.
Income
taxes
Provision for income taxes increased by $196,000, or 4%, to
$5.3 million for 2005 from $5.1 million for 2004. The
provision for income taxes for 2005 resulted primarily from our
income before provision for income taxes of $21.1 million
and an effective annual tax rate of 25%. The provision for
income taxes for 2004 resulted primarily from our income before
provision for income taxes of $16.6 million and an
effective annual tax rate of 31%. The provision for income taxes
also reflects research and development tax credits of $474,000
for 2005 and $492,000 for 2004 and small amounts of permanent
tax differences in each year.
Year ended
December 31, 2004 compared to year ended December 31,
2003
Revenues
Product sales revenues increased by $25.5 million, or 46%,
to $81.0 million for 2004 from $55.5 million for 2003.
This increase in product sales revenues was primarily due to a
45% increase in the number of doses delivered. Product sales
revenues in 2004 consisted of BioThrax sales to the DoD of
$80.6 million and sales to the Canadian government of
$360,000. Product sales revenues in 2003 consisted of BioThrax
sales to the DoD of $55.2 million and sales to the Canadian
government of $270,000.
Milestones and grant revenues increased to $2.5 million in
2004 from $233,000 in 2003 primarily as a result of additional
work that we performed on a project basis for DARPA to evaluate
a new vaccine adjuvant for BioThrax.
Cost of
product sales
Cost of product sales increased by $7.8 million, or 35%, to
$30.1 million for 2004 from $22.3 million for 2003.
This increase was attributable to the delivery of approximately
1.0 million additional doses of BioThrax in 2004. We were
able to deliver these additional doses as a result of increasing
our manufacturing capacity at our Lansing facility in 2004 by
extending the hours of operation of the facility. The increase
in the number of doses delivered resulted in additional costs of
$3.5 million. Increasing manufacturing capacity resulted in
additional costs of $4.3 million, primarily for the
training of new personnel. Our increase in manufacturing
capacity allowed us to spread our fixed manufacturing costs
69
over a greater number of doses, which resulted in a decrease in
the cost of product sales per dose of BioThrax in 2004 compared
to 2003.
Research and
development expenses
Research and development expenses increased by
$3.8 million, or 60%, to $10.1 million for 2004 from
$6.3 million for 2003. This increase reflects increased
expenses of $1.9 million in the biodefense segment and
$1.8 million in the commercial segment. The increase in the
biodefense segment was attributable to work on the initiation of
programs for BioThrax enhancements and consisted primarily of
personnel and contract service costs. The increase in the
commercial segment was attributable to spending on commercial
product candidates acquired from Antex in May 2003. Research and
development spending by Antex is not included in our results
prior to the acquisition date.
Selling,
general and administrative expenses
Selling, general and administrative expenses increased by
$10.8 million, or 55%, to $30.3 million for 2004 from
$19.5 million for 2003. Selling, general and administrative
expenses related to the biodefense segment increased by
$9.5 million to $29.0 million for 2004 from
$19.5 million for 2003. This increase was attributable to
growth in corporate staff to support expanding business activity
and increased costs for professional service providers. Selling,
general and administrative expenses related to the commercial
segment increased by $1.3 million for 2004 from an
immaterial amount for 2003 as we hired additional employees to
support the newly acquired Antex operations. The overall
increase in selling, general and administrative expenses was
primarily attributable to an increase of $7.0 million in
general and administrative expenditures as a result of our
corporate reorganization in June 2004 and the formation of our
headquarters organization, including a non-cash stock-based
compensation charge of $4.3 million. In addition, general
and administrative expenses increased $1.1 million as a
result of our acquisition of assets from Antex. Selling and
marketing expense increased to $843,000 for 2004 from an
immaterial amount for 2003. This increase in spending resulted
from the addition of personnel and outside consulting fees.
Purchased
in-process research and development
In 2003, we recorded a non-cash charge of $1.8 million
associated with our acquisition of assets from Antex. The
purchase consideration was $3.4 million in cash. We valued
the transaction at $3.8 million after the inclusion of
acquisition costs. Of this amount, we identified $300,000 as
current assets, $1.7 million as fixed assets and
$1.8 million as the value attributable to development
programs. Because we determined that the development programs
had no future alternative use, we charged the value attributable
to the development programs as purchased in-process research and
development. We will amortize this charge for tax purposes over
15 years.
Settlement of
State of Michigan obligation
In 2004, we recorded a gain of $3.8 million from the
satisfaction for less than originally estimated of an obligation
to the State of Michigan related to our acquisition of assets
from the Michigan Biologic Products Institute in 1998. We have
no ongoing obligations to the State of Michigan related to our
acquisition of assets from the Michigan Biologic Products
Institute. There was no settlement of obligations in 2003.
70
Total other
income (expense)
Total other expense, net, increased to $170,000 for 2004 from
$25,000 for 2003. The increase resulted principally from a
decrease in other income of $162,000.
Income
taxes
Provision for income taxes increased by $3.9 million to
$5.1 million for 2004 from $1.3 million for 2003. The
provision for income taxes for 2004 resulted primarily from our
income before provision for income taxes of $16.6 million
and an effective annual tax rate of 31%. The provision for
income taxes for 2003 resulted primarily from our income before
provision for income taxes of $5.7 million and an effective
annual tax rate of 22%. The provision for income taxes also
reflects research and development tax credits of $492,000 for
2004 and $441,000 for 2003 and small amounts of permanent tax
differences in each year.
Liquidity and
capital resources
Sources of
liquidity
We require cash to meet our operating expenses and for capital
expenditures, acquisitions and principal and interest payments
on our debt. We have funded our cash requirements from inception
through June 30, 2006 principally with a combination of
revenues from BioThrax product sales, debt financings and
facilities and equipment leases and, to a lesser extent, from
the sale of our class B common stock upon exercise of stock
options. We have operated profitably for each of the years in
the three year period ended December 31, 2005, but incurred
a loss in the six months ended June 30, 2006. As of
June 30, 2006, we had cash and cash equivalents of
$15.7 million.
Cash
flows
The following table provides information regarding our cash
flows for the years ended December 31, 2003, 2004 and 2005
and the six months ended June 30, 2005 and June 30,
2006.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year ended
December 31,
|
|
|
Six months ended
June 30,
|
|
(in
thousands)
|
|
2003
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used in):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating activities(1)
|
|
$
|
11,072
|
|
|
$
|
9,196
|
|
|
$
|
41,974
|
|
|
$
|
4,708
|
|
|
$
|
(7,882
|
)
|
Investing activities
|
|
|
(7,917
|
)
|
|
|
(18,175
|
)
|
|
|
(5,841
|
)
|
|
|
(1,384
|
)
|
|
|
(20,203
|
)
|
Financing activities
|
|
|
(927
|
)
|
|
|
8,681
|
|
|
|
(6,660
|
)
|
|
|
(531
|
)
|
|
|
7,528
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total net cash provided
(used)
|
|
$
|
2,228
|
|
|
$
|
(298
|
)
|
|
$
|
29,473
|
|
|
$
|
2,793
|
|
|
$
|
(20,557
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Includes the effect of exchange rate changes on cash and cash
equivalents.
|
Net cash used in operating activities of $7.9 million in
the six months ended June 30, 2006 resulted principally
from our net loss of $7.7 million, an increase in
inventories of $12.2 million, reflecting the value of work
in process for BioThrax lots being manufactured or awaiting
delivery, and a non-cash benefit from income taxes of
$8.2 million, reflecting our net loss before provision for
income taxes for the period, offset by an increase in deferred
revenue of $22.6 million related to amounts billed under
our contract with the DoD and deferral of a portion of the
upfront license fee from Sanofi Pasteur. The net loss for the
period and the increase in inventory are primarily related to
the timing of our fulfilling orders from the DoD and HHS. The
increase in deferred revenue primarily reflects progress
billings to the DoD,
71
pursuant to our contract, for product not yet released or
shipped and, therefore, not recorded as revenue during the
period.
Net cash provided by operating activities of $4.7 million
in the six months ended June 30, 2005 resulted principally
from our net income of $2.8 million, a non-cash charge for
purchased in-process research and development relating to the
Microscience acquisition, which reduced net income by
$26.6 million, and an increase in income taxes payable of
$8.7 million related to our net income for the period and
the non-deductibility of the majority of the book expense
related to the charge for purchased in-process research and
development, offset by a reduction in deferred revenue of
$10.9 million, reflecting the recognition of revenue
related to the delivery to the DoD of BioThrax lots for which we
had previously invoiced the DoD for progress payments and been
paid, an increase in accounts receivable of $11.6 million
as a result of amounts billed to the DoD for progress payments
in the manufacture of BioThrax lots and an increase in deferred
tax assets of $10.4 million, reflecting a deferred tax
asset recorded to reflect the timing differences between the
book charge and the tax deferral of expense related to the
purchased in-process research and development expense related to
the Microscience acquisition.
Net cash provided by operating activities of $42.3 million
in 2005 resulted principally from our net income of
$15.8 million, a non-cash charge for purchased in-process
research and development related to the Microscience
acquisition, which reduced net income by $26.6 million, and
a reduction of accounts receivable of $16.1 million as a
result of the collection of amounts due from the DoD during 2005
for invoices outstanding at the end of 2004 for progress in the
manufacture of BioThrax lots, offset by a reduction of deferred
revenue of $10.9 million, reflecting the delivery to the
DoD in the first quarter of 2005 of BioThrax lots for which we
had previously invoiced the DoD for progress payments and been
paid and an increase in deferred tax assets of
$11.0 million, reflecting a deferred tax asset recorded to
reflect the timing differences between the book charge and the
tax deferral of expense related to the purchased in-process
research and development expense related to the Microscience
acquisition.
Net cash provided by operating activities of $9.2 million
in 2004 resulted principally from our net income of
$11.5 million, a non-cash stock based compensation charge
that we incurred as a result of our issuance of new stock
options in our corporate reorganization in June 2004, which
reduced net income by $4.3 million, an increase in income
taxes payable of $5.8 million related to the timing of
payment of taxes and related deferred tax assets, and an
increase in deferred revenue of $3.9 million, reflecting
invoices to and payments from the DoD for progress in the
manufacture of BioThrax lots, offset by an increase in accounts
receivable of $15.7 million, reflecting invoices for
amounts due from the DoD for progress in the manufacture of
BioThrax lots, and a one-time non-cash gain of $3.8 million
resulting from the satisfaction of an obligation to the State of
Michigan for less than originally estimated.
Net cash provided by operating activities of $11.1 million
in 2003 resulted principally from our net income of
$4.5 million and an increase of $11.9 million in
deferred revenue reflecting invoices to and payments from the
DoD for progress in the manufacture of BioThrax lots, offset by
an increase in inventories of $4.7 million reflecting the
timing of deliveries to the DoD.
Net cash used in investing activities in the six months ended
June 30, 2006 and 2005 and in 2005, 2004 and 2003 resulted
principally from the purchase of property, plant and equipment.
Capital expenditures in the six months ended June 30, 2006
relate primarily to costs for construction of our new building
in Lansing, Michigan. Capital expenditures in 2005 were
primarily attributable to investments in information technology
upgrades and miscellaneous facility enhancements. Capital
expenditures in 2004 include infrastructure investments of
$4.7 million, $3.8 million for an enterprise resource
planning system and $8.5 million for the purchase of one of
our facilities in Frederick, Maryland. Capital expenditures in
2003 include infrastructure investments in our Lansing
facilities. Net cash used in investing activities in 2003 also
includes cash of $3.8 million used for the acquisition of
assets from Antex.
72
Net cash provided by financing activities of $7.5 million
in the six months ended June 30, 2006 resulted primarily
from proceeds from notes payable related to the financing of the
purchase of our Frederick facility in May 2006. Net cash used in
financing activities of $531,000 in the six months ended
June 30, 2005 resulted principally from the repayment of
notes payable to employees and the repurchase of class B
common stock.
Net cash used in financing activities of $6.7 million in
2005 resulted principally from the payment of a special dividend
of $5.4 million from a portion of the proceeds of a
litigation settlement and the repayment of notes payable to
employees.
Net cash provided by financing activities of $8.7 million
in 2004 resulted principally from an increase in notes payable
as a result of $11.0 million of total debt incurred to
finance the purchase of one of our facilities in Frederick,
Maryland and to finance the purchase of an enterprise resource
planning system, offset by the repayment of non-recurring
royalty and product supply obligations to the State of Michigan
of $2.4 million.
Net cash used in financing activities of $927,000 in 2003
resulted primarily from the repayment of royalty and product
supply obligations to the State of Michigan.
Contractual
obligations
The following table summarizes our contractual obligations at
June 30, 2006.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payments due by
period
|
(in
thousands)
|
|
Total
|
|
2006
|
|
2007
|
|
2008
|
|
2009
|
|
2010
|
|
After 2010
|
|
|
Contractual obligations:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Short and long-term debt(1)(2)
|
|
$
|
26,102
|
|
$
|
1,787
|
|
$
|
2,196
|
|
$
|
1,521
|
|
$
|
1,511
|
|
$
|
1,504
|
|
$
|
17,585
|
Operating lease obligations
|
|
|
3,338
|
|
|
845
|
|
|
1,249
|
|
|
1,188
|
|
|
56
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Royalties and milestones(3)
|
|
|
11,400
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11,400
|
Contractual settlement liabilities
|
|
|
200
|
|
|
100
|
|
|
100
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total contractual
obligations
|
|
$
|
41,040
|
|
$
|
2,732
|
|
$
|
3,545
|
|
$
|
2,709
|
|
$
|
1,567
|
|
$
|
1,504
|
|
$
|
29,985
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Includes scheduled interest payments. |
|
|
|
(2) |
|
Does not include the incurrence in August 2006 of
$10.0 million principal amount of indebtedness under a term
loan with HSBC Realty Credit Corporation and $10.0 million
principal amount of indebtedness under a revolving line of
credit with Fifth Third Bank. |
|
|
|
(3) |
|
Includes financially material royalties and milestone payments
related to current development programs that we estimate are
probable to occur. |
Debt
financing
As of August 31, 2006, we had $39.5 million principal
amount of debt outstanding, comprised primarily of the following:
|
|
|
$2.5 million outstanding under a forgivable loan from the
Department of Business and Economic Development of the State of
Maryland used to finance eligible costs incurred to purchase one
of our facilities in Frederick, Maryland;
|
73
|
|
|
$7.0 million outstanding under a mortgage loan from
Mercantile Potomac Bank used to finance the remaining portion of
the purchase price for the Frederick facility;
|
|
|
|
$8.5 million outstanding under a mortgage loan from HSBC
Realty Credit Corporation used to finance the purchase price for
a second facility on the Frederick site;
|
|
|
|
$1.3 million outstanding under a term loan from Fifth Third
Bank used to finance the purchase of an enterprise resource
planning system;
|
|
|
|
$10.0 million outstanding under a revolving line of credit
with Fifth Third Bank; and
|
|
|
|
$10.0 million outstanding under a term loan from HSBC
Realty Credit Corporation used to finance a portion of the costs
of our facility expansion in Lansing, Michigan.
|
We also have a revolving line of credit for up to
$5.0 million with HSBC Realty Credit Corporation. We can
borrow under the line of credit with HSBC Realty Credit
Corporation through October 2007.
Some of these debt instruments contain financial and operating
covenants. In particular:
|
|
|
Under our mortgage loan from Mercantile Potomac Bank for our
Frederick facility, we are required to maintain at all times a
minimum tangible net worth of not less than $5.0 million.
In addition, we are required to maintain at all times a ratio of
earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization
to the sum of current obligations under capital leases and
principal obligations and interest expenses for borrowed money,
in each case due and payable within the following
12 months, of not less than 1.1 to 1.0.
|
|
|
|
Under our forgivable loan from the State of Maryland, we are not
required to repay the principal amount of the loan if beginning
December 31, 2009 and through 2012 we maintain a specified
number of employees at the Frederick site, by December 31,
2009 we have invested at least $42.9 million in total funds
toward financing the purchase of the buildings on the site and
for related improvements and operation of the facility and we
occupy the facility through 2012.
|
|
|
|
Under our term loan and revolving line of credit with HSBC
Realty Credit Corporation, we are required to maintain on an
annual basis a minimum tangible net worth of not less than the
sum of 85% of our tangible net worth for the most recently
completed fiscal year plus 25% of current net operating profit
after taxes. In addition, we are required to maintain on a
quarterly basis a ratio of earnings before interest, taxes,
depreciation and amortization for the most recent four quarters
to the sum of current obligations under capital leases and
principal obligations and interest expenses for borrowed money,
in each case due and payable for the following four quarters, of
not less than 1.25 to 1.00.
|
|
|
|
Under our line of credit with Fifth Third Bank, BioPort is
required to maintain at all times a ratio of total liabilities
to tangible net worth of not more than 2.5 to 1.0.
|
Our debt instruments also contain negative covenants restricting
our activities. Our term loan and revolving line of credit with
HSBC Realty Credit Corporation limit the ability of BioPort to
incur indebtedness and liens, sell assets, make loans, advances
or guarantees, enter into merger or similar transactions and
enter into transactions with affiliates. Our term loan and
revolving line of credit with HSBC Realty Credit Corporation
also limit our ability to incur indebtedness and liens, enter
into merger or similar transactions and enter into transactions
with affiliates. Our line of credit with Fifth Third Bank limits
the ability of BioPort to incur indebtedness and liens, sell
assets, make loans, advances or guarantees, enter into merger or
similar transactions, enter into transactions with affiliates
and amend the terms of any government contract.
74
The facilities and software and other equipment that we
purchased with the proceeds of our loans from Mercantile Potomac
Bank, the State of Maryland, HSBC Realty Credit Corporation and
Fifth Third Bank serve as collateral for these loans. Our line
of credit with Fifth Third Bank is secured by accounts
receivable under our DoD and HHS contracts. Our term loan and
revolving line of credit with HSBC Realty Credit Corporation are
secured by substantially all of Bio Ports assets, other
than accounts receivable under our DoD and HHS contracts. The
covenants under our existing debt instruments and the pledge of
our existing assets as collateral limit our ability to obtain
additional debt financing.
Under our mortgage loan from Mercantile Potomac Bank, we are
required to make monthly principal payments beginning in
November 2006. A residual principal repayment of approximately
$5.0 million is due upon maturity in October 2011. Interest
is payable monthly and accrues at an annual rate of 6.625%
through October 2009. In October 2009, the interest rate is
scheduled to be adjusted to a fixed annual rate equal to 3.20%
over the yield on U.S. government securities adjusted to a
constant maturity of two years.
Under our mortgage loan from HSBC Realty Credit Corporation, we
are required to make monthly principal payments. A residual
principal repayment of approximately $7.5 million is due
upon maturity in April 2011. Interest is payable monthly and
accrues at an annual rate equal to LIBOR plus 3.00%.
Under our term loan from Fifth Third Bank, we make monthly
principal payments through maturity in September 2007. Interest
is payable monthly and accrues at an annual rate equal to 0.375%
less than the prime rate of interest established from time to
time by Fifth Third Bank.
Under our term loan with HSBC Realty Credit Corporation, we are
required to make monthly principal payments beginning in April
2007. A residual principal payment of approximately
$4.0 million is due upon maturity in August 2011. Upon our
request, the term loan is subject to an extension term in the
sole discretion of HSBC Realty Credit Corporation for five
additional years until August 2016 for an extension fee of 1.00%
of the principal balance of the loan. If the term of the loan
were extended, we would be required to continue to make monthly
principal payments through maturity in August 2016 in lieu of
the residual principal payment otherwise due in August 2011.
Interest is payable monthly and accrues at an annual rate equal
to LIBOR plus 3.75%.
Under our revolving line of credit with Fifth Third Bank, any
outstanding principal under the revolving line of credit is due
upon maturity in October 2006. Interest is payable monthly and
accrues at an annual rate equal to 0.375% less than the prime
rate of interest established from time to time by Fifth Third
Bank.
Under our revolving line of credit with HSBC Realty Credit
Corporation, we are not required to repay outstanding principal
until October 2007. In October 2007, the outstanding principal
under the revolving line of credit will convert to a term loan
with required monthly principal payments through maturity in
August 2011. Interest is payable monthly and accrues at an
annual rate equal to LIBOR plus 3.75%. We also are required to
pay a fee on a quarterly basis equal to 0.50% of the average
daily difference between $5.0 million and the amount
outstanding under the revolving line of credit.
Tax
benefits
In connection with our facility expansion in Lansing, the State
of Michigan and the City of Lansing have provided us a variety
of tax credits and abatements. We estimate that the total value
of these tax benefits may be up to $18.5 million over a
period of up to 15 years. These tax benefits are based on
our $75 million planned additional investment in our
Lansing facilities. In addition, we must maintain a specified
number of employees in Lansing to continue to qualify for these
tax benefits.
75
Funding
requirements
We believe that the net proceeds from this offering, together
with our existing cash and cash equivalents, revenues from
BioThrax product sales and other committed sources of funds,
will be sufficient to enable us to fund our anticipated
operating expenses and capital expenditure and debt service
requirements for at least the next 24 months. We have based
this estimate on assumptions that may prove to be wrong. We
expect to continue to fund a significant portion of our
development and commercialization costs for our product
candidates with internally generated funds from sales of
BioThrax. There are numerous risks and uncertainties associated
with BioThrax product sales and with the development and
commercialization of our product candidates. Our business plan
also contemplates that we will raise $10 million to
$20 million of additional external debt financing to fund
our facility expansion in Lansing and to provide additional
financial flexibility. Our only committed external sources of
funds are remaining borrowing availability under our revolving
lines of credit with HSBC Realty Credit Corporation and
Fifth Third Bank, development funding under our collaboration
agreement with Sanofi Pasteur, funding from NIAID for animal
efficacy studies of our anthrax immune globulin candidate and
funding from the Wellcome Trust for our Phase II clinical
trial of our typhoid vaccine candidate in Vietnam. Our ability
to borrow additional amounts under our loan agreements is
subject to our satisfaction of specified conditions. Our future
capital requirements will depend on many factors, including:
|
|
|
the level and timing of BioThrax product sales and cost of
product sales;
|
|
|
|
the timing of, and the costs involved in, constructing our new
manufacturing facility in Lansing, Michigan and the build out of
our manufacturing facilities in Frederick, Maryland;
|
|
|
the scope, progress, results and costs of our preclinical and
clinical development activities;
|
|
|
the costs, timing and outcome of regulatory review of our
product candidates;
|
|
|
the number of, and development requirements for, other product
candidates that we may pursue;
|
|
|
the costs of commercialization activities, including product
marketing, sales and distribution;
|
|
|
the costs involved in preparing, filing, prosecuting,
maintaining and enforcing patent claims and other patent-related
costs, including litigation costs and the results of such
litigation;
|
|
|
|
the extent to which we acquire or invest in businesses, products
and technologies;
|
|
|
|
our ability to obtain development funding from government
entities and non-government and philanthropic organizations; and
|
|
|
|
our ability to establish and maintain collaborations, such as
our collaboration with Sanofi Pasteur.
|
We may require additional sources of funds for future
acquisitions that we may make or, depending on the size of the
obligation, to meet balloon payments upon maturity of our
current borrowings. To the extent our capital resources are
insufficient to meet our future capital requirements, we will
need to finance our cash needs through public or private equity
offerings, debt financings or corporate collaboration and
licensing arrangements.
Additional equity or debt financing, grants, or corporate
collaboration and licensing arrangements, may not be available
on acceptable terms, if at all. If adequate funds are not
available, we may be required to delay, reduce the scope of or
eliminate our research and development programs or reduce our
planned commercialization efforts. If we raise additional funds
by issuing equity securities, our stockholders may experience
dilution. Debt financing, if available, may involve agreements
that include covenants limiting or restricting our ability to
take specific actions, such as incurring additional debt, making
capital
76
expenditures or declaring dividends. Any debt financing or
additional equity that we raise may contain terms, such as
liquidation and other preferences, that are not favorable to us
or our stockholders. If we raise additional funds through
collaboration and licensing arrangements with third parties, it
may be necessary to relinquish valuable rights to our
technologies or product candidates or grant licenses on terms
that may not be favorable to us.
Quantitative and
qualitative disclosures about market risk
Our exposure to market risk is currently confined to our cash
and cash equivalents and restricted cash that have maturities of
less than three months. We currently do not hedge interest rate
exposure. We have not used derivative financial instruments for
speculation or trading purposes. Because of the short-term
maturities of our cash and cash equivalents, we do not believe
that an increase in market rates would have any significant
impact on the realized value of our investments, but may
increase the interest expense associated with our debt.
Effects of
inflation
Our most liquid assets are cash, cash equivalents and short-term
investments. Because of their liquidity, these assets are not
directly affected by inflation. We also believe that we have
intangible assets in the value of our intellectual property. In
accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, we
have not capitalized the value of this intellectual property on
our balance sheet. Due to the nature of this intellectual
property, we believe that these intangible assets are not
affected by inflation. Because we intend to retain and continue
to use our equipment, furniture and fixtures and leasehold
improvements, we believe that the incremental inflation related
to replacement costs of such items will not materially affect
our operations. However, the rate of inflation affects our
expenses, such as those for employee compensation and contract
services, which could increase our level of expenses and the
rate at which we use our resources.
Recent accounting
pronouncements
In June 2006, the FASB also issued FASB Interpretation 48,
Accounting for Uncertainty in Income
Taxes an interpretation of FASB Statement
No. 109, Accounting for Income Taxes, or
FIN 48. FIN 48 clarifies the accounting for
uncertainty in income taxes. FIN 48 prescribes a
recognition threshold and measurement attribute for the
financial statement recognition and measurement of a tax
position taken or expected to be taken in a tax return.
FIN 48 requires that we recognize in the financial
statements, the impact of a tax position, if that position is
more likely than not of being sustained on audit, based on the
technical merits of the position. FIN 48 also provides
guidance on derecognition, classification, interest and
penalties, accounting in interim periods and disclosure. The
provisions of FIN 48 are effective for fiscal years
beginning after December 15, 2006, with the cumulative
effect of the change in accounting principle recorded as an
adjustment to opening retained earnings. We are currently
evaluating the impact of adopting FIN 48 on our financial
statements.
In March 2006, the FASB issued Statement No. 156,
Accounting for Servicing of Financial Assets an
amendment of FASB Statement No. 140, or
SFAS No. 156. SFAS No. 156 requires an
entity to recognize a servicing asset or servicing liability
each time it undertakes an obligation to service a financial
asset by entering into a servicing contract based on certain
conditions. The provisions of SFAS No. 156 are
effective for fiscal years beginning after September 15,
2006. SFAS No. 156 will have no immediate impact on
our consolidated financial statements.
In February 2006, the FASB issued Statement No. 155,
Accounting for Certain Hybrid Financial
Instruments an amendment of FASB Statements
No. 133 and 140, or SFAS No. 155.
SFAS No. 155 permits fair value remeasurement for any
hybrid financial instrument that contains an embedded
77
derivative that otherwise would require bifurcation, clarifies
which interest-only strips and principal-only strips are not
subject to the requirements of Statement No. 133,
establishes a requirement to evaluate interests in securitized
financial assets to identify interests that are freestanding
derivatives or that are hybrid financial instruments that
contain an embedded derivative requiring bifurcation, clarifies
that concentrations of credit risk in the form of subordination
are not embedded derivatives and amends Statement No. 140
to eliminate the prohibition on a qualifying special-purpose
entity from holding a derivative financial instrument that
pertains to a beneficial interest other than another derivative
financial instrument. The provisions of SFAS No. 156
are effective for fiscal years beginning after
September 15, 2006. SFAS No. 155 will have no
immediate impact on our consolidated financial statements.
78
Business
Overview
We are a biopharmaceutical company focused on the development,
manufacture and commercialization of immunobiotics.
Immunobiotics are pharmaceutical products, such as vaccines and
immune globulins that induce or assist the bodys immune
system to prevent or treat disease. We operate in two business
segments: biodefense and commercial. In our biodefense business,
we develop and commercialize immunobiotics for use against
biological agents that are potential weapons of bioterrorism. In
our commercial business, we develop immunobiotics for use
against infectious diseases with significant unmet or
underserved medical needs. Our marketed product, BioThrax, is
the only vaccine approved by the U.S. Food and Drug
Administration, or FDA, for the prevention of anthrax infection.
In addition to BioThrax, our biodefense product portfolio
includes three biodefense product candidates in preclinical
development. Our commercial product portfolio includes a typhoid
vaccine candidate and a hepatitis B therapeutic vaccine
candidate, both of which are in Phase II clinical
development, one vaccine candidate in Phase I clinical
development and two vaccine candidates in preclinical
development.
We manufacture and market BioThrax, also referred to as anthrax
vaccine adsorbed, the only FDA approved anthrax vaccine.
BioThrax was originally approved in the United States in 1970.
There have been more than 20 published studies of the use of
BioThrax in humans. In December 2005, based on a review of the
human efficacy data used to support the approval of BioThrax and
other studies of BioThrax, the FDA reaffirmed that BioThrax is
safe and effective for the prevention of anthrax infection by
all routes of exposure, including inhalation. Our total revenues
from BioThrax sales were $55.5 million in 2003,
$81.0 million in 2004 and $127.3 million in 2005. The
U.S. Department of Defense, or DoD, and the
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, or HHS, have
been the principal customers for BioThrax. Under two contracts
with the DoD, we have supplied over eight million doses of
BioThrax through August 2006 for immunization of military
personnel. Since March 1998, the DoD has vaccinated more than
1.5 million military personnel with more than
5.5 million doses of BioThrax. In April 2006, the DoD
issued a notice that it intends to negotiate a sole source fixed
price contract for the purchase of up to an additional
11 million doses of BioThrax over one base contract year
plus four option years. Under a contract that we entered into
with HHS in May 2005, we supplied five million doses of BioThrax
to HHS for placement into the strategic national stockpile for a
fixed price of $123 million. In May 2006, we entered into a
contract modification with HHS for the delivery of an additional
five million doses of BioThrax to HHS by May 2007 for a fixed
price of $120 million. We have delivered approximately one
million doses of BioThrax under this contract modification
through August 2006.
The September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks and the October
2001 anthrax letter attacks significantly affected political and
budgetary attitudes toward the threat of bioterrorism. Following
these attacks, the U.S. government enacted measures to
provide incentives for private industry to develop and
manufacture biodefense products. In particular, in 2004, the
Project BioShield Act became law, providing $5.6 billion in
appropriations over ten years and authorizing the procurement of
countermeasures for biological, chemical, radiological and
nuclear attacks. Project BioShield provides for the procurement
of countermeasures for anthrax and botulism, which are two of
the biological agents that the Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention, or CDC, has identified as the greatest possible
threat to public health. The U.S. government procures most
biodefense countermeasures through HHS, the CDC and the DoD and
provides biodefense research and development funding through the
National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, or NIAID,
of the National Institutes of Health, or NIH, and the DoD.
79
In addition to BioThrax, we are developing three other
biodefense immunobiotic product candidates, all of which are in
preclinical development. These product candidates are:
|
|
|
Anthrax immune globulin for post-exposure
treatment of anthrax infection, which we are developing in part
with funding from NIAID;
|
|
|
|
Botulinum immune globulin for post-exposure
treatment of illness caused by botulinum toxin, which we are
developing based on a new botulinum toxoid vaccine that we are
developing in collaboration with the U.K. Health Protection
Agency, or HPA; and
|
|
|
Recombinant bivalent botulinum vaccine a
prophylaxis for illness caused by botulinum toxin, which we also
are developing in collaboration with HPA.
|
We also are evaluating several potential product candidates in
connection with development of a next generation anthrax
vaccine, featuring attributes such as self-administration and a
longer shelf life.
In our commercial business, we are developing a range of
immunobiotic product candidates for use against infectious
diseases with significant unmet or underserved medical needs.
Our commercial product candidates in clinical development are:
|
|
|
Typhoid vaccine a single dose, drinkable
vaccine, for which we have completed a Phase I clinical
program, including trials in the United States, the United
Kingdom and Vietnam, and expect to initiate a Phase II
clinical trial in Vietnam in the fourth quarter of 2006;
|
|
|
|
Hepatitis B therapeutic vaccine a multiple
dose, drinkable vaccine for treatment of chronic carriers of
hepatitis B infection, for which we have completed a
Phase I clinical trial in the United Kingdom and expect to
initiate a Phase II clinical trial in the United Kingdom in
the fourth quarter of 2006; and
|
|
|
|
Group B streptococcus vaccine a multiple
dose, injectable vaccine for administration to women of
childbearing age for protection of the fetus and newborn babies,
for which we have completed a Phase I clinical trial in the
United Kingdom.
|
In addition, we are developing a chlamydia vaccine and a
meningitis B vaccine, each of which is currently in preclinical
development.
The Wellcome Trust provided funding for our Phase I
clinical trial of our typhoid vaccine candidate in Vietnam and
has agreed to provide funding for our Phase II clinical
trial of this vaccine candidate in Vietnam. In May 2006, we
entered into a license and co-development agreement with Sanofi
Pasteur, the vaccines business of Sanofi-Aventis, under which we
granted Sanofi Pasteur an exclusive, worldwide license under our
proprietary technology to develop and commercialize a meningitis
B vaccine candidate.
Our
strategy
Our goal is to become a worldwide leader in developing,
manufacturing and commercializing immunobiotics that target
diseases with significant unmet or underserved medical needs.
Key elements of our strategy to achieve this goal are:
Maximize the commercial potential of BioThrax. We
are focused on increasing sales of BioThrax to
U.S. government customers, expanding the market for
BioThrax to other customers and pursuing label expansions and
improvements for BioThrax. The potential label expansions and
improvements for BioThrax include an extension of shelf life,
reductions in the number of required doses, addition of another
method of administration and use as a post-exposure prophylaxis
for anthrax infection in combination with antibiotic therapy.
80
Continue to develop a balanced portfolio of immunobiotic
products. We seek to maintain a balanced product
portfolio that includes both biodefense and commercial
immunobiotic product candidates and both vaccines and
therapeutics to diversify product development and
commercialization risk. We use multiple technologies in our
development programs, which we believe significantly reduces our
risk in these activities. We expect that biodefense product
candidates may generate revenues from product sales sooner than
commercial product candidates because of Project BioShield,
which allows the U.S. government to purchase biodefense
products for the strategic national stockpile before they are
approved by the FDA.
Focus on core capabilities in product development and
manufacturing. We focus our efforts on immunobiotic
product development and manufacturing, which we believe are our
core capabilities. This approach enables us to avoid the expense
and time entailed in early stage research activities and, we
believe, reduces product development and commercialization risk.
We seek to obtain marketed products and development stage
product candidates through acquisitions and licensing
arrangements with third parties. We believe that we have
secured, and will be able to continue to secure, rights to a
diverse product pipeline that targets diseases with significant
unmet or underserved medical needs. We also believe that this
approach may enable us to accelerate product development
timelines through our preclinical and clinical development and
regulatory expertise and manufacturing capabilities.
Build large scale manufacturing infrastructure. To
augment our existing manufacturing capabilities, we are
constructing a new 50,000 square foot manufacturing
facility on our Lansing, Michigan campus. We also own two
buildings in Frederick, Maryland that we plan to build out as
future manufacturing facilities. We are constructing our new
facility in Lansing as a large scale commercial manufacturing
plant that we can use to produce multiple vaccine products,
subject to complying with appropriate change-over procedures. We
anticipate that we will initiate large scale manufacturing of
BioThrax for commercial sale at our new Lansing facility in
2008. We are constructing this facility to accommodate
production of up to 40 million doses of BioThrax per year
on a single production line, which we could expand for
production of up to 80 million doses per year through the
addition of a second production line. In comparison, our current
facility has a maximum production capacity of approximately nine
million doses of BioThrax per year.
Selectively establish collaborations. For each of
our product candidates, we plan to evaluate the merits of
retaining commercialization rights for ourselves or entering
into collaboration arrangements with leading pharmaceutical or
biotechnology companies or non-governmental organizations. We
expect that we will selectively pursue collaboration
arrangements in situations in which the collaborator has
particular expertise or resources for the development or
commercialization of our products and product candidates or to
access particular markets. We recently entered into a
collaboration with Sanofi Pasteur for our meningitis B vaccine
candidate as we believe that the value of this vaccine candidate
may be maximized if it is sold in combination with other
vaccines offered by Sanofi Pasteur. We are currently
collaborating with HPA for the development of both a new
botulinum toxoid vaccine, which we plan to use to develop our
botulinum immune globulin candidate, and our recombinant
bivalent botulinum vaccine candidate, which has given us access
to HPAs technology and manufacturing capabilities.
Seek governmental and other third party grants and
support. The biodefense immunobiotic product candidates
that we are developing are of significant interest to the U.S.
and potentially other governments. The CDC currently is
independently conducting a clinical trial to evaluate the
administration of BioThrax in a regimen of fewer doses. In
addition, NIAID has completed an independent animal efficacy
study of BioThrax in combination with antibiotics as a
post-exposure prophylaxis for anthrax infection. NIAID has
awarded us grant funding for animal efficacy studies of our
anthrax immune globulin candidate. We believe that some of our
commercial immunobiotic product candidates that may benefit
people in the developing world are of interest to charitable and
philanthropic organizations. The
81
Wellcome Trust provided funding for our Phase I clinical
trial of our typhoid vaccine candidate in Vietnam and has agreed
to provide funding for our Phase II clinical trial of this
vaccine candidate in Vietnam. We plan to encourage government
entities and non-government and philanthropic organizations to
continue to conduct studies of, and pursue other development
efforts and provide development funding for, BioThrax and our
product candidates.
Market
opportunity
We focus on the biodefense and commercial markets for
immunobiotics.
The biodefense
market
The biodefense market for immunobiotics has grown dramatically
as a result of the increased awareness of the threat of global
terror activity in the wake of the September 11, 2001
terrorist attacks and the October 2001 anthrax letter attacks.
The letter attacks involved the delivery of mail contaminated
with anthrax spores to government officials and members of the
media in the United States. As a result of the letter attacks,
22 people became infected with anthrax, including 11 with
inhalational anthrax, and five people died.
The U.S. government is the principal source of worldwide
biodefense spending. Most U.S. government spending on
biodefense programs results from procurement of countermeasures
by HHS, the CDC and the DoD and development funding from NIAID
and the DoD. The U.S. government is now the largest source
of funding for academic institutions and biotechnology companies
conducting biodefense basic research or developing novel
vaccines and other immunobiotic therapeutics.
Department of Health and Human Services. In 2004,
the Project BioShield Act became law. This statute provides
$5.6 billion in appropriations over ten years and
authorizes the procurement of countermeasures for biological,
chemical, radiological and nuclear attacks. Pursuant to Project
BioShield, HHS has begun to procure vaccines and other products
for a strategic national stockpile. The strategic national
stockpile is a national repository of medical assets and
countermeasures designed to provide state and local public
health agencies with medical supplies needed to treat those
affected by terrorist attacks, natural disasters, industrial
accidents and other public health emergencies, such as a flu
epidemic. Materials from the strategic national stockpile were
deployed following both the September 11, 2001 terrorist
attacks and the October 2001 anthrax letter attacks. We expect
that HHS will procure supplies of vaccines for the strategic
national stockpile on an ongoing basis and replenish the
stockpile as the existing inventories reach the end of their
shelf lives.
Pursuant to Project BioShield, the CDC has categorized
bioterrorism agents into three categories from A to C based on
the perceived risk of the agent to national security. The
highest risk category is category A. The six agents that the CDC
has classified as category A are anthrax, botulism, plague,
smallpox, tularemia and viral hemorrhagic fevers. The Secretary
of HHS has directed most of the BioShield procurement efforts
and funding to date to category A agents. Under Project
BioShield, the Secretary of HHS can contract to purchase
countermeasures for the strategic national stockpile prior to
FDA approval of the countermeasure in specified circumstances.
To be eligible for purchase under these provisions, the
Secretary of HHS must determine that there is sufficient and
satisfactory clinical results or research data, including data,
if available, from preclinical and clinical trials, to support a
reasonable conclusion that the countermeasure will qualify for
approval or licensing within eight years, even though the
product has not completed clinical trials and has not yet been
approved by the FDA. Project BioShield also
82
allows the Secretary of HHS to authorize the emergency use of
medical products that have not yet been approved by the FDA.
Members of Congress have proposed and may in the future propose
legislation that expands the funding and coverage of Project
BioShield. We believe that continued assessments of the threat
that bioterrorism poses to the public health are likely to
advance these legislative initiatives.
Centers for Disease Control. The U.S. Congress
provides annual funding to the CDC for the procurement of
medical assets and countermeasures for the strategic national
stockpile. This appropriation funding supplements amounts
available under Project BioShield for procurement of
countermeasures. Congress provided funding to CDC of
$525 million in fiscal year 2006 and $467 million in
fiscal year 2005 for this purpose.
Department of Defense. The DoD procures biodefense
immunobiotics that it administers primarily through the Military
Vaccine Agency, or MilVax. MilVax administers various
vaccination programs for military personnel, including vaccines
for common infectious diseases, such as influenza, and vaccines
to protect against specific bioterrorism threats, such as
anthrax and smallpox. The DoD has included anthrax at the top of
its biological threat list. The level of spending by the DoD for
MilVax is a function of the size of the U.S. military and
the approach of the DoD with respect to vaccine stockpile and
use, particularly whether the DoD mandates that members of the
military participate in vaccination programs. Absent a
Presidential waiver or the informed consent of the recipient,
the DoD is required to use FDA approved products, if available,
and not investigational products under development, in MilVax
vaccination programs. The DoD provides development funding for
biodefense vaccines through its Joint Vaccine Acquisition
Program.
National Institute of Allergy and Infectious
Diseases. Beginning with fiscal year 2003, the
U.S. Congress added approximately $1.5 billion per
year to the biodefense research funding budget for NIAID. In
fiscal year 2004, NIAID awarded more than 700 research project
grants for biodefense research. In fiscal year 2004, biodefense
funding by NIAID totaled $1.6 billion, which was more than
one-third of NIAIDs total budget.
There are also a number of potential additional customers for
biodefense immunobiotics. These include:
|
|
|
the U.S. Postal Service;
|
|
|
foreign governments;
|
|
|
state and local governments, which we expect will be interested
in these products to protect first responders, such as police,
fire and emergency medical personnel;
|
|
|
multinational companies and non-governmental
organizations; and
|
|
|
hospitals.
|
Although there have been minimal sales to these customers to
date, we believe that they may comprise an important component
of the overall biodefense market in the future.
The commercial
market
Vaccines have long been recognized as a safe and cost-effective
method for preventing infection caused by various bacteria and
viruses. Because of an increased emphasis on preventative
medicine in industrialized countries, vaccines are now well
recognized as an important part of public health
83
management strategies. According to Frost & Sullivan, a
market research organization, from 2002 to 2005, annual
worldwide vaccine sales increased from $6.7 billion to
$9.9 billion, a compound annual growth rate of
approximately 14%. Frost & Sullivan estimates that the
worldwide sales of vaccines will grow at a compound annual rate
of approximately 10.5% from 2005 through 2012. As of 2005,
Frost & Sullivan estimates that approximately
two-thirds of global vaccine sales were attributable to
pediatric vaccines. In addition, vaccines sold in developed
markets represented approximately 80% of worldwide vaccine
revenues. New vaccine technologies and a greater understanding
of how disease-causing organisms, or pathogens, cause disease
are leading to the introduction of new vaccine products.
Moreover, while existing marketed vaccines generally are
designed to prevent infections, new vaccine technologies have
also led to a focus on the development of vaccines for
therapeutic purposes. Potential therapeutic vaccines extend
beyond infectious diseases to cancer, autoimmune diseases and
allergies.
Most non-pediatric commercial vaccines are purchased and paid
for, or reimbursed by, managed care organizations, other private
health plans or public insurers or paid for directly by
patients. With respect to some diseases affecting the public
health generally, particularly in developing countries, public
health authorities or nongovernmental, charitable or
philanthropic organizations fund the cost of vaccines. According
to Frost & Sullivan, public purchases of vaccines,
including for immunization programs and government stockpiles,
account for approximately 90% of the total volume of worldwide
vaccine sales. Although accounting for only 10% of the total
volume of worldwide vaccine sales, private market purchases of
vaccines accounted for approximately 60% of total worldwide
vaccine sales revenues in 2005.
Scientific
background
The immune
system
The immune system provides protection against pathogens, such as
bacteria and viruses, through immune responses that are
generated by a type of white blood cells known as lymphocytes.
Immune responses that depend on lymphocyte recognition of
components of pathogens, called antigens, have two important
characteristics. First, these immune responses are specific,
which means that lymphocytes recognize particular antigens on
pathogens. Second, these immune responses induce memory so that
when the antigen is encountered again, the immune response is
enhanced. Generally, there are two types of specific immunity:
humoral immunity and cell mediated immunity. Humoral immunity is
provided by proteins, known as antibodies or immune globulins,
that are produced by lymphocytes. Antibodies are effective in
dealing with pathogens before the pathogens enter cells. Cell
mediated immunity is provided by lymphocytes that generally deal
with threats from cells that are already infected with pathogens
by directly killing infected cells or interacting with other
immune cells to initiate the production of antibodies or
activate cells that kill and eliminate infected cells.
Vaccines
A vaccine is normally given to a healthy person as a prophylaxis
in order to generate immune responses that will protect against
future infection and disease caused by pathogens. Following
vaccination, the immune systems memory of antigens
presented by a vaccine allows for an immune response to be
generated to a pathogen to provide protection against disease.
Therapeutic vaccines also are being developed to strengthen or
modify the immune response in patients already infected with
bacterial and viral pathogens to clear the pathogens from their
bodies. Without treatment, these patients can be subject to
recurring bouts of the disease.
84
There are three basic types of vaccines: live attenuated
vaccines, inactivated whole cell vaccines and subunit vaccines.
Live attenuated vaccines are made from weakened, or attenuated,
viruses or bacteria that are designed to mimic some of the early
stages of infection without causing disease. Inactivated whole
cell vaccines are made by growing the infectious organism in
culture media or mammalian cells and then inactivating the
organisms. Subunit vaccines are derived from individual antigens
that can be purified and used as vaccines. Culture filtrate
vaccines are a type of subunit vaccine. These vaccines are based
on components that are secreted by pathogens grown in a culture
media and then purified by filtration of the culture media.
Live attenuated vaccines can produce stronger, longer lasting
immunity than inactivated whole cell vaccines and often are
effective after only a single dose. However, live attenuated
vaccines are subject to safety concerns related to the risk that
they may revert to the virulent form or cause disease in
patients with weakened immune systems. Inactivated whole cell
vaccines have been successfully developed for some pathogens,
but large quantities of the infectious organism have to be grown
to make the vaccine. This poses a safety risk for people
involved in the manufacturing process and requires high levels
of containment. Subunit vaccines generally produce fewer side
effects than vaccines that use the whole organism, but often are
not as immunogenic as inactivated whole cell or live attenuated
vaccines. Adjuvants, which augment or enhance the immune
responses to vaccine antigens, are often used in combination
with weaker antigens, such as subunit vaccines.
Scientists have applied recombinant technology, which allows for
the manipulation of the genetic material of pathogens, in the
development of new live attenuated and subunit vaccines. For
live attenuated vaccines, genes involved in virulence can be
completely deleted from a pathogen so that the organism can no
longer cause disease or revert to the virulent form. For subunit
vaccines, the gene directing the production of the antigen can
be isolated and moved into a harmless organism where it can be
expressed at high levels and purified. In addition, scientists
have used recombinant technology to develop vector systems to
deliver multiple vaccine antigens from different disease-causing
organisms in a single live attenuated vaccine by inserting genes
coding for these antigens into the genetic material of the
vector. Currently, the only recombinant vaccines approved by the
FDA are those for the prevention of hepatitis B infection,
including both stand-alone vaccines and combination vaccines
that include the recombinant hepatitis B component. The only
recombinant vaccines currently licensed by the European
Medicines Agency for marketing in the European Union member
states are several vaccines that contain recombinant hepatitis B
and one vaccine that includes a recombinant cholera toxin B
subunit. We believe that the primary application for recombinant
technology in the vaccine field will be for the development of
vaccines in situations in which other vaccine technologies have
not been successful or in which recombinant technology permits
vaccine production with a lower level of safety containment.
Immune
globulins
Immune globulins are normally made by collecting plasma from
individuals who have contracted or been vaccinated for a
particular disease and whose plasma contains protective
antibodies, known as IgG, generated by a humoral immune response
to pathogen exposure or vaccination. These antibodies are
isolated by fractionation of the plasma, purified and then
administered intravenously to patients, providing an immediate
protective effect. Because it normally takes several weeks to
generate antibodies after vaccination, immune globulins are used
in situations in which it is not possible to wait for active
immunization to generate the protective immune response.
85
Products
The following table summarizes key information about our
marketed product, BioThrax, and our biodefense and commercial
immunobiotic product candidates. We utilize a wide array of
technologies to develop and manufacture our marketed product and
product candidates, including conventional and recombinant
technologies. For each development program, we select and apply
the technology that we believe is best suited to address the
particular disease based on our evaluation of factors such as
safety, efficacy, manufacturing requirements, regulatory pathway
and cost. We currently hold all commercial rights to BioThrax
and all of our immunobiotic product candidates, other than our
recombinant bivalent botulinum vaccine, for which HPA has the
non-exclusive right to make, use and sell to meet public health
requirements in the United Kingdom, and our meningitis B vaccine
candidate that we are developing in collaboration with Sanofi
Pasteur. For more information about our agreements with HPA, see
Intellectual property and licenses License
agreements HPA agreements. For more information
about our collaboration with Sanofi Pasteur, see
Sanofi Pasteur collaboration.
86
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Therapeutic/
|
|
Stage of
|
|
|
|
Collaboration/external
|
Immunobiotic
|
|
prophylactic
|
|
development
|
|
Status
|
|
relationship
|
|
|
Biodefense
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anthrax
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
BioThrax (anthrax vaccine adsorbed)
|
|
Prophylactic
|
|
FDA approved
|
|
Commercially marketed six dose
regimen
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Prophylactic
|
|
Post-approval label expansion
|
|
BLA supplement submitted for five
dose regimen and intramuscular injection; CDC clinical trial
ongoing
|
|
CDC independent
clinical trial
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Prophylactic
|
|
Post-approval label expansion
|
|
Single dose syringe development
program initiated
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
BioThrax (anthrax vaccine absorbed)*
|
|
Post-exposure prophylactic
|
|
Post-approval label expansion
|
|
Plan to file IND in 2006; two
proof-of-concept
animal studies completed
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anthrax immune globulin*
|
|
Therapeutic
|
|
Preclinical
|
|
Plasma donor stimulation program
ongoing; animal efficacy studies planned; plan to file IND in
late 2006 or early 2007
|
|
NIAID funding for animal
efficacy studies in rabbits
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Botulinum
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recombinant bivalent botulinum
vaccine*
|
|
Prophylactic
|
|
Preclinical
|
|
Proof-of-concept
animal study completed
|
|
HPA collaboration
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Botulinum immune globulin*
|
|
Therapeutic
|
|
Preclinical
|
|
Proof-of-concept
animal studies planned
|
|
HPA collaboration for
development of a new botulinum toxoid vaccine
|
Commercial
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Typhoid vaccine
|
|
Prophylactic
|
|
Phase II
|
|
Phase I clinical trial in
Vietnam completed; plan to initiate Phase II clinical trial
in Vietnam in the fourth quarter of 2006
|
|
Wellcome Trust funding
for Phase I and Phase II clinical trials in Vietnam
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hepatitis B therapeutic vaccine
|
|
Therapeutic
|
|
Phase II
|
|
Phase I clinical trial in the
United Kingdom completed; clinical trial application approved in
the United Kingdom for a Phase II clinical trial
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Group B streptococcus vaccine
|
|
Prophylactic
|
|
Phase I
|
|
One Phase I clinical trial in
the United Kingdom completed; two additional Phase I
clinical trials planned
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Chlamydia vaccine
|
|
Prophylactic
|
|
Preclinical
|
|
Proof-of-concept
animal study completed
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Meningitis B vaccine
|
|
Prophylactic
|
|
Preclinical
|
|
Antigen identification completed
|
|
Sanofi Pasteur
collaboration
|
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
We currently intend to rely on the
FDA animal rule in seeking marketing approval for these product
candidates. Under the animal rule, if human efficacy trials are
not ethical or feasible, the FDA can approve drugs or biologics
used to treat or prevent serious or life threatening conditions
caused by exposure to lethal or permanently disabling toxic
chemical, biological, radiological or nuclear substances based
on human clinical data demonstrating safety and immunogenicity
and evidence of efficacy from appropriate non-clinical animal
studies and any additional supporting data. For more information
about the FDA animal rule, see Government
regulation Clinical trials.
|
87
No assessment of the safety or efficacy of our vaccine
candidates can be considered definitive until all clinical
trials needed to support a submission for marketing approval are
completed. The results of our completed preclinical tests and
Phase I clinical trials do not ensure that our planned later
stage clinical trials for our vaccine candidates will be
successful. A failure of one or more of our clinical trials can
occur at any stage of testing.
Biodefense
business
In our biodefense business, we are developing and
commercializing immunobiotics for use against biological agents
that are potential weapons of bioterrorism. Our marketed
product, BioThrax, is the only vaccine approved by the FDA for
the prevention of anthrax infection. In addition to BioThrax,
our biodefense product portfolio includes three product
candidates in preclinical development. We are developing all of
our biodefense product candidates to address category A
biological agents, which are the class of biological agents that
the CDC has identified as the greatest possible threat to public
health.
BioThrax
(anthrax vaccine adsorbed)
Anthrax overview. Anthrax is a potentially fatal
disease caused by the spore forming bacterium Bacillus
anthracis. Anthrax bacteria are naturally occurring and
spores are found in soil throughout the world. Anthrax spores
can withstand extreme heat, cold and drought for long periods
without nutrients or air. Anthrax infections occur if the spores
enter the body through a cut, abrasion or open sore, referred to
as cutaneous anthrax, or by ingestion or inhalation of the
spores. Once inside the body, anthrax spores germinate into
bacteria that then multiply. Anthrax bacteria secrete three
toxin proteins, protective antigen, lethal factor and edema
factor, which are individually non-toxic but can become highly
toxic if allowed to interact on the surface of human or animal
cells.
Cutaneous anthrax, although rare in the United States, is the
most common type of naturally acquired anthrax. Cutaneous
anthrax is typically acquired through contact with contaminated
animals and animal products. The fatality rate for untreated
cases of cutaneous anthrax is estimated to be approximately 20%.
Inhalational anthrax is the most lethal form of anthrax. We
believe that aerosolized anthrax spores are the most likely
method to be used in a potential anthrax bioterrorism attack.
Inhalational anthrax has been reported to occur from one to
43 days after exposure to aerosolized spores. Initial
symptoms of inhalational anthrax are non-specific and may
include sore throat, mild fever, cough, achiness or weakness,
lasting up to a few days. After a brief period of improvement,
the release of anthrax toxins may cause an abrupt deterioration
of the infected person, with the sudden onset of symptoms,
including fever, respiratory failure as the lungs fill with
fluids and shock. Hemorrhagic meningitis is common. Death often
occurs within 24 hours of the onset of advanced respiratory
complications. The fatality rate for inhalational anthrax is
estimated to be between 45% and 90%, depending on whether
aggressive, early treatment is provided.
To date, the principal customer for anthrax vaccines has been
the U.S. government. Because of concerns regarding the use
of anthrax spores as a biological weapon during the first
Persian Gulf War, the DoD began administering BioThrax to
military personnel in 1990. Since 1998, we have been a party to
two supply agreements for BioThrax with the DoD. Pursuant to
these contracts, we supplied over eight million doses of
BioThrax through August 2006 to the DoD for immunization of
military personnel. Since March 1998, the DoD has vaccinated
more than 1.5 million military personnel with more than
5.5 million doses of BioThrax. The DoD currently
administers BioThrax under its MilVax program on a voluntary
basis.
In May 2005, we entered into an agreement to supply five million
doses of BioThrax to HHS for placement into the strategic
national stockpile for a fixed price of $123 million. We
completed delivery of all five
88
million doses by February 2006, seven months earlier than
required. In May 2006, we entered into a contract modification
with HHS for the delivery of an additional five million doses of
BioThrax to HHS by May 2007 for a fixed price of
$120 million. We have delivered approximately one million
doses of BioThrax under this contract modification through
August 2006.
Following the October 2001 anthrax letter attacks, HHS provided
BioThrax under an investigational new drug application, or IND,
protocol for administration on a voluntary basis to Capitol Hill
employees and others who may have been exposed to anthrax. In
addition, we have supplied small amounts of BioThrax directly to
several foreign governments. It is our understanding that the
DoD has sold BioThrax to the governments of a number of other
foreign countries for the protection of military personnel. We
believe that state and local governments and several foreign
governments are significant potential customers for BioThrax.
Our total revenues from BioThrax sales were $55.5 million
in 2003, $81.0 million in 2004 and $127.3 million in
2005.
Current treatments. The only FDA approved product
for pre-exposure prophylaxis of anthrax infection is BioThrax.
The only FDA approved products for post-exposure prophylaxis of
anthrax infection are antibiotics, which are typically
administered over a
60-day
period. Antibiotics prevent anthrax disease by killing the
anthrax bacteria before the bacteria can release anthrax toxins
into the body. However, antibiotics are not effective against
anthrax toxins after the toxins have been released into the body
and do not kill anthrax spores that may remain in the body for
extended periods after exposure. Anthrax spores that remain in
the body can potentially lead to infection following the end of
antibiotic treatment. Infection also may occur if patients do
not adhere to the prolonged course of antibiotic treatment or
are not able to remain on antibiotics for extended periods of
time. Because of these limitations, the CDC recommends
administering BioThrax in combination with antibiotics under an
IND with informed consent of the patient as a post-exposure
prophylaxis for anthrax infection as an emergency public health
intervention. While BioThrax is not currently approved by the
FDA for post-exposure prophylaxis, as discussed below, we are
actively pursuing a label expansion for this indication.
Description and benefits of BioThrax. BioThrax is
the only FDA approved vaccine for the prevention of anthrax
infection. It is approved by the FDA as a pre-exposure
prophylaxis for use in adults who are at high risk of exposure
to anthrax spores. BioThrax is manufactured from a culture
filtrate, made from a non-virulent strain of Bacillus
anthracis, and contains no dead or live bacteria. BioThrax
is administered by subcutaneous injection in three initial doses
followed by three additional doses, with an annual booster dose
recommended thereafter. The initial three doses are given two
weeks apart followed by three additional doses given at six, 12
and 18 months following first vaccination. BioThrax
includes aluminum hydroxide, or alum, as an adjuvant.
The NIH originally approved the manufacture and sale of BioThrax
by the Michigan Department of Public Health in 1970. In 1972,
responsibility for approving biological products transferred
from the NIH to the FDA. Following that transfer of
responsibility, the FDA established procedures for reviewing the
safety and efficacy of biological products, including BioThrax,
that had been previously approved by the NIH. The FDA set out to
categorize the products according to evidence of safety and
effectiveness and determine if the products should remain
approved and on the market. In December 1985, the FDA issued a
proposed rule containing a finding that BioThrax was safe and
effective. However, the FDA did not finalize that proposed rule
pursuant to applicable notice and comment requirements. In
December 2005, based on a review of data from the study used to
support the original marketing approval of BioThrax and other
studies of the use of BioThrax in humans, including studies by
the CDC and the DoD, the FDA issued a final order regarding
BioThrax. In the final order, the FDA affirmed the approval of
BioThrax and found, among other things, that:
|
|
|
BioThrax is safe and effective;
|
89
|
|
|
the study used to support the original marketing approval of
BioThrax constituted a well controlled human efficacy study in
which BioThrax was 92.5% effective in preventing inhalational
and cutaneous anthrax;
|
|
|
as reported by the National Academy of Sciences Institute
of Medicine, studies in humans and animal models support the
conclusion that BioThrax is effective against anthrax strains
that are dependent upon the anthrax toxin as a mechanism of
virulence by all routes of exposure, including inhalation;
|
|
|
periodic evaluations of reports in the vaccine adverse event
reporting system database maintained by the CDC and the FDA
confirm that BioThrax continues to be safe for its intended use;
and
|
|
|
as reported by an independent advisory panel to the FDA, CDC
data suggest that BioThrax is fairly well tolerated with severe
local reactions and systemic reactions being relatively rare.
|
In a study published in 2002, the Institute of Medicine, which
is a component of The National Academy of Sciences and provides
independent, unbiased, evidence-based advice on matters
pertaining to public health, found that BioThrax is an effective
vaccine for protection against anthrax, including inhalational
anthrax, caused by any known or plausible engineered strains and
that no convincing evidence exists that people face an increased
risk of experiencing short-term life-threatening or permanently
disabling adverse effects from BioThrax or developing any
adverse effects from long-term use of BioThrax.
As with any pharmaceutical product, the use of vaccines carries
a risk of adverse health effects that must be weighed against
the expected health benefit of the product. The adverse
reactions that have been associated with the administration of
BioThrax are similar to those observed following the
administration of other adult vaccines and include local
reactions, such as redness, swelling and limitation of motion in
the inoculated arm, and systemic reactions, such as headache,
fever, chills, nausea and general body aches. In addition, some
serious adverse events have been reported to the vaccine adverse
event reporting system database maintained by the CDC and the
FDA with respect to BioThrax. The report of any such adverse
event to the vaccine adverse event reporting system database is
not proof that the vaccine caused such event. These serious
adverse events, including diabetes, heart attacks, autoimmune
diseases, including Guillian Barre syndrome, lupus and multiple
sclerosis, lymphoma and death, have not been causally linked to
the administration of BioThrax.
BioThrax development activities. In its 2002 study,
the Institute of Medicine recommended characteristics for the
development of a new anthrax vaccine. Based on these
recommendations, we are actively pursuing label expansions and
improvements for BioThrax, including the following:
|
|
|
Extend shelf life. In 2005, the FDA approved an
extension of BioThrax shelf life from two to three years, which
will allow BioThrax to be stockpiled for a longer period of
time. We are conducting ongoing stability testing of BioThrax,
and, depending on the outcome of these tests, we may apply for a
further extension of BioThrax shelf life to five years in 2007.
|
|
|
Reduce doses for pre-exposure prophylaxis. Based on
an interim analysis of data from an ongoing clinical trial of
BioThrax being conducted by the CDC, we have applied to the FDA
to reduce the number of required doses of BioThrax for
pre-exposure prophylaxis from six to five, with an annual
booster dose thereafter. In April 2006, the FDA issued a
complete response letter to our application, requesting
clarification and requiring additional analysis of the data that
we submitted. We are in the process of responding to this letter
and amending our application.
|
|
|
Add second route of administration. We have applied
to the FDA to add a second route of administration of BioThrax
to include intramuscular injection in addition to subcutaneous
injection. We believe that intramuscular injection will result
in fewer injection site reactions than subcutaneous injection.
|
90
|
|
|
Single dose syringe. We believe that products that
are administered in a single dose syringe are of significant
interest to HHS for inclusion in the strategic national
stockpile. As a result, we have initiated a development program
to make BioThrax available in single dose syringes.
|
Post-exposure prophylaxis. We also plan to seek
approval of BioThrax in combination with antibiotic therapy as a
post-exposure prophylaxis for anthrax infection. We expect that
we will use three doses of BioThrax given two weeks apart for
this indication. In 2005, NIAID completed a
proof-of-concept
study of BioThrax in which rabbits infected with anthrax were
treated with the antibiotic levofloxacin or with levofloxacin in
combination with two doses of BioThrax in one of three dose
amounts. One of the dose amounts tested was a dilution of
BioThrax designed to elicit an immune response that is
proportional to the effect of an undiluted dose in humans. This
is referred to as a humanized dose. Only 44% of the rabbits
treated with antibiotics alone survived, while 100% of the
rabbits treated with either humanized doses or undiluted human
doses of BioThrax in combination with levofloxacin survived. In
the trial, there were statistically significant increases in
survival rates for rabbits treated with all dose amounts of
BioThrax in combination with the antibiotic compared to rabbits
treated with levofloxacin alone. These results were consistent
with an earlier animal test conducted by the U.S. Army
Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases, or USAMRIID,
involving undiluted human doses of BioThrax in combination with
an antibiotic administered to nonhuman primates infected with
anthrax.
To advance the development of BioThrax for this additional
indication, we plan to conduct three animal efficacy studies in
accordance with the FDA animal rule. We plan to evaluate the
effect of a humanized dose of BioThrax in combination with an
antibiotic compared to the antibiotic alone in rabbits and
nonhuman primates exposed by inhalation to anthrax spores. We
plan to file an IND with the FDA in 2006 to initiate a human
clinical trial of BioThrax for this indication using three doses
of BioThrax given two weeks apart. The purpose of this trial
will be to obtain additional immunogenicity data regarding
BioThrax using the planned three dose regimen. We expect to
conduct this clinical trial concurrently with our planned animal
efficacy studies. Under the FDA animal rule, we believe that, if
the results are favorable, the rabbit and nonhuman primate
animal efficacy studies together with our planned human
immungenicity clinical trial would be sufficient to support the
filing with the FDA of a biologics license application, or BLA,
supplement for marketing approval of BioThrax for this
indication in the second half of 2007.
Next generation anthrax vaccine. We are evaluating
several potential product candidates in connection with
development of a next generation anthrax vaccine, featuring
attributes such as self-administration and a longer shelf life.
In September 2006, we submitted three separate proposals in
response to a request for proposals issued by NIAID in June 2006
for the advanced development and testing of next generation
anthrax vaccine candidates. The NIAID request for proposals
specified properties desirable for a biodefense vaccine to be
stored in the strategic national stockpile, including the
following:
|
|
|
shelf life of three years or longer at room temperature;
|
|
|
the ability to generate protective immune response in one or two
doses; and
|
|
|
the ability to be safely self administered or rapidly inoculated
into large numbers of people.
|
The NIAID request stated that anthrax vaccine candidates should
maintain a superior safety profile to BioThrax, contain a
protective antigen that has been shown to be efficacious against
anthrax spore challenge in animal models and have progressed
through a proof-of-concept efficacy study in a relevant spore
challenged animal model. NIAID is not obligated to make any
award, and may decide not to make any award, for development
funding pursuant to this request for proposals or otherwise.
91
Anthrax immune
globulin
We are developing an anthrax immune globulin as a single dose
intravenous therapeutic for treatment of patients with manifest
symptoms of anthrax disease resulting from the release of
anthrax toxins into the body. If successfully developed, we
expect our anthrax immune globulin therapeutic to be prescribed
for administration in these circumstances either as a
monotherapy or in conjunction with an antibiotic.
There are no approved products for the effective treatment of
anthrax disease after anthrax toxins have been released into the
body. Cangene, in collaboration with the CDC, is currently
developing an anthrax immune globulin for use in these
circumstances based on plasma collected from military personnel
who have been vaccinated with BioThrax. Pursuant to the first in
a series of three anticipated requests for proposals, HHS
awarded a contract to Cangene in 2005 to supply anthrax immune
globulin for use in preliminary efficacy testing. In July 2006,
HHS exercised an option under a modification to this contract
for Cangene to supply 10,000 doses of anthrax immune globulin
for the strategic national stockpile. This contract modification
has a total value of approximately $143 million. Cangene
has announced that it expects to deliver these doses of anthrax
immune globulin to the strategic national stockpile beginning in
late 2007 through the end of 2009. HHS also awarded a contract
to Human Genome Sciences in 2005 to supply a monoclonal antibody
to Bacillus anthracis for evaluation of efficacy as a
post-exposure therapeutic for anthrax infection. In June 2006,
HHS awarded a development and supply agreement with a value of
$165 million to Human Genome Sciences for this monoclonal
antibody, referred to as ABthrax. The contract provides for the
supply of 20,000 treatment courses of ABthrax for the strategic
national stockpile. Human Genome Sciences has announced that it
expects to deliver ABthrax to the strategic national stockpile
in 2008. The FDA has granted ABthrax an orphan drug designation
for the treatment of inhalational anthrax.
Our plan is to develop our anthrax immune globulin therapeutic
using antibodies that are produced by healthy donors immunized
with BioThrax. We recently completed a plasma donor stimulation
program in which we collected plasma from our employees and
military personnel who had been vaccinated with BioThrax. We are
currently designing a civilian donor stimulation program. We
have collected a sufficient amount of plasma to initiate
manufacturing of the anthrax immune globulin under current good
manufacturing practice, or cGMP, requirements in a validated and
approved process. The manufacturing process entails
fractionating the plasma and purifying the immune globulin. We
have engaged Talecris Biotherapeutics, Inc. to perform the
plasma fractionation and purification processes and contract
filling for our anthrax immune globulin candidate at its FDA
approved facilities. We expect that the anthrax immune globulin
that we manufacture will be acceptable under the FDAs
rules for use in both preclinical studies and human clinical
trials.
We plan to rely on the FDA animal rule in connection with the
development of our anthrax immune globulin candidate.
Specifically, we plan to conduct efficacy studies of this
product candidate in infected rabbits and then infected nonhuman
primates. Concurrently, we plan to file an IND for a
Phase I clinical trial to evaluate the safety and
pharmacokinetics of our anthrax immune globulin candidate in
healthy volunteers. We currently anticipate filing such an IND
in late 2006 or early 2007. We believe that favorable data from
these animal efficacy studies and the safety and pharmacokinetic
clinical trial would be sufficient to support an application to
the FDA for marketing approval. NIAID has provided us grant
funding of up to $3.7 million for the studies designed to
assess the tolerability, pharmacokinetics and efficacy of this
product candidate in infected rabbits and the development and
validation of product assays. We believe that our anthrax immune
globulin would be eligible to be procured by HHS under Project
BioShield for inclusion in the strategic national stockpile
after we file an IND and prior to receiving marketing approval.
92
Recombinant
bivalent botulinum vaccine
Disease overview. Botulism is a frequently fatal
disease caused by botulinum toxins produced by the bacterium
Clostridium botulinum. Clostridium botulinum is
widely distributed in soil and aquatic environments throughout
the world. Botulinum bacteria produce seven distinct serotypes,
each of which elicits a distinct antibody response. Naturally
occurring outbreaks of botulism in humans have been reported
from exposure to four of the seven serotypes: A, B, E and
F. Botulism normally occurs when an individual consumes
contaminated food containing botulinum toxin. Once consumed, the
toxin rapidly attacks nerve cells, resulting in paralysis of
peripheral muscles, including the muscles involved in
respiration. Botulism can also be contracted if botulinum
bacteria contaminate wounds or colonize in the intestine of
infants, which is referred to as infant botulism.
Botulinum toxins are among the most potent and dangerous of
potential biological weapons. Exposure to very small quantities
of botulinum toxin can cause the rapid onset of life threatening
paralytic disease syndrome. It has been estimated that a single
gram of toxin evenly dispersed and inhaled could kill more than
one million people.
Market opportunity and current treatment. Because
botulinum toxin is stable when purified and extremely potent
when administered in very small quantities, it has the potential
to be used directly as a biological weapon, either through
deliberate contamination of food or drinking water or as an
aerosol. As with anthrax vaccines, we believe that the
U.S. government will be the principal customer for a
botulinum vaccine, particularly in the near term. We believe
that state and local governments, which we expect will be
interested in a botulinum vaccine to protect first responders to
a bioterrorism attack, and several foreign governments are
significant potential customers for a botulinum vaccine.
The Michigan Department of Public Health first developed a
pentavalent botulinum toxoid vaccine in the late 1960s and began
manufacturing the pentavalent vaccine for use under an IND in
1969. This vaccine is called pentavalent because it addresses
five serotypes of botulinum neurotoxin. Since 1989, the CDC and
the DoD have distributed the pentavalent botulinum toxoid
vaccine under this IND for vaccination of at risk laboratory
workers and military personnel as an adjunct to other measures
of protection. The pentavalent botulinum toxoid vaccine
exhibited an acceptable safety profile in connection with the
immunization of over 5,000 individuals with more than 21,000
doses of the vaccine. Approximately 90% of injections were
followed by no, or mild, local reactions. Only 0.3% of
injections were followed by severe local reactions. A total of
5.1% of injections were followed by reported systemic reactions.
In connection with our acquisition of assets from the Michigan
Biologic Products Institute in 1998, we acquired rights to the
pentavalent vaccine, know-how relating to the development of the
pentavalent vaccine and rights to a master botulinum cell bank,
which provides starting materials for the pentavalent vaccine.
After more than 15 years of use, the supplies of
pentavalent botulinum toxoid vaccine are dwindling and in need
of replacement. In August 2003, HHS issued a pre-solicitation
notice for the acquisition of up to ten million doses of a
recombinant trivalent botulinum vaccine, which would address
botulinum serotypes A, B and E. HHS was seeking a trivalent
vaccine because botulinum serotype F is more difficult to
produce under cGMP conditions and does not appear to represent
the same level of threat as other serotypes of botulinum
neurotoxin. We also believe that botulinum serotype E does not
represent the same level of threat as serotypes A and B.
Botulinum serotypes A and B are responsible for approximately
85% of all cases of botulism.
In November 1997, the DoD, through its Joint Vaccine Acquisition
Program, awarded a contract for $322 million to DynPort
Vaccine Company for the development of various biodefense
vaccines. In April
93
2005, the DoD provided additional funding to DynPort for the
continued development of a recombinant bivalent botulinum
vaccine for protection against botulinum serotypes A and B.
Description and development status. We are
developing a recombinant protein subunit bivalent botulinum
vaccine for protection against botulinum serotypes A and B in
collaboration with HPA. We hold an exclusive license from HPA to
the recombinant technology that we are using in the development
of our vaccine candidate. HPA is also providing us with process
development and toxicology expertise, access to its facilities
and specialized manufacturing capabilities. We are designing our
vaccine candidate to be administered by intramuscular injection
with an alum adjuvant in a three dose regimen. Our recombinant
vaccine candidate is based on a fragment of the botulinum toxin
that we have selected as an antigen because we believe it to be
non-toxic and immunogenic. We are producing this recombinant
antigen in an E. coli expression system. We believe that our
technology will allow us to develop a stable product with
possible cross-protection against a range of toxin subtypes and
ease of formulation into a multivalent vaccine.
We have completed initial
proof-of-concept
studies of this vaccine candidate in mice for botulinum
serotypes A and B. In these studies, the vaccine elicited
antibodies and provided protection against challenge with the
botulinum toxin. We plan to initiate additional
proof-of-concept
animal studies in mice for botulinum serotype E and then to
evaluate the toxicity of the vaccine in other animal studies so
that we will be in a position, if we determine to do so, to
develop a recombinant trivalent botulinum vaccine instead of a
recombinant bivalent botulinum vaccine.
We have established a small scale production process for
botulinum serotypes A and B. We anticipate that we will be able
to manufacture our recombinant vaccine in a cGMP facility that
will not require the high level of containment that is required
for the production of conventional, non-recombinant toxoid
vaccines that involve cultivation of the disease-causing
organism. We plan to rely on the FDA animal rule in connection
with the development of our recombinant bivalent botulinum
vaccine candidate.
Botulinum
immune globulin
We are developing our botulinum immune globulin candidate in
collaboration with HPA as an intravenous therapeutic for
treatment of symptomatic botulinum exposure. Because of the
rapid onset of symptoms following infection with botulinum
toxin, prophylactic vaccines, which take several weeks to create
an effective protective immune response, are not useful as
post-exposure treatments for botulism. In addition, antibiotics
are not effective post-exposure treatments since they work by
killing the botulinum bacteria that produce the toxin, but do
not act directly against the botulinum toxin.
We believe that an intravenous botulinum immune globulin has the
potential to provide immediate protection from the effects of
botulinum toxin. A third partys FDA approved botulinum
immune globulin was tested in a five-year, randomized,
double-blind, placebo controlled trial in 122 infants with
infant botulism and a subsequent six-year, open-label study in
382 infants. In the placebo controlled trial, infants treated
with the botulinum immune globulin had statistically significant
reductions in the average length of hospital stay, duration of
intensive care, duration of mechanical ventilation, duration of
tube or intravenous feeding and hospital charges. In the
open-label study, the early treatment of patients with infant
botulism shortened the average length of stay significantly more
than later treatment.
The only current recommended therapy for exposure to botulism
consists of passive immunization with an immune globulin derived
from equine plasma. The components of a previously approved
trivalent equine immune globulin that contained antibodies
against botulinum toxin types A, B, and E have been reformulated
into an approved bivalent product and an investigational
monovalent product. However, the equine immune globulin is
subject to important shortcomings. First, because the human body
recognizes
94
the equine immune globulin as a foreign substance, its efficacy
may be limited. In addition, the antibody immune response
against the equine immune globulin can lead to potential severe
side effects, including anaphylactic shock, if the equine immune
globulin is administered more than once. To screen for
sensitivity to the equine immune globulin, patients are given
small challenge doses of the equine immune globulin before
receiving a full dose.
In June 2006, HHS awarded a five-year development and supply
contract with a base value of $362 million to Cangene for a
heptavalent botulinum immune globulin derived from equine
plasma. The contract provides for the supply of 200,000 doses of
a botulinum immune globulin for the strategic national
stockpile. Cangene has announced that it expects to produce and
deliver usable product to the strategic national stockpile from
mid to late 2007. The contract also provides for optional task
orders worth up to an extra $234 million, which may be
awarded at the sole discretion of HHS. Cangene previously began
development work on the project under a research and development
contract with the CDC.
We plan to rely on the FDA animal rule in connection with the
development of our botulinum immune globulin candidate.
Specifically, we plan to conduct efficacy studies of this
product candidate in an infected rodent population and then
infected nonhuman primates. Concurrently, we expect to file an
IND for a Phase I clinical trial to evaluate the safety and
pharmacokinetics of the botulinum immune globulin in healthy
volunteers. We believe that favorable data from these animal
efficacy studies and the safety and pharmacokinetic clinical
trial would be sufficient to support an application to the FDA
for marketing approval.
As the first step in the development of our botulinum immune
globulin candidate, we are initiating production of a bivalent
botulinum toxoid vaccine using botulinum serotypes A and B
derived from the starting material for the pentavalent vaccine
developed by the Michigan Department of Public Health. We are
designing this botulinum toxoid vaccine to be administered by
injection with an alum adjuvant. We anticipate that several
doses will be needed to elicit a strong immune response. We are
performing development activities at existing HPA facilities,
which we expect may expedite production of clinical material for
the vaccine. HPA is also providing us with process development
and specialized manufacturing capabilities for the vaccine.
We plan to conduct a preclinical
proof-of-concept
study of this vaccine candidate in mice to confirm the
suitability of the vaccine for further development. If the
results of this proof-of-concept study are favorable, based on a
demonstration of protective efficacy or an immune response
associated with protection, we plan to file an IND to initiate a
Phase I clinical trial to evaluate the safety of this
vaccine in healthy volunteers. We expect that the Phase I
clinical trial will provide data sufficient to support an
acceptable dose for the vaccine and the optimal dosing schedule.
If the results of the Phase I clinical trial are favorable,
we intend to initiate a donor stimulation program in which we
will immunize healthy volunteers with the vaccine and collect
plasma for fractionation for the manufacture of our botulinum
immune globulin candidate. We expect to rely on safety and
immunogenicity data from the pentavalent botulinum toxoid
vaccine previously manufactured by the State of Michigan in the
development of this bivalent botulinum toxoid vaccine. This data
includes the results of a Phase II safety and
immunogenicity clinical trial conducted by the DoD from July
1998 to May 2000, animal efficacy trial data and the extensive
use of the pentavalent vaccine by the CDC in immunizing at risk
laboratory personnel. As a result, we anticipate that the FDA
will not require us to conduct a Phase II clinical trial
for the bivalent botulinum toxoid vaccine before permitting us
to initiate the donor stimulation program.
Our current plan is to develop the botulinum toxoid vaccine that
we are using in the development of our botulinum immune globulin
candidate through Phase I clinical trials. At that point,
we expect to assess our future development plans based on the
U.S. governments interest in providing funding for
the further development or procurement of this toxoid vaccine,
either instead of or in addition to a
95
recombinant botulinum vaccine, as a pre-exposure prophylaxis for
botulinum toxin. We believe that this type of government funding
may become available as there is currently no botulinum vaccine
available for the military or the strategic national stockpile.
Moreover, we believe that the well-established nature of the
manufacturing process for a toxoid vaccine, the availability of
safety data from the pentavalent botulinum vaccine, our access
to know-how from the development and manufacturing of the
pentavalent botulinum vaccine by the State of Michigan and
access to HPA technology would all facilitate our development of
a bivalent botulinum toxoid vaccine.
Commercial
business
In our commercial business, we are developing a range of
commercial immunobiotic product candidates for use against
infectious diseases with significant unmet or underserved
medical needs.
Typhoid
vaccine
Disease overview. Typhoid, also known as typhoid
fever, is caused by infection with the bacterium Salmonella
typhi. Typhoid is characterized by fever, headache,
constipation, malaise, stomach pains, anorexia and myalgia.
Severe cases of typhoid can result in confusion, delirium,
intestinal perforation and death. Typhoid is transmitted by
consuming contaminated food or drinks. Contamination usually
results from poor hygiene and sanitation. Typhoid is often
endemic in developing countries in which there is limited access
to treated water supplies and sanitation.
Market opportunity and current treatment. According
to the CDC, approximately 400 cases of typhoid are reported
annually in the United States, of which approximately 70% are
contracted abroad. An estimated 22 million cases of typhoid
occur per year worldwide, resulting in approximately 200,000
deaths annually. The CDC recommends that all persons from the
United States traveling to developing countries consider
receiving a typhoid vaccination, with travelers to Asia, Africa
and Latin America deemed to be especially at risk.
U.S. military personnel deployed in these areas are also at
risk of infection.
One oral typhoid vaccine and one injectable typhoid vaccine are
currently approved and administered in both the United States
and Europe. The approved oral typhoid vaccine is available in
liquid and capsule formulations. Both formulations require three
to four doses to generate a protective immune response. The
capsule formulation requires a booster every five years
thereafter. The liquid formulation has been reported to provide
77% of recipients in clinical trials with protection three years
after vaccination. The approved injectable vaccine requires only
a single dose. However, it is poorly immunogenic in children,
requires a booster dose every three years thereafter and was
effective in only 55% to 75% of recipients in clinical trials.
Both approved vaccines have good safety profiles with relatively
few adverse events reported. Antibiotics are used to treat
typhoid after infection and usually lead to recovery commencing
within four days. Without antibiotic therapy, the CDC estimates
that the mortality rate of a typhoid infection is as high as 20%.
Description and development status. We are
developing a live attenuated typhoid vaccine that contains
deletions in two genes of the Salmonella typhi bacterium
designed to eliminate virulence. We have designed our vaccine
candidate to be administered in a single drinkable dose prior to
travel to countries where typhoid is endemic. We believe that,
if approved, the method of administration of our vaccine
candidate would provide a competitive advantage compared to both
currently approved typhoid vaccines.
96
We have completed preclinical studies in which we assessed the
immunogenicity and toxicity of our vaccine candidate, with the
following results:
|
|
|
In in vitro tests in which human cells were exposed
to our vaccine candidate, the live attenuated bacteria contained
in the vaccine did not multiply.
|
|
|
In pharmacology studies in mice, our vaccine candidate was
immunogenic and had higher relative immunogenicity when
delivered subcutaneously than the currently approved oral
typhoid vaccine.
|
|
|
In safety and toxicity studies in mice, a strain of
Salmonella that causes a disease similar to typhoid in
mice, which contained deletions of the genes that are also
deleted in our vaccine candidate, did not cause disease.
|
We also have completed the following clinical trials of our
typhoid vaccine candidate in the United States and Europe:
|
|
|
An open-label, non-placebo controlled, pilot study conducted in
the United Kingdom in nine healthy adult volunteers. The purpose
of this study was to evaluate the safety and immunogenicity of
our vaccine candidate. In this study, our vaccine candidate was
immunogenic, eliciting both cell mediated and humoral
immunogenicity, and well tolerated.
|
|
|
A double-blind, placebo controlled, single dose escalating
Phase I clinical trial conducted in the United States in 60
healthy adult volunteers. The purpose of this trial was to
evaluate the safety, tolerability and immunogenicity of three
dose levels of our vaccine candidate. In this trial, our vaccine
candidate was immunogenic and well tolerated at all dose levels.
|
|
|
An open-label, non-placebo controlled, single dose Phase I
clinical trial conducted in the United States in 32 healthy
adult volunteers. The purpose of this trial was to evaluate the
safety and immunogenicity of two different presentations of the
vaccine candidate, one using bottled water and another using tap
water. We vaccinated 16 subjects with each presentation. Because
one subject who received the tap water presentation of the
vaccine candidate was excluded from the trial results due to a
lack of post-baseline immunology data, the tap water
presentation data reflected data from only 15 subjects. More
than 90% of the subjects vaccinated with each presentation had a
humoral antibody response to S. typhi. Because the
two presentations were equally immunogenic and both were well
tolerated by trial participants, we selected the tap water
presentation for further development based on its relative
convenience.
|
In these three clinical trials, our vaccine candidate
demonstrated immunogenicity response levels following a single
drinkable dose similar to those seen with multiple doses of the
currently approved oral vaccine. As a result of these trials, we
were able to establish the dose and regimen for our vaccine
candidate with a formulation that we believe is appropriate for
commercialization.
We recently completed a single-blind, placebo controlled
Phase I clinical trial of our vaccine candidate in Vietnam
in 27 healthy adult volunteers using the dose and regimen
established in our Phase I clinical trials in the United
States. The Wellcome Trust provided funding for the trial. The
purpose of the trial was to evaluate the safety and
immunogenicity of the vaccine candidate in adults living in an
endemic area. In this trial, the vaccine candidate met the
criterion for immunogenicity, with approximately 68% of subjects
who received the vaccine candidate mounting a humoral antibody
response. The vaccine candidate was well tolerated by trial
participants, with no serious adverse events reported.
97
The remainder of our planned clinical development program for
this vaccine candidate consists of the following:
|
|
|
Phase II clinical trial. In the fourth quarter
of 2006, we plan to initiate a single-blind, placebo controlled
Phase II clinical trial in Vietnamese children between five
and 14 years of age. The Wellcome Trust has agreed to
provide funding for this trial. The purpose of this trial will
be to evaluate the safety and immunogenicity of our vaccine
candidate. The trial design calls for 100 subjects to receive
vaccine and 50 to receive placebo, with at least 70% of the
subjects being between five and ten years of age. We will assess
safety and immunogenicity up to 28 days after vaccination.
|
|
|
Disease surveillance study. Concurrently with the
planned Phase II clinical trial, we plan to conduct a
disease surveillance study in the areas where we are considering
conducting a Phase III clinical trial of our vaccine
candidate in order to confirm that a sufficient number of
subjects will be included in the Phase III trial.
|
|
|
Phase III clinical trial. We plan to conduct a
single-blind Phase III clinical trial in an area where
typhoid is endemic. The purpose of this trial will be to
evaluate the efficacy of our vaccine candidate in children who
are likely to be exposed to the typhoid bacterium. We expect to
undertake an interim analysis of the data from the trial after
approximately one year, which, if the results are favorable, we
plan to use to support the filing with the FDA of a BLA for
marketing approval of our vaccine candidate. We plan to continue
to monitor the incidence of typhoid in the trial participants
for several years after vaccination.
|
|
|
Tolerability and immunogenicity study. Concurrently
with our Phase III clinical trial, we plan to conduct a
Phase III clinical trial in the United States or Europe in
healthy volunteers. The purpose of this trial will be to
evaluate the safety and immunogenicity of our vaccine candidate
in the target population to support marketing approval in the
United Sates and Europe.
|
Since typhoid fever in Asia is largely a disease of children, we
plan to conduct our Phase II and Phase III clinical
trials in this age group. We plan to conduct our Phase II
and Phase III clinical trials in endemic areas because
there are no agreed immune correlates of efficacy for live
attenuated typhoid vaccines and it is not practicable to
demonstrate clinical efficacy in travelers from the United
States or Europe due to the prohibitively large number of
subjects that would be needed. The currently approved typhoid
vaccines relied on similar clinical trials for regulatory
approval.
We plan to seek additional grant funding for development of this
product candidate.
Hepatitis B
therapeutic vaccine
Disease overview. Hepatitis B is a highly infectious
virus transmitted from person to person by contact with blood
and bodily fluids. Most hepatitis B infections in adults result
in acute hepatitis, with the immune system eventually clearing
the infection. However, in approximately 8% to 10% of infected
adults and a much larger proportion of infected children, the
immune system fails to clear the virus, resulting in immune
tolerance of the virus and chronic infection. In addition,
pregnant women suffering from hepatitis B can pass the infection
on to their babies during childbirth. Babies born infected
rarely clear the infection, with over 90% becoming chronically
infected. According to the World Health Organization,
approximately 25% of people with chronic hepatitis B infection
develop serious liver disease, including cirrhosis and liver
cancer.
Market opportunity and current treatment. Chronic
infection with the hepatitis B virus is a global problem,
with an estimated 350 million carriers worldwide. The World
Health Organization estimates that approximately one million
people per year worldwide die from complications of hepatitis B
infection.
98
Infection rates are highest in the developing world, posing an
infection risk to travelers from industrialized countries.
Infection is less common in the United States and Europe. In the
United States, there are an estimated 1.2 million people
with chronic hepatitis B infection, resulting in approximately
4,000 to 5,000 deaths annually.
Prophylactic vaccines based on recombinant protein subunit
preparations are effective in preventing hepatitis B infection.
Childhood vaccination with these vaccines is common in
industrialized countries and in some of the developing world.
Childhood immunization programs have reduced the number of
carriers of chronic hepatitis B infection by up to 90% in parts
of the world where hepatitis B is most common. In the United
States, infection rates for acute hepatitis B have decreased by
approximately 77% over the past 20 years. However, these
existing vaccines have not proven to be effective in treating
people with chronic hepatitis B infection. As a result, there
remain a large number of people who are chronically infected
with hepatitis B and require treatment to prevent the
development of liver disease and reduce the risk of transmitting
the infection to others.
There is no vaccine currently on the market that is licensed for
therapeutic use for chronic hepatitis B infection. Currently
available therapies for this patient population consist mainly
of antiviral drugs, such as an immunotherapy with interferons.
However, these treatments are subject to a number of
shortcomings. Both of these treatments can only be used in a
subset of patients, and their efficacy is limited. In addition,
the use of antiviral drugs may lead to the development of
resistant forms of the virus and Interferon has side effects
that reduce patient compliance.
Description and development status. We are
developing a live attenuated therapeutic vaccine for treatment
of patients with chronic hepatitis B infection. We have designed
our vaccine candidate to be administered in multiple drinkable
doses over several months. It may require further booster doses.
Because chronic carriers have weak cellular responses to the
hepatitis B virus, they cannot clear the virus. Our vaccine
candidate is intended to redirect the immune system to make
strong cellular responses to a hepatitis B antigen known as
hepatitis B core in chronic carriers, leading to suppression of
viral replication and associated liver damage.
Our vaccine candidate uses our proprietary
spi-VEC®
oral delivery system technology to deliver hepatitis B core
antigen to the human immune system. Spi-VEC is based on
our live attenuated typhoid vaccine and employs recombinant
technology to insert the gene for hepatitis B core into the live
attenuated Salmonella bacteria. The bacteria produce the
antigen once inside the patient. Because we are relying on
recombinant technology to insert the gene for hepatitis B core
into a vector delivery system, we do not need to separately
purify the vaccine.
We have completed a program of pharmacology and toxicity studies
of our hepatitis B therapeutic vaccine candidate in animals. In
mice that were administered our vaccine candidate, the hepatitis
B core antigen was manufactured and immune responses were
elicited against the antigen. In separate toxicity studies also
conducted in mice, our vaccine candidate was non-toxic.
In February 2004, we completed an open-label, dose escalating
Phase I clinical trial of our vaccine candidate in the
United Kingdom in 30 healthy adult volunteers. The purpose of
this trial was to evaluate the safety and immunogenicity of our
vaccine candidate. In this trial, we administered volunteers two
doses of vaccine over a period of approximately two months. The
vaccine elicited a cellular immune response in all subjects
after two doses, indicating that the antigen had been
successfully delivered to the immune system. In addition, 100%
of subjects in the high dose group and 90% of subjects in the
low dose group demonstrated the type of immune response known to
be important in promoting clearance of hepatitis B. The vaccine
candidate was well tolerated by trial participants, with no
serious adverse events reported.
99
In March 2006, the U.K. Medicines and Healthcare Products
Regulatory Agency approved our clinical trial application,
including a trial protocol to initiate a Phase II clinical
trial of our vaccine candidate in patients chronically infected
with hepatitis B. The protocol provides for a placebo
controlled, randomized, dose escalating study to be conducted in
the United Kingdom in 45 chronic carriers of hepatitis B. If
necessary, we may expand the study to additional sites in Europe
to increase the recruitment rate. The primary purpose of this
trial will be to evaluate the safety and tolerability of six
monthly doses of our vaccine candidate. The secondary purpose
will be to investigate whether the vaccine candidate can reduce
the hepatitis B viral DNA load, a recognized surrogate endpoint
for treatment of hepatitis B using current therapeutics. We
expect to begin dosing patients in the trial in the fourth
quarter of 2006.
If the results of this Phase II clinical trial are
favorable, we expect to submit an IND to the FDA to conduct one
or more clinical trials of this vaccine candidate in the United
States as may be appropriate. The IND must become effective
before we can conduct any clinical trials in the United States.
Group B
streptococcus vaccine
Disease overview. Group B streptococcus is a
bacterium that causes illness in newborn babies, pregnant women,
the elderly and adults with other illnesses, such as diabetes or
liver disease. Group B streptococcus is the most common cause of
sepsis and meningitis in newborns in the developed world and is
a frequent cause of pneumonia in newborns. It affects more
babies than any other newborn health problem. Group B
streptococcus bacteria can cause bladder and womb infections in
pregnant women that in turn lead to infection of the fetus and
premature delivery and stillbirth. In pregnant women carrying
the group B streptococcus bacteria, the baby may become infected
either before or during birth.
In the United States, approximately half of all neonatal group B
streptococcus infections occur in newborns less than seven days
old and are categorized as early onset disease.
Infections in babies between seven days and three months old are
categorized as late onset disease. Early onset
disease is often associated with complicated or premature
deliveries and usually results in pneumonia and the blood
infection septicemia in the baby. It is also associated with
meningitis. Approximately 5% of babies with early onset disease
die. A high number of survivors of early onset disease are left
with significant permanent disabilities, including sight or
hearing loss and mental retardation. The majority of late onset
cases occur in the first month of life. Late onset disease
usually results in meningitis. Up to 5% of babies with late
onset disease die. A high number of survivors of late onset
disease are left with permanent disabilities, with up to
one-third suffering long-term mental or physical handicaps.
Group B streptococcus infections in the elderly cause blood
infections, skin or soft tissue infections and pneumonia.
Market opportunity and current treatment. The NIH
has identified prevention of group B streptococcus infection in
newborns as a major vaccine objective. Concern about the number
of group B streptococcus neonatal infections prompted the CDC to
recommend routine screening of pregnant women for group B
streptococcus bacteria and preventative antibiotic treatment at
the time of labor for women found to be infected. Screening of
pregnant women for infection is recommended during weeks 35 to
37 of pregnancy. Approximately 10% to 30% of women are found to
be carrying the bacterium as a normal component of the vaginal
microflora. These women are offered intravenous antibiotics
throughout their labor as a preventative measure. In the absence
of antibiotic treatment, the CDC estimates that the risk is one
in 200 of delivering a baby with group B streptococcus
infection. While the level of group B streptococcus disease
decreased in the United States from 1.7 cases per 1,000 live
births in 1993 to 0.4 cases per 1,000 live births in 2002, the
CDC projects that there are approximately 2,750 neonatal
100
infections each year in the United States. In a study of 338 of
these cases of neonatal infections, the death rate was
approximately 6%. We expect the target market for our vaccine
candidate to be women of childbearing age.
The existing method of prevention of group B streptococcus
infection in neonates is the targeted administration of
intravenous antibiotics to women during labor. However, this
approach is invasive and only partially effective. In addition,
antibiotics create the risk of possible adverse reactions and
may lead to the development of antibiotic resistant strains of
the disease. Direct vaccination of newborns is not effective
because their immune system is too immature to respond to the
vaccine. Antibiotics are used to treat babies after infection.
Approximately 17,500 cases of group B streptococcus infection
occur each year in the U.S. population over one year of
age, with most occurring in those over age 50. According to
the CDC, the average death rates for invasive infections are
approximately 8% to 10% for adults 18 to 64 years of age
and 15% to 25% for adults 65 years of age and over.
Antibiotics are used to treat infected individuals.
Description and development status. We are
developing a recombinant protein subunit group B streptococcus
vaccine initially for administration to women of childbearing
age for protection of the fetus and newborn babies. We are
designing our vaccine candidate to be administered by injection
with an alum adjuvant in a three dose regimen. We expect that a
booster dose may also be required. We anticipate that the
vaccine will elicit an antibody response resulting in the
production of antibody in the mother, which may the cross the
placenta to protect the fetus and the newborn baby by passive
immunity.
We have identified several novel surface associated proteins and
are working on the development of three of these proteins as
components of our vaccine candidate. We believe that a
combination of proteins will be required to provide effective
protection. We have completed preclinical studies in which we
evaluated the safety and immunogenicity of our vaccine
candidate, with the following results:
|
|
|
In studies in rabbits and mice, the three protein components of
our vaccine candidate were immunogenic.
|
|
|
In a passive immunization study in which we administered rabbit
antibody to rat pups, the rat pups were protected against
challenge with disease.
|
|
|
Antibodies elicited by one of the protein components of our
vaccine candidate recognized a number of group B streptococcus
types, indicating that the protein component has potential to
generate immune responses with broad coverage.
|
|
|
In a toxicology study in mice with one of the protein components
of our vaccine candidate, the protein was non-toxic.
|
We have completed an open-label, dose escalating Phase I
clinical trial of the first protein component of our vaccine
candidate in the United Kingdom in 47 healthy adult volunteers.
The purpose of this trial was to evaluate the safety and
immunogenicity of this protein as an individual recombinant
protein. We adjuvanted the protein with alum and tested it at
four different strengths, with two doses given 28 days
apart. In this trial, the protein was immunogenic at all doses
tested. The immunogenic response rate was 83% at the lowest dose
tested and 100% at the highest dose tested. The vaccine
candidate was well tolerated by trial participants at all dose
levels tested, with no serious adverse events reported. None of
the subjects withdrew due to an adverse event.
As the next steps in our development plan, we plan to initiate
two additional Phase I clinical trials for the other two
proposed protein components of our vaccine candidate. First, we
plan to evaluate the safety
101
and immunogenicity of the protein that we already have tested
together with one of these other proteins in a Phase I
clinical trial in healthy adults. If the results of that trial
are favorable, we plan to evaluate the safety and immunogenicity
of all three proteins together in a further Phase I
clinical trial. If the results of these Phase I clinical
trails are favorable, we expect to submit an IND to the FDA to
conduct more advanced clinical trials in the United States. The
IND must become effective before we can conduct any clinical
trials in the United States.
Chlamydia
vaccine
Disease overview. Chlamydia is the most prevalent
sexually transmitted disease in the world. It is caused by
infection with the bacterium Chlamydium trachomatis.
Chlamydia trachomatis can cause urogenital disorders such as
uritheritis, cervicitis, pelvic inflammatory disease, ectopic
pregnancy and infertility among females and is the leading cause
of non-gonococcal uritheritis and epidemiditis in males.
Chlamydia trachomatis also causes the ocular disease
trachoma, which is a form of vesicular conjunctivitis. Trachoma
is the leading cause of preventable blindness worldwide.
Market opportunity and current treatment. The World
Health Organization estimates that approximately 92 million
new cases of Chlamydia trachomatis infection occur
annually worldwide, approximately four million of which occur in
North America. Chlamydia trachomatis infections are the
most commonly reported notifiable disease in the United States,
with an estimated 2.8 million Americans becoming infected
with Chlamydia trachomatis each year. Epidemiological
studies indicate that in the United States, Chlamydia
trachomatis infections are most prevalent among young
sexually active individuals between the ages of 15 to
24 years of age. There is no vaccine currently on the
market for Chlamydia trachomatis. However, screening
tests and effective antibiotic treatments have been effective at
containing Chlamydia trachomatis in the United States and
Europe. Although Chlamydia trachomatis infection can be
treated with antibiotics, control measures based on
antimicrobial treatment alone are difficult due to the incidence
of infection, the percentage of asymptomatic infections and
deficiencies in diagnosis.
Description and development status. We are
developing a recombinant protein subunit chlamydia vaccine for
all clinically relevant strains of Chlamydia trachomatis,
including strains that cause ocular disease. We are designing
our vaccine candidate to be administered by injection with a
novel adjuvant in a three dose regimen. We are currently
evaluating in-license opportunities for the adjuvant. We have
cloned our vaccine candidate and produced it in E. coli.
In studies in mice, our vaccine candidate protected against both
upper reproductive tract disease and lower reproductive tract
infection induced by Chlamydia trachomatis. In addition,
there was no evidence of infertility in the mice following
treatment with our vaccine candidate.
Meningitis B
vaccine
Disease overview. Meningococcal disease is a life
threatening condition caused by infection with the bacterium
Neisseria meningitidis. Neisseria meningitidis is
classified into 12 groups based on differences in the surface
coating of the bacterium that elicit distinct immune responses.
According to the World Health Organization, group B is the most
common cause of endemic meningitis in industrialized countries,
accounting for 30% to 40% of cases in North America and 30% to
80% of cases in Europe. Meningococcal disease has a fatality
rate of approximately 10%. The infection can develop very
rapidly and cause death within 24 hours of the symptoms
first becoming apparent. Children from six months to two years
of age are at the highest risk of group B meningococcal
infection, with teenagers also at enhanced risk.
102
Market opportunity and current treatment. The World
Health Organization estimates that approximately
1.2 million cases of bacterial meningitis occur annually
worldwide, resulting in approximately 135,000 deaths. The World
Health Organization estimates that approximately 500,000 of
these cases and 50,000 of these deaths are caused by the
bacterium Neisseria meningitidis. In the United States,
2,333 cases of meningococcal disease were reported in 2001, with
approximately one-third due to group B. In 2003, 1,756 cases of
meningococcal disease were reported in the United States.
Currently, there is no meningitis vaccine on the market that is
protective against group B meningococcal infection. Current
meningitis B treatments include antibiotics and clinical
support. The rapid progression of the infection means that
antibiotic therapy can be ineffective in preventing serious
morbidity and mortality.
Description and development status. We are
developing a recombinant protein subunit meningitis B vaccine
for babies, children and adolescents. We are designing our
vaccine candidate to be administered by injection with an alum
adjuvant in a two dose regimen for children under age five and a
single dose regimen for children over age five. We do not expect
that a booster dose will be required. We anticipate that the
vaccine will consist of two or three protein antigens. We are
currently evaluating a pool of 46 protein candidates in a number
of preclinical studies. We are producing recombinant proteins in
E. coli.
We have entered into a collaboration agreement with Sanofi
Pasteur for this vaccine candidate.
Sanofi Pasteur
collaboration
In May 2006, we entered into a license and co-development
agreement effective April 1, 2006 with Sanofi Pasteur, the
vaccines business of Sanofi-Aventis, pursuant to which we
granted Sanofi Pasteur an exclusive, worldwide license to
develop and commercialize a meningitis vaccine that contains
program antigens evaluated and selected under the agreement. We
retain the right and obligation to conduct development
activities through Phase I clinical trials. Under specified
circumstances, we also retain the right to exploit antigens that
have been terminated from development under the agreement on an
exclusive basis and other specified antigens on a co-exclusive
basis. Sanofi Pasteur has agreed to use commercially reasonable
efforts to develop and commercialize a meningitis B vaccine in
the United States, the European Union and other major market
countries.
A steering committee made up of an equal number of
representatives from us and Sanofi Pasteur oversees all
development and commercialization activities under the
agreement. The steering committee has the authority to make
strategic decisions by unanimous vote relating to the
development of a meningitis vaccine. Sanofi Pasteur has ultimate
decision-making authority over matters that are not resolved at
the steering committee and executive officer levels, but does
not have the unilateral authority to amend the agreement or the
development plan in a manner that would alter our obligations.
In addition, Sanofi Pasteur has the right to make all strategic
decisions relating to the development of any combination product
and has sole discretion over the commercialization of any
meningitis vaccine developed under the agreement.
Under the agreement, Sanofi Pasteur paid us initial fees of
3 million. In addition, Sanofi Pasteur has agreed to
pay all expenses incurred by us under the development program.
We are also eligible to receive payments of up to a maximum of
73 million upon the achievement of specified
research, development and commercialization milestones. Sanofi
Pasteur has agreed to pay royalties to us based on net sales by
Sanofi Pasteur, its affiliates and sublicensees of licensed
products from the collaboration, including specified minimum
royalties with respect to sales of any combination product. In
addition, Sanofi Pasteur has agreed to pay us a portion of
specified sublicense income received by Sanofi Pasteur or its
affiliates.
The term of the agreement ends, on a
country-by-country
basis, upon the later of ten years from first commercial sale or
the expiration of the
last-to-expire
patent covering a licensed product in such country.
103
Sanofi Pasteur may terminate the agreement for convenience
beginning April 1, 2007 upon six months prior written
notice. Sanofi Pasteur also may terminate the agreement upon any
change of control involving us or as a result of our uncured
material breach of the agreement or bankruptcy.
Facilities
The following table sets forth general information regarding our
materially important facilities.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Approximate
|
|
|
|
Location
|
|
Use
|
|
Segment
|
|
square
feet
|
|
|
Owned/leased
|
|
|
Lansing, Michigan
|
|
Manufacturing operations facility
and office space
|
|
Biodefense
|
|
|
214,000
|
|
|
Owned
|
Frederick, Maryland
|
|
Future manufacturing facilities
|
|
Biodefense/
Commercial
|
|
|
290,000
|
|
|
Owned
|
Gaithersburg, Maryland
|
|
Office and laboratory space
|
|
Biodefense/
|
|
|
36,000
|
|
|
Leases expire 2008
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rockville, Maryland
|
|
Office space
|
|
Biodefense/
Commercial
|
|
|
23,000
|
|
|
Lease expires 2016
|
Wokingham, England
|
|
Office and laboratory space
|
|
Commercial
|
|
|
16,000
|
|
|
Leases expire 2016
|
|
|
Lansing, Michigan. We own a multi-building campus on
approximately 12.5 acres in Lansing, Michigan that includes
facilities for bulk manufacturing of BioThrax, including
fermentation, filtration and formulation, as well as for raw
material storage and in-process and final product warehousing.
The campus is secured through perimeter fencing, limited and
controlled ingress and egress and 24 hour
on-site
security personnel. We acquired these facilities in 1998 from
the Michigan Biologic Products Institute after the State of
Michigan, with the concurrence of the DoD, suspended the
production of BioThrax to renovate these manufacturing
facilities. Following our acquisition of BioThrax, we completed
the facility renovations initiated by the State of Michigan. Our
comprehensive renovations included the implementation of work
plans to systematically improve numerous aspects of the
production and release of BioThrax, including process
validation, quality systems and testing methods. In December
2001, the FDA approved a supplement to our manufacturing
facility license for the manufacture of BioThrax at the
renovated facilities.
In February 2006, we began construction of a new
50,000 square foot manufacturing facility on our Lansing
campus. We expect the construction of the facility to cost
approximately $75 million, including approximately
$55 million for the building and associated capital
equipment. We are constructing this new facility as a large
scale commercial manufacturing plant that we can use to produce
multiple vaccine products, subject to complying with appropriate
change-over procedures. Subject to regulatory approval, we
expect that the new manufacturing facility will serve as our
primary BioThrax manufacturing facility. We anticipate that we
will initiate large scale manufacturing of BioThrax for
commercial sale at the new facility in 2008. We are constructing
this facility to accommodate production of up to 40 million
doses of BioThrax per year on a single production line, which we
could expand for production of up to 80 million doses per
year through the addition of a second production line. In
comparison, our current facility has a maximum production
capacity of approximately nine million doses of BioThrax per
year. In addition to construction of a new manufacturing
facility, we recently commissioned a new pilot plant on our
Lansing campus. Our Lansing facilities and substantially all of
the other assets of BioPort, other than accounts receivable
under our DoD and HHS contracts, serve as collateral for our
financing obligations. For more information, see
Managements discussion and analysis of financial
condition and results of operations Liquidity and
capital resources Debt financing.
104
Frederick, Maryland. We own two buildings of
approximately 145,000 square feet each on a
15-acre site
in Frederick, Maryland. We financed the purchase of these
buildings with a forgivable loan from the Department of Business
and Economic Development of the State of Maryland and mortgage
loans from commercial lenders. These buildings serve as
collateral for our financing obligations. For more information,
see Managements discussion and analysis of financial
condition and results of operations Liquidity and
capital resources Debt financing.
We are in the preliminary phase of establishing plans to build
out this site for a portion of our potential future product
manufacturing requirements. Our preliminary plans contemplate
that the site would be designed to provide pilot plant
production capabilities, full scale commercial manufacturing
operations, warehouse and storage facilities and fill and finish
operations. We expect that we will complete the build out of
this site in two stages. In the first stage, our preliminary
plans contemplate a build out of one of the two buildings on
this site to accommodate pilot plant and initial product launch
capabilities. In the second stage, our preliminary plans
contemplate a build out of commercial manufacturing operations.
Other. We lease two separate product development
facilities. Our facility in Gaithersburg, Maryland of
approximately 36,000 square feet contains a combination of
laboratory and office space, including our executive offices. We
conduct product development programs at this site for both our
biodefense and commercial product candidates. Our facility in
Wokingham, England of approximately 16,000 square feet
contains a combination of laboratory and office space. We
conduct product development programs at this site primarily for
our commercial product candidates. Our facility in Rockville,
Maryland contains approximately 23,000 square feet of
office space for our future needs.
Manufacturing
We manufacture BioThrax at our facilities in Lansing, Michigan
using well established vaccine manufacturing procedures. We
currently rely on contract manufacturers and other third parties
to manufacture the supplies of our immunobiotic product
candidates that we require for preclinical and clinical
development. We acquire these supplies on a purchase order
basis. We anticipate that we will use our existing plant
facilities in Michigan, including our recently commissioned
pilot plant, and, when constructed and approved, our planned new
plant facilities in Michigan and Maryland to support both
continued process development and the manufacture of clinical
supplies of our product candidates. We believe that
manufacturing our products and product candidates independently
will provide us cost savings and greater control over the
manufacturing and regulatory approval and oversight process,
accelerate product development timelines and allow us to expand
our base of manufacturing know-how that we can then apply to the
development and manufacture of future product candidates.
Hollister-Stier Laboratories LLC performs the contract filling
operation for BioThrax vials at its FDA approved facility
located in Spokane, Washington. Hollister-Stier has agreed to
meet all of our firm purchase orders for contract filling of
BioThrax based on a good faith annual estimate that we provide
prior to each calendar year. In addition, Hollister-Stier has
agreed to accommodate fill requests in excess of our annual
estimate subject to its available production capacity. Our
contract with Hollister-Stier expires December 31, 2007.
The contract also can be terminated by either party following an
uncured material breach by the other party.
Talecris Biotherapeutics has agreed to perform plasma
fractionation and purification and contract filling relating to
the manufacture of our anthrax immune globulin candidate at its
FDA approved facilities located in Melville, New York and
Clayton, North Carolina. Subject to limited exceptions, we have
agreed to obtain all of our anthrax immune globulin requirements
exclusively from Talecris. While our agreement
105
with Talecris remains in effect, Talecris has agreed not to
market, sell or acquire any competing product that contains
anthrax immune globulin as an active ingredient.
Talecris has agreed to perform plasma fractionation and
purification and contract filling for the manufacture of our
anthrax immune globulin candidate for preclinical or animal
studies, for clinical use or for non-clinical testing required
for clinical trials and for commercial sale. We have agreed to
pay Talecris royalties on net sales on a
country-by-country
basis for commercial product manufactured by Talecris under the
contract.
Our contract with Talecris expires December 31, 2013 or
five years following initiation of commercial manufacturing. We
have the option to extend the term for an additional five-year
period upon notice to Talecris at least 12 months prior to
the expiration of the initial term. After three years following
initiation of commercial manufacturing, either party may
terminate the contract upon two years advance notice. The
contract can also be terminated by either party following an
uncured material breach by the other party. We have the right to
terminate the contract, under specified circumstances, if we
discontinue our production of anthrax immune globulin source
plasma or the development of our anthrax immune globulin
candidate.
We expect to engage one or more third parties to perform the
plasma fractionation and purification processes and contract
filling for our botulinum immune globulin candidate.
We rely on third parties for supplies and raw materials used for
the production of BioThrax and our immunobiotic product
candidates. We purchase these supplies and raw materials from
various suppliers in quantities adequate to meet our needs. We
believe that there are adequate alternative sources of supply
available if any of our current suppliers were unable to meet
our needs.
Marketing and
sales
We currently market and sell BioThrax directly to the DoD and
HHS with a small, targeted marketing and sales group. We plan to
continue to do so and expect that we will use a similar approach
for sales to the U.S. government of any other biodefense
product candidates that we successfully develop. We plan to
expand our sales and marketing organization as we broaden our
sales activities of biodefense products to state and local
governments, which we expect will be interested in these
products to protect first responders, such as police, fire and
emergency medical personnel. We have established marketing and
sales offices in Singapore and Munich, Germany to target sales
of biodefense products to foreign governments. We have engaged
third party marketing representatives to market BioThrax in the
Middle East, Turkey, India, Australia and several Scandinavian
countries in Europe.
We expect to establish a separate internal organization to
market and sell commercial products for which we retain
commercialization or co-commercialization rights. We anticipate
that our internal marketing and sales organization will be
complemented by selective co-promotion and other arrangements
with leading pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies.
We generally expect to retain commercial rights for our product
candidates that we successfully develop in situations in which
we believe it is possible to access the market through a
focused, specialized sales force. In particular, we believe that
such a sales force could address commercial markets, such as the
market for typhoid vaccines and other vaccines for travelers to
developing countries, that overlap with markets for our
biodefense products. We expect that we will selectively pursue
collaboration arrangements in situations in which the
collaborator has particular expertise or resources for the
development or commercialization of our products or product
candidates or to access particular markets.
106
Competition
The biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries are
characterized by rapidly advancing technologies, intense
competition and a strong emphasis on proprietary products. While
we believe that our technologies, knowledge, experience, and
resources provide us with competitive advantages, we face
potential competition from many different sources, including
commercial pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, academic
institutions, government agencies and private and public
research institutions.
GlaxoSmithKline, Sanofi-Aventis, Wyeth, Merck and Chiron
generated approximately 85% of total vaccine revenues in 2005.
The concentration of the industry reflects a number of factors,
including:
|
|
|
the need for significant, long-term investment in research and
development;
|
|
|
the importance of manufacturing capacity, capability and
specialty know-how, such as techniques, processes and biological
starting materials; and
|
|
|
the high regulatory burden for prophylactic products, which
generally are administered to healthy people.
|
These factors have created a significant barrier to entry into
the vaccine industry.
Many of our competitors, including those named above, have
significantly greater financial resources and expertise in
research and development, manufacturing, preclinical testing,
conducting clinical trials, obtaining regulatory approvals and
marketing approved products than we do. These companies also
compete with us in recruiting and retaining qualified scientific
and management personnel, as well as in acquiring products,
product candidates and technologies complementary to, or
necessary for, our programs. Smaller or more focused companies,
including Vaxgen, Cangene, Human Genome Sciences, Acambis, Avant
Immunotherapeutics and Avecia, may also prove to be significant
competitors, particularly through collaborative arrangements
with large and established companies.
Our commercial opportunity could be reduced or eliminated if our
competitors develop and commercialize products that are safer,
more effective, have fewer side effects, are more convenient or
are less expensive than any products that we may develop. In
addition, we may not be able to compete effectively if our
products and product candidates do not satisfy government
procurement requirements, particularly requirements of the
U.S. government with respect to biodefense products.
Any immunobiotic product candidates that we successfully develop
and commercialize is likely to compete with currently marketed
products, such as vaccines and therapeutics, including
antibiotics, and with other product candidates that are in
development for the same indications.
BioThrax. Although BioThrax is the only
product approved by the FDA for human use for the prevention of
anthrax infection, we face significant competition for the
supply of this vaccine to the U.S. government. The NIAID
Biodefense Research Agenda for CDC Category A Agents includes
the development of an anthrax vaccine based on recombinant
protective antigen. In September 2003, NIAID awarded joint
three-year contracts totaling $151.6 million to VaxGen and
Avecia to fund development of a recombinant protective antigen
anthrax vaccine. In November 2004, HHS awarded VaxGen a contract
with a value of $877.5 million to supply 75 million
doses of recombinant protective antigen vaccine for the
strategic national stockpile. Avecia submitted a competing
proposal to supply vaccine for the strategic national stockpile,
which HHS did not accept. The HHS procurement request was
limited to a recombinant anthrax vaccine. Because BioThrax is
not a recombinant vaccine, BioThrax was precluded from
consideration under that procurement program.
107
The VaxGen vaccine candidate is based on technology developed by
USAMRIID. VaxGen has announced that studies of its vaccine
candidate in animal models have indicated results that are
approximately equivalent to those experienced with BioThrax.
VaxGen has not yet delivered any vaccine doses under its
contract with HHS. In May 2006, VaxGen announced that HHS
unilaterally modified its contract to provide its anthrax
vaccine for the strategic national stockpile. The contract
modification extends the deadlines by which VaxGen is required
to complete various milestones, including deliveries, and
imposes additional requirements for clinical and non-clinical
studies to be completed prior to the initiation of vaccine
deliveries to the strategic national stockpile. VaxGen announced
that meeting the new requirements would delay deliveries to the
strategic national stockpile to the end of 2007 at best or more
likely into 2008. VaxGen is obligated under the modified
contract to initiate deliveries no later than November 2008.
Prior to the modification, VaxGen had stated that it intended to
initiate deliveries by the end of 2006 or early 2007. According
to VaxGen, the new requirements under the contract modification
and the delays in delivery will increase the cost of contract
performance for VaxGen and postpone revenues triggered by
delivery of a vaccine to the stockpile. As a result, VaxGen
announced that it is pursuing financial compensation for the
unilateral contract modifications. In May 2006, an HHS official
stated in Congressional testimony that delays in accelerated
development programs are not unexpected or unprecedented and
that HHS maintains a commitment to develop a next generation
recombinant protective antigen anthrax vaccine.
HPA manufactures an anthrax vaccine for use by the government of
the United Kingdom. In addition, other countries may have
anthrax vaccines for use by or in development for their own
internal purposes.
Other biodefense products. The competition for our
biodefense immunobiotic product candidates includes the
following:
|
|
|
Anthrax immune globulin. Cangene, in collaboration
with the CDC, is currently developing an anthrax immune globulin
using plasma collected from military personnel who have been
vaccinated with BioThrax. In July 2006, HHS exercised an option
under a modification to an existing development and supply
contract for Cangene to supply 10,000 doses of anthrax immune
globulin for the strategic national stockpile. In June 2006, HHS
awarded a contract to Human Genome Sciences to supply 20,000
treatment courses of a monoclonal antibody to Bacillus
anthracis, referred to as ABthrax, for the strategic
national stockpile.
|
|
|
Recombinant bivalent botulinum vaccine. DynPort
Vaccine Company has a recombinant bivalent botulinum vaccine in
Phase I clinical development with funding from the DoD and
NIAID.
|
|
|
Botulinum immune globulin. The current recommended
therapy for clinical symptoms of botulism following exposure
consists of passive immunization with an immune globulin
derivied from equine plasma. In June 2006, HHS awarded a
five-year development and supply contract to Cangene for a
heptavalent botulinum immune globulin derived from equine
plasma. The contract provides for the supply of 200,000 doses of
a botulinum immune globulin for the strategic national stockpile.
|
BioThrax and our biodefense product candidates also face
competition for BioShield funds from other defensive measures,
including protective gear such as bio-suits and gas masks.
Commercial products. The competition for our
commercial immunobiotic product candidates includes the
following:
|
|
|
Typhoid vaccine. One oral typhoid vaccine and one
injectable typhoid vaccine are currently approved and
administered in the United States and Europe. In addition,
combination vaccines are available for the prevention of
hepatitis A and typhoid infections. Antibiotics typically are
used to treat typhoid after infection. For more information, see
Products Commercial
business Typhoid vaccine. We
|
108
|
|
|
believe that Avant Immunotherapeutics Inc. has an oral, single
dose, live attenuated typhoid vaccine candidate in Phase I
clinical development with funding from NIAID.
|
|
|
|
Hepatitis B therapeutic vaccine. There is no vaccine
currently on the market that is licensed for therapeutic use for
hepatitis B infection. Currently available therapies for this
patient population consist mainly of antiviral drugs, such as an
immunotherapy with interferons. For more information, see
Products Commercial
business Hepatitis B therapeutic vaccine.
Several other companies have vaccine candidates in clinical
development, including Enzo Biochem, Oxxon Therapeutics and
Genencor International.
|
|
|
|
Group B streptococcus vaccine. The existing method
of prevention of group B streptococcus infection in neonates is
the targeted administration of intravenous antibiotics to women
during labor. A number of competitors have passive immune
vaccines in preclinical development.
|
|
|
Chlamydia vaccine. There is no vaccine currently on
the market for chlamydia, and we are not aware of any competing
chlamydia vaccine candidate in clinical development. Several
competitors may have chlamydia vaccine candidates in preclinical
development. Screening tests and effective antibiotic treatments
have been effective at containing chlamydia in the United States
and Europe.
|
|
|
Meningitis B vaccine. Currently, there is no
meningitis vaccine on the market that is protective against
group B meningococcal infection. Novartis markets a meningitis B
vaccine in New Zealand to people under the age of 20 and is also
developing a broad coverage protein subunit vaccine candidate.
Current meningitis B treatment strategies include antibiotics
and clinical support.
|
Intellectual
property and licenses
Our success, particularly with respect to our commercial
business, depends in part on our ability to obtain and maintain
proprietary protection for our product candidates, technology
and know-how, to operate without infringing the proprietary
rights of others and to prevent others from infringing our
proprietary rights. Our policy is to seek to protect our
proprietary position by, among other methods, filing U.S. and
foreign patent applications related to our proprietary
technology, inventions, and improvements that are important to
the development of our business. U.S. patents generally
have a term of 20 years from the date of nonprovisional
filing. We also rely on trade secrets, know-how, continuing
technological innovation and in-licensing opportunities to
develop and maintain our proprietary position.
As of August 31, 2006, we owned or licensed a total of 40
U.S. patents and 45 U.S. patent applications relating to our
biodefense and commercial product candidates described in this
prospectus, as well as numerous foreign counterparts to many of
these patents and patent applications. Our patent portfolio
includes patents and patent applications with claims directed to
compositions of matter, pharmaceutical formulations and methods
of use.
We consider the patent rights that we have licensed from HPA
relating to our recombinant bivalent botulinum vaccine candidate
and our botulinum toxoid vaccine, which we plan to use in the
development of our botulinum immune globulin candidate, to be
most important to the protection of our biodefense product
portfolio. These patents rights are described below under
License agreements HPA
agreements.
We consider the following patents that we own or license to be
most important to the protection of our vaccine candidates in
our commercial business that are in clinical development.
|
|
|
Typhoid vaccine. We hold five U.S. patents
relating to our typhoid vaccine candidate. Some of these patents
have claims to the composition of matter of the vaccine
candidate and methods of use of
|
109
|
|
|
attenuated Salmonella typhi bacteria as vaccines for the
treatment and prevention of typhoid and for the delivery of
vaccine antigens. In addition, we have two pending
U.S. patent applications with claims to additional
compositions and methods of therapy that are generally related
to our typhoid vaccine candidate. Our issued U.S. patents
expire, and, if issued, our U.S. patent applications would
expire, between 2015 and 2020. We hold 25 foreign counterparts
to our issued U.S. patents relating to our typhoid vaccine
candidate, including counterparts under the European Patent
Convention and in Japan, that expire, and 31 foreign patent
applications that, if issued, would expire, between 2015 and
2020.
|
|
|
|
Hepatitis B therapeutic vaccine. Our hepatitis B
therapeutic vaccine candidate uses our proprietary
spi-VEC oral delivery system technology to deliver
hepatitis B core antigen to the human immune system.
Spi-VEC is based on our live attenuated typhoid vaccine
candidate and employs recombinant technology to insert the gene
for hepatitis B core into the live attenuated Salmonella
bacteria. As a result, the patents relating to our typhoid
vaccine candidate also protect our hepatitis B therapeutic
vaccine candidate. We also hold one U.S. patent with claims
to the use of attenuated Salmonella organisms for the
delivery of hepatitis B vaccine antigens, which expires in 2019.
In addition, we have one pending U.S. patent application
relating to our hepatitis B therapeutic vaccine candidate, which
if issued also would expire in 2019. We have four foreign patent
applications relating to our hepatitis B therapeutic vaccine
candidate that, if issued, would expire in 2019.
|
|
|
Group B streptococcus vaccine. We hold two
U.S. patents relating to our group B streptococcus vaccine
candidate with claims to the composition of matter of the
vaccine candidate and methods of use for the prevention or
treatment of infection caused by Streptococcus
agalactiae. In addition, we have four pending
U.S. patent applications with claims to additional
compositions and methods of therapy relating to our group B
streptococcus vaccine candidate. Our issued U.S. patents expire,
and, if issued, our U.S. patent applications would expire,
between 2019 and 2022. We hold 19 foreign counterparts to our
issued U.S. patents relating to our group B streptococcus
vaccine candidate, including counterparts under the European
Patent Convention and in Japan, that expire, and 39 foreign
patent applications that, if issued, would expire, in 2019.
|
|
|
STM technology. We jointly own with Imperial College
Innovations Limited patents with claims to methods for the
identification of virulence genes using our signature tagged
mutagenesis, or STM, technology, which we used to identify and
develop the gene mutations that form the basis of our typhoid
vaccine and hepatitis B therapeutic vaccine candidates. We also
jointly own with Imperial Innovations the composition of matter
patents covering these gene mutations. We have exclusive rights,
even as to Imperial Innovations, under these jointly owned
patents in all fields of use, except in the field of diagnosis,
prevention, treatment, or palliation of microbial diseases,
disorders and infections in humans and animals where our rights
are generally non-exclusive and are subject to existing license
agreements with third parties. Because our typhoid vaccine and
hepatitis B therapeutic vaccine candidates are outside of this
non-exclusive field of use, we have exclusive rights with
respect to these vaccine candidates. We exclusively own the
composition of matter patents covering the specific combination
of mutations employed in our typhoid vaccine and hepatitis B
therapeutic vaccine candidates.
|
The patent positions of companies like ours are generally
uncertain and involve complex legal and factual questions. Our
ability to maintain and solidify our proprietary position for
our technology will depend on our success in obtaining effective
claims and enforcing those claims once granted. We do not know
whether any of our patent applications or those patent
applications that we license will result in the issuance of any
patents. Our issued patents and those that may issue in the
future, or those licensed to us, may be challenged, invalidated
or circumvented, which could limit our ability to stop
competitors from marketing related products or the length of
term of patent protection that we may have for our
110
products. In addition, our competitors may independently develop
similar technologies or duplicate any technology developed by
us, and the rights granted under any issued patents may not
provide us with any meaningful competitive advantages against
these competitors. Furthermore, because of the extensive time
required for development, testing and regulatory review of a
potential product, it is possible that, before any of our
products can be commercialized, any related patent may expire or
remain in force for only a short period following
commercialization, thereby reducing any advantage of the patent.
We also rely on trade secrets relating to manufacturing
processes and product development to protect our business.
Because we do not have patent protection for BioThrax, the label
expansions and improvements that we are pursuing for BioThrax or
our anthrax immune globulin candidate, our only intellectual
property protection for BioThrax and our anthrax immune globulin
candidate is confidentiality regarding our manufacturing
capability and specialty know-how, such as techniques, processes
and biological starting materials. However, these types of trade
secrets can be difficult to protect. We seek to protect this
confidential information, in part, with agreements with our
employees, consultants, scientific advisors and contractors. We
also seek to preserve the integrity and confidentiality of our
data and trade secrets by maintaining physical security of our
premises and physical and electronic security of our information
technology systems. While we have confidence in these
individuals, organizations and systems, agreements or security
measures may be breached, and we may not have adequate remedies
for any breach. In addition, our trade secrets may otherwise
become known or be independently discovered by competitors. To
the extent that our consultants or contractors use intellectual
property owned by others in their work for us, disputes may
arise as to the rights in related or resulting know-how and
inventions.
License
agreements
We are a party to a number of license agreements under which we
license patents, patent applications, and other intellectual
property. We enter into these agreements to augment our owned
intellectual property. These agreements impose various diligence
and financial payment obligations on us. We expect to continue
to enter into these types of license agreements in the future.
The only existing licenses that we consider to be material to
our business, are our agreements with HPA, which are described
below.
HPA agreements. In November 2004, we entered into
two separate license agreements with HPA for our botulinum
toxoid vaccine and our recombinant bivalent botulinum vaccine
candidate. Under the license agreements, we obtained the
exclusive, worldwide right to develop, manufacture and
commercialize pharmaceutical products that consist of botulinum
toxoid components or recombinant botulinum toxin components for
the prevention or treatment of illness in humans caused by
exposure to the botulinum toxin, subject to HPAs
non-exclusive right to make, use or sell recombinant botulinum
products to meet public health requirements in the United
Kingdom.
The licensed patent portfolio includes one U.S. patent with
claims to the composition of matter of recombinant components of
Clostridium botulinum, which expires in 2016. Additional
composition of matter and method of use claims are pending in
three U.S. patent applications, which if issued as patents
also would expire in 2016. The licensed portfolio also includes
seven foreign applications, which if issued would expire in 2016.
Under each license agreement, we are required to pay HPA
royalties on sales of the licensed product by us, our affiliates
or third party sublicensees in the major market countries of the
United States, United Kingdom, France, Germany, Italy and Japan,
and a separate royalty on sales of the licensed product by us
and our affiliates in any other country.
111
Under each license agreement, we are generally obligated to use
commercially reasonable efforts to respond to applicable
solicitations or procurement proposals from, and to enter into
contracts with, governmental agencies in each of the major
market countries with respect to the licensed product. We may
satisfy this obligation by filing an IND with respect to a
licensed product by November 2009. If we fail to file an IND
within that time period under either of the license agreements,
we are obligated to pay HPA an annual fee until an IND has been
filed.
In November 2004, we also entered into two separate development
agreements with HPA pursuant to which HPA agreed to conduct
specified tests, studies and other development activities with
respect to the botulinum toxoid product and the recombinant
botulinum product in accordance with mutually-agreed development
plans. We have paid minimum contractual commitments of
$1.0 million under each development agreement to compensate
HPA for this development work. HPA also agreed to provide us
with clinical supplies of the botulinum toxoid product and the
recombinant botulinum product for clinical trials.
The term of each development agreement lasts until the
development activities are completed. HPA may terminate each
development agreement as a result of our uncured material breach
or insolvency. Each of the development agreements automatically
terminates if the applicable license agreement is terminated.
The term of each license agreement lasts until the expiration of
all of our royalty obligations under the applicable license
agreement. We are obligated to pay royalties under each license
agreement, on a
product-by-product
and
country-by-country
basis, until the later of seven years from first commercial sale
of the first licensed product in that country and the expiration
of the
last-to-expire
licensed patent in that country. HPA may terminate each license
agreement if we terminate the applicable development agreement
without cause before we have paid, or if HPA terminates such
development agreement due to our failure to pay, the minimum
commitment amount set forth in such development agreement. In
addition, HPA may terminate each license agreement as a result
of our uncured material breach or insolvency.
Government
contracts
We have an ongoing BioThrax supply contract with the DoD, which
purchases BioThrax for immunization of military personnel. In
addition, we supply BioThrax to HHS for placement into the
strategic national stockpile.
Department of Defense. Since 1998, we have been a
party to two supply agreements for BioThrax with the DoD. We
have completed delivery of all of the doses of BioThrax under
our first contract with the DoD. In November 2003, we entered
into a follow-on, second supply contract with the DoD. This
second contract is referred to as an indefinite
delivery/indefinite quantity contract. Under this contract, the
DoD is obligated to acquire a minimum number of doses of
BioThrax and has the right to acquire up to a maximum number of
doses. We invoice the DoD for progress payments under the
contract upon reaching pre-determined process stages in the
manufacture of BioThrax. The contract provides for the supply of
BioThrax to the DoD through September 30, 2006. We expect
to be able to provide all of the remaining doses of BioThrax
under our contract with the DoD within the contract term.
Department of Health and Human Services. In May
2005, we entered into an agreement to supply five million doses
of BioThrax to HHS for placement into the strategic national
stockpile for a fixed price of $123 million. We have
completed delivery of all of the five million doses of BioThrax
to HHS. In May 2006, we entered into a contract modification
with HHS for the delivery of an additional five million doses of
BioThrax to HHS by May 2007 for a fixed price of
$120 million. We expect to complete delivery of all five
million additional doses by the first half of 2007. Our contract
with HHS does not provide for
112
progress payments. We invoice HHS under the contract upon
completing delivery of the specified doses of BioThrax.
U.S. government indemnification. Under
contractual provisions, the U.S. government indemnifies us
against claims by third parties for death, personal injury and
other damages related to BioThrax, including reasonable
litigation and settlement costs, to the extent that the claim or
loss results from specified risks not covered by insurance or
caused by our grossly negligent or criminal behavior. As
required under such contracts, we have notified the DoD of
personal injury claims that have been filed against us as a
result of the vaccination of U.S. military personnel with
BioThrax and are seeking reimbursement from DoD for all costs
incurred in defending these claims. In addition, HHS has agreed
that BioThrax delivered for inclusion in the strategic national
stockpile will not be used in humans unless mutually agreeable
indemnification is approved.
Safety Act and other statutory protections. In
August 2006, the Department of Homeland Security approved our
application under the Safety Act enacted by the
U.S. Congress in 2002 for liability protection for sales of
BioThrax. The Safety Act creates product liability limitations
for qualifying anti-terrorism technologies for claims arising
from or related to an act of terrorism. In addition, the Safety
Act provides a process by which an anti-terrorism technology may
be certified as an approved product by the
Department of Homeland Security and therefore entitled to a
rebuttable presumption that the government contractor defense
applies to sales of the product.
The government contractor defense, under specified
circumstances, extends the sovereign immunity of the United
States to government contractors who manufacture a product for
the government. Specifically, for the government contractor
defense to apply, the government must approve reasonably precise
specifications, the product must conform to those specifications
and the supplier must warn the government about known dangers
arising from the use of the product. We have successfully
asserted the government contractor defense in product liability
litigation in federal district court in Michigan.
As part of the 2006 Defense Authorization Act, the
U.S. Congress adopted the Public Readiness and Emergency
Preparedness Act, which offers targeted liability protections to
those involved in the development, manufacturing and deployment
of pandemic and epidemic products and security countermeasures.
The Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act provides
immunity, subject to limited exceptions, for claims arising out
of, related to or resulting from the administration or use of a
covered countermeasure.
Government
regulation
The FDA and comparable regulatory agencies in state and local
jurisdictions and in foreign countries impose substantial
requirements for the preclinical and clinical development,
manufacture, distribution and marketing of pharmaceutical and
biological products, including immunobiotics. These agencies and
other federal, state and local entities regulate research and
development activities and the testing, manufacture, quality
control, safety, effectiveness, labeling, storage, distribution,
recordkeeping, approval, advertising, sale, promotion, import,
and export of our products and product candidates.
U.S. government
regulation
In the United States, BioThrax and our product candidates are
regulated by the FDA as biological products. Biologics are
subject to regulation under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic
Act, or the FDCA, the Public Health Service Act, or the PHSA,
the regulations promulgated under the FDCA and the PHSA and
other federal, state, and local statutes and regulations.
Violations of regulatory requirements at any stage may result in
various adverse consequences, including delay in approving or
refusal to approve
113
a product. Violations of regulatory requirements also may result
in enforcement actions, including withdrawal of approval,
labeling restrictions, seizure of products, fines, injunctions
or civil or criminal penalties.
The process required by the FDA under these laws before our
product candidates may be marketed in the United States
generally involves the following:
|
|
|
preclinical laboratory and animal tests;
|
|
|
submission to the FDA of an IND, which must become effective
before clinical trials may begin;
|
|
|
completion of human clinical trials and other studies to
establish the safety and efficacy of the proposed product for
each intended use;
|
|
|
FDA review of whether the facility in which the product is
manufactured, processed, packed or held complies with cGMP
requirements designed to assure the products continued
quality; and
|
|
|
submission to the FDA and approval of an NDA in the case of a
drug, or a BLA in the case of a biologic, containing preclinical
and clinical data, proposed labeling and information to
demonstrate that the product will be manufactured to appropriate
standards of identity, purity and quality.
|
The research, development and approval process requires
substantial time, effort and financial resources, and approvals
may not be granted on a timely or commercially viable basis, if
at all.
Preclinical
studies
Preclinical studies include laboratory evaluation of the product
candidate, its chemistry, formulation and stability, as well as
animal studies to assess its potential safety and efficacy. We
submit the results of the preclinical studies, together with
manufacturing information, analytical data and any available
clinical data or literature to the FDA as part of an IND, which
must become effective before we may begin human clinical trials.
The IND submission also contains clinical trial protocols, which
describe the design of the proposed clinical trials. The IND
becomes effective 30 days after the FDA receives the
filing, unless the FDA, within the
30-day time
period, raises concerns or questions about the conduct of the
preclinical trials or the design of the proposed clinical trials
as outlined in the IND. In such a case, the IND sponsor and the
FDA must resolve any outstanding concerns before clinical trials
can begin. In addition, an independent Institutional Review
Board charged with protecting the welfare of human subjects
involved in research at each medical center proposing to conduct
the clinical trials must review and approve any clinical trial.
Furthermore, study subjects must provide informed consent for
their participation in the clinical trial.
Clinical
trials
Human clinical trials are typically conducted in three
sequential phases, which may overlap:
|
|
|
In a Phase I clinical trial, the drug or biologic is
initially administered into healthy human subjects or subjects
with the target condition and tested for safety, dosage
tolerance, absorption, metabolism, distribution and excretion.
|
|
|
In a Phase II clinical trial, the drug or biologic is
administered to a limited subject population to identify
possible adverse effects and safety risks, the efficacy of the
product for specific targeted diseases and dosage tolerance and
optimal dosage.
|
114
|
|
|
A Phase III clinical trial is undertaken if a Phase II
clinical trial demonstrates that a dosage range of the drug or
biologic is effective and has an acceptable safety profile. In a
Phase III clinical trial, the drug or biologic is
administered to an expanded population, often at geographically
dispersed clinical trial sites, to further evaluate dosage and
clinical efficacy and to further test for safety.
|
U.S. law requires that trials to support approval for
product marketing be adequate and well controlled.
In general, this means that pivotal clinical trials typically
must be prospective, randomized, blinded and controlled. The
design of the clinical trials must be described in appropriate
protocols submitted to the FDA and approved by an Institutional
Review Board. Clinical trials typically compare the experimental
product to either a placebo or, in some cases, a product already
approved for the treatment of the applicable disease or
condition. Trials must also be conducted in compliance with good
clinical practice, or GCP, requirements.
In the case of product candidates that are intended to treat
rare life-threatening diseases, such as infection caused by
exposure to the anthrax toxin, conducting controlled clinical
trials to determine efficacy may be unethical or infeasible.
Under regulations issued by the FDA in 2002, often referred to
as the animal rule, the FDA described the
circumstances under which it will rely on evidence from studies
in animals to provide substantial evidence of efficacy for
products for which human efficacy studies are not ethical or
feasible. The animal rule provides that, under these
circumstances, approval of the product can be based on clinical
data from trials in healthy subjects that demonstrate adequate
safety and immunogenicity and efficacy data from adequate and
well controlled animal studies. Among other requirements, the
animal studies must establish that the biological product is
reasonably likely to produce clinical benefits in humans.
Because the FDA must agree that data derived from animal studies
may be extrapolated to establish safety and effectiveness in
humans, these studies add complexity and uncertainty to the
testing and approval process. In addition, products approved
under the animal rule are subject to additional regulation not
normally required of other products. Additional regulation may
include post-marketing study requirements, restrictions imposed
on marketing or distribution or requirements to provide
information to patients.
We may not successfully complete Phase I, Phase II or
Phase III testing of our product candidates within any
specific time period, if at all. Furthermore, the FDA or the
Institutional Review Boards or the sponsor may prevent clinical
trials from beginning or may place clinical trials on hold or
terminate them at any point in this process if, among other
reasons, they conclude that study subjects are being exposed to
an unacceptable health risk.
Marketing
approval
In the United States, the results of product development,
preclinical studies and clinical trials must be submitted to the
FDA for review and approval prior to marketing and commercial
shipment of the product candidate. If the product is regulated
as a drug, an NDA must be submitted and approved before
commercial marketing may begin. If the product is regulated as a
biologic, a BLA must be submitted and approved before commercial
marketing may begin. The NDA or BLA must include a substantial
amount of data and other information concerning the safety and
effectiveness and, in the case of a biologic, purity and potency
of the product candidate from laboratory, animal and clinical
testing, as well as data and information on the finished
product, including manufacturing, product stability and proposed
product labeling.
Each domestic and foreign manufacturing establishment, including
any contract manufacturers we may decide to use, must be listed
in the NDA or BLA and must be registered with the FDA. The FDA
generally will not approve an application until the FDA conducts
a manufacturing inspection, approves the
115
applicable manufacturing process for the drug or biological
product and determines that the facility is in compliance with
cGMP requirements. If the manufacturing facilities and processes
fail to pass the FDA inspection, we will not receive approval to
market these products.
Under applicable laws and FDA regulations, each NDA or BLA
submitted for FDA approval is usually reviewed for
administrative completeness and reviewability within 45 to
60 days following submission of the application. If deemed
complete, the FDA will file the NDA or BLA, thereby
triggering substantive review of the application. The FDA can
refuse to file any NDA or BLA that it deems incomplete or not
properly reviewable.
The FDA may deny an NDA or BLA if the applicable regulatory
criteria are not satisfied or may require additional clinical
data. Even if additional clinical data is submitted, the FDA may
ultimately decide that the NDA or BLA does not satisfy the
criteria for approval. If the FDA approves a product, it may
limit the approved therapeutic uses for the product as described
in the product labeling, require that contraindications, warning
statements or precautions be included in the product labeling,
require that additional studies be conducted following approval
as a condition of the approval, impose restrictions and
conditions on product distribution, prescribing or dispensing in
the form of a risk management plan or otherwise limit the scope
of any approval or post-approval, or limit labeling. Once
issued, the FDA may withdraw product approval if compliance with
regulatory standards is not maintained or if problems occur
after the product reaches the market. In addition, the FDA may
require testing and surveillance programs to monitor the effect
of approved products that have been commercialized. The FDA has
the power to prevent or limit further marketing of a product
based on the results of these post-marketing programs.
Satisfaction of FDA requirements or similar requirements of
state, local and foreign regulatory agencies often takes many
years and the actual time required may vary substantially, based
upon the type, complexity and novelty of the product candidate.
Government regulation may delay or prevent marketing of
potential products for a considerable period of time or
permanently and impose costly procedures upon our activities.
The FDA or other regulatory agencies may not grant approval for
any of our product candidates on a timely basis, or on a
commercially viable basis, if at all. Success in preclinical
testing or early clinical trials does not ensure that later
clinical trials will be successful, and interim results of a
clinical trial do not necessarily predict final results. Data
obtained from preclinical and clinical activities is not always
conclusive and may be susceptible to varying interpretations,
which could delay, limit or prevent regulatory approval. Even if
a product candidate receives regulatory approval, the approval
may be significantly limited to specific indications.
Furthermore, later discovery of previously unknown problems with
a product may result in restrictions on the product or even
complete withdrawal of the product from the market.
Ongoing
regulation
Any products manufactured or distributed by us pursuant to FDA
clearances or approvals are subject to pervasive and continuing
regulation by the FDA, including:
|
|
|
recordkeeping requirements;
|
|
|
periodic reporting requirements;
|
|
|
cGMP requirements related to all stages of manufacturing,
testing, storage, packaging, labeling and distribution of
finished dosage forms of the product;
|
116
|
|
|
reporting of adverse experiences with the drug or
biologic; and
|
|
|
advertising and promotion restrictions.
|
The FDAs rules for advertising and promotion require in
particular that we not promote our products for unapproved uses
and that our promotion be fairly balanced and adequately
substantiated. We must also submit appropriate new and
supplemental applications and obtain FDA approval for some
changes to the approved product, product labeling or
manufacturing process.
Drug and biologics manufacturers and their subcontractors are
required to register their establishments with the FDA and state
agencies. The cGMP requirements for biological products are
extensive and require considerable time, resources, and ongoing
investment to comply. The regulations require manufacturers to
establish validated systems to ensure that products meet high
standards of sterility, purity and potency. The requirements
apply to all stages of the manufacturing process, including the
synthesis, processing, sterilization, packaging, labeling,
storage and shipment of the biological product. The regulations
require investigation and correction of any deviations from cGMP
and impose documentation requirements upon us and any third
party manufacturers that we may decide to use. Manufacturing
establishments are subject to periodic unannounced inspections
by the FDA and state agencies for compliance with cGMP. The FDA
is authorized to inspect manufacturing facilities without a
warrant at reasonable times and in a reasonable manner. We or
our present or future suppliers may not be able to comply with
cGMP and other FDA regulatory requirements.
In addition, cGMP requirements are constantly evolving, and new
or different requirements may apply in the future. We, our
collaborators or third party contract manufacturers may not be
able to comply with the applicable regulations. After regulatory
approvals are obtained, the subsequent discovery of previously
unknown problems, or the failure to maintain compliance with
existing or new regulatory requirements, may result in:
|
|
|
restrictions on the marketing or manufacturing of a product;
|
|
|
warning letters;
|
|
|
withdrawal of the product from the market;
|
|
|
refusal to approve pending applications or supplements to
approved applications;
|
|
|
voluntary or mandatory product recall;
|
|
|
fines or disgorgement of profits or revenue;
|
|
|
suspension or withdrawal of regulatory approvals;
|
|
|
refusal to permit the import or export of products;
|
|
|
product seizure; and
|
|
|
injunctions or the imposition of civil or criminal penalties.
|
The FDAs policies may change and additional government
regulations may be enacted that could prevent or delay
regulatory approval of our product candidates. Moreover,
increased attention to the containment of health care costs in
the United States and in foreign markets could result in new
government regulations. We cannot predict the likelihood, nature
or extent of adverse governmental regulation that might arise
from future legislative or administrative action in the United
States or abroad. We and our product candidates are also subject
to a variety of state laws and regulations in those states or
localities
117
where they are or will be marketed. Any applicable state or
local regulations may hinder our ability to market our product
candidates in those states or localities.
Biologics review
for BioThrax
The NIH originally approved the manufacture and sale of BioThrax
in 1970 pursuant to the regulatory process in effect at the
time. In 1972, responsibility for approving biological products
was transferred from the NIH to the FDA. Following that transfer
of responsibility, the FDA established procedures for reviewing
the safety, efficacy and labeling of biological products,
including BioThrax, that had been approved by the NIH prior to
July 1, 1972. Under the biologics review process, the FDA
appointed advisory panels of independent experts to evaluate
previously approved biologic products and to advise the FDA as
to whether the products were safe, effective and not misbranded.
After reviewing a particular panels recommendation, the
FDA publishes the panels report, along with a proposed
order recommending classification of the biological product into
one of three categories: Category I, safe, effective and
not misbranded; Category II, unsafe, ineffective or
misbranded; or Category III, not within Category I or
Category II because further studies are required. After a
ninety-day comment period, the FDA reviews any comments and then
publishes a final rule or order classifying the product at issue
as Category I, II or III. Only after publishing a
final order does the FDA then take action with respect to
individual products. For example, if the biologics review
determines that a specific product is not safe and effective,
the FDA would initiate the process of revoking the approval for
the product. Likewise, if further study is required before the
status of a product can be determined, the sponsor would be
required to come forward with additional data within prescribed
time periods. The FDA completed the biologics review for
BioThrax in 2005, classifying the product as Category I,
safe, effective and not misbranded.
Regulation of
immune globulin products
Products derived from humans, including our immune globulin
candidates, are subject to additional regulation. The FDA
regulates the screening and vaccination of human donors and the
process of collecting source plasma. FDA regulations require
that all donors be tested for suitability and provide informed
consent prior to vaccination or collection of source plasma for
the immune globulin. The vaccination and collection of source
plasma may also be subject to Institutional Review Board
approval or to an IND, depending on factors such as whether
donors are to be vaccinated according to the vaccines
approved schedule. The FDA also regulates the process of
testing, storage and processing of source plasma, which is used
to manufacture immune globulin candidates for use in clinical
trials and, after approval by the FDA, for commercial
distribution.
Regulation related
to bioterrorism counteragents and pandemic
preparedness
Because some of our products or product candidates are intended
for the treatment of diseases that may result from acts of
bioterrorism or for pandemic preparedness, they may be subject
to the specific requirements described below.
Project
BioShield
The Project BioShield Act of 2004 provides expedited procedures
for bioterrorism related procurement, hiring and awarding of
research grants, making it easier for HHS to quickly commit
funds to countermeasure projects. Project BioShield relaxes
procedures under the Federal Acquisition Regulation for
procuring up to $25 million of property or services used in
performing, administering or supporting biomedical
countermeasure research and development. In addition, if the
Secretary of HHS deems that
118
there is a pressing need, Project BioShield authorizes the
Secretary to use an expedited award process, rather than the
normal peer review process, for grants, contracts and
cooperative agreements related to biomedical countermeasure
research and development activity. This power is limited to
awards of $1.5 million or less.
Under Project BioShield, the Secretary of HHS, with the
concurrence of the Secretary of the Department of Homeland
Security and upon the approval of the President, can contract to
purchase unapproved countermeasures for the strategic national
stockpile in specified circumstances. Congress is notified of a
recommendation for a stockpile purchase after Presidential
approval. Project BioShield specifies that a company supplying
the countermeasure to the strategic national stockpile is paid
on delivery of a substantial portion of the countermeasure. To
be eligible for purchase under these provisions, the Secretary
of HHS must determine that there is sufficient and satisfactory
clinical results or research data, including data, if available,
from preclinical and clinical trials, to support a reasonable
conclusion that the countermeasure will qualify for approval or
licensing within eight years. Project BioShield also allows the
Secretary of HHS to authorize the emergency use of medical
products that have not yet been approved by the FDA. To exercise
this authority, the Secretary of HHS must conclude that:
|
|
|
the agent for which the countermeasure is designed can cause
serious or life-threatening disease;
|
|
|
the product may reasonably be believed to be effective in
detecting, diagnosing, treating or preventing the disease;
|
|
|
the known and potential benefits of the product outweigh its
known and potential risks;
|
|
|
there is no adequate alternative to the product that is approved
and available; and
|
|
|
any other criteria prescribed in regulations are met.
|
Although this provision permits the Secretary of HHS to
circumvent the FDA approval process, its use would be limited to
rare circumstances. We cannot predict whether these authorities
would be applicable to any of our current product candidates.
Safety
Act
The Safety Act enacted by the U.S. Congress in 2002 creates
product liability limitations for qualifying anti-terrorism
technologies for claims arising from or related to an act of
terrorism. In addition, the Safety Act provides a process by
which an anti-terrorism technology may be certified as an
approved product by the Department of Homeland
Security and therefore entitled to a rebuttable presumption that
the government contractor defense applies to sales of the
product. The government contractor defense, under specified
circumstances, extends the sovereign immunity of the United
States to government contractors who manufacture a product for
the government. Specifically, for the government contractor
defense to apply, the government must approve reasonably precise
specifications, the product must conform to those specifications
and the supplier must warn the government about known dangers
arising from the use of the product. Although sales of BioThrax
are subject to the protections of the Safety Act, our product
candidates may not qualify for the protections of the Safety Act
or the government contractor defense.
Public
Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act
The Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act enacted by
the U.S. Congress in 2005 provides immunity for
manufacturers from all claims under state or federal law for
loss arising out of the administration or use of a
covered countermeasure. Covered
countermeasures include security
119
countermeasures and qualified pandemic or epidemic
products, including products intended to diagnose or treat
pandemic or epidemic disease, such as pandemic vaccines, as well
as treatments intended to address conditions caused by such
products. For these immunities to apply, the Secretary of HHS
must issue a declaration in cases of public health emergency or
credible risk of a future public health emergency.
In the declaration, the Secretary may recommend the manufacture,
administration or use of one or more countermeasures. Once the
Secretary issues a declaration invoking the immunity provisions
of the Act for the specified countermeasures, immunity applies
with regard to administration or use of those countermeasures
during the effective period of the declaration and for the
diseases specified in the declaration. However, injured persons
may still bring a suit for willful misconduct
against the manufacturer under some circumstances. A declaration
also triggers the establishment of a compensation program. If
Congress funds the compensation program, persons injured by a
qualified countermeasure must first seek compensation under the
program before they may bring a suit alleging willful
misconduct. We cannot predict whether our products or product
candidates would fall within the provisions of this law, whether
Congress would fund the relevant compensation program or if the
necessary prerequisites for immunity would be triggered.
Foreign
regulation
In addition to regulations in the United States, we will be
subject to a variety of foreign regulations governing clinical
trials and commercial sales and distribution of our products.
Whether or not we obtain FDA approval for a product, we must
obtain approval of a product by the comparable regulatory
authorities of foreign countries before we can commence clinical
trials or marketing of the product in those countries. The
actual time required to obtain clearance to market a product in
a particular foreign jurisdiction may vary substantially, based
upon the type, complexity and novelty of the pharmaceutical
product candidate and the specific requirements of that
jurisdiction. The requirements governing the conduct of clinical
trials, marketing authorization, pricing and reimbursement vary
from country to country.
In the European Union, our products are subject to extensive
regulatory requirements. As in the United States, the marketing
of medicinal products has for many years been subject to the
granting of marketing authorizations by regulatory agencies.
European Union member states require both regulatory clearance
and a favorable ethics committee opinion prior to the
commencement of a clinical trial, whatever its phase. Under
European Union regulatory systems, we may submit marketing
authorization applications either under a centralized or
decentralized procedure.
The centralized procedure provides for the grant of a single
marketing authorization that is valid for all European Union
member states. The centralized procedure is currently mandatory
for products developed by means of a biotechnological process,
including recombinant DNA technology, the controlled expression
of genes coding for biologically active proteins and monoclonal
antibody methods, and new chemical entities for the treatment of
acquired immune deficiency syndrome, cancer and
neurodegenerative disorder or diabetes. Beginning in May 2008,
the centralized procedure will be mandatory for products for the
treatment of auto-immune diseases and other immune dysfunctions
and viral diseases. The centralized process is optional for
medicines that constitute a significant therapeutic,
scientific or technical innovation or for which a
centralized process is in the interest of patients.
The decentralized procedure provides for mutual recognition of
national approval decisions. Under this procedure, the holder of
a national marketing authorization may submit an application to
the remaining member states. Within 90 days of receiving
the applications and an assessment report, each member state
must decide whether to recognize approval. If a member state
does not recognize the marketing
120
authorization, the disputed points are eventually referred to
the European Commission, whose decision is binding on all member
states.
Unlike the United States, the European Union member states do
not have separate rules or review procedures for biologics and
vaccines. Regulators apply broadly consistent principles and
standards when reviewing applications, although they accept that
the nature of the efficacy data supporting a vaccine application
is likely to differ from the data that would support
applications for the majority of therapeutic products. However,
there are special procedures for some types of vaccine products.
For example, influenza vaccines are subject to accelerated
review and approval each year, following the release by the
World Health Organization of the annual influenza strains.
European Union member states have the discretion to require that
marketing authorization holders submit samples of live vaccines
or other immunological products for examination and formal batch
release by a government control laboratory prior to release onto
the market.
Orphan
drugs
Under the Orphan Drug Act, special incentives exist for sponsors
to develop products for rare diseases or conditions, which are
defined to include those diseases or conditions that affect
fewer than 200,000 people in the United States. A vaccine also
can receive these incentives if it is expected to be
administered to fewer than 200,000 persons per year. Sponsors
may request that the FDA grant a drug orphan designation prior
to approval. Biologics may qualify for designation as an orphan
drug.
Products designated as orphan drugs are eligible for special
grant funding for research and development, FDA assistance with
the review of clinical trial protocols, potential tax credits
for research, reduced filing fees for marketing applications and
a special seven-year period of market exclusivity after
marketing approval. Orphan drug exclusivity prevents FDA
approval of applications by others for the same drug or biologic
intended for use for the designated orphan disease or condition.
The FDA may approve a subsequent application from another person
if the FDA determines that the application is for a different
product or different use, or if the FDA determines that the
subsequent product is clinically superior or that the holder of
the initial orphan drug approval cannot assure the availability
of sufficient quantities of the drug or biologic to meet the
publics need. The FDA also may approve another application
for the same drug or biologic that has orphan exclusivity but
for a different use, in which case the competing drug or
biologic could be prescribed by physicians outside its FDA
approval for the orphan use notwithstanding the existence of
orphan exclusivity. A grant of an orphan designation is not a
guarantee that a product will be approved.
The European Union operates an equivalent system to encourage
the development and marketing of medicinal products for rare
diseases. Applications for orphan designations are submitted to
the European Medicines Agency and reviewed by a Committee on
Orphan Medicinal Products, comprising representatives of the
member states, patient groups and other persons. The final
decision is made by the European Commission.
A product can be designated as an orphan drug if it is intended
for either a life-threatening or chronically debilitating
condition affecting not more than 5 in 10,000 persons in the
European Community when the application is made or a
life-threatening, seriously debilitating or serious and chronic
condition in the European Community for which, without
incentives, it is unlikely that the marketing of the product in
the Community would generate sufficient return to justify the
necessary investment. In either case, the applicant must also
demonstrate that there exists no satisfactory method of
diagnosis, prevention or treatment of the condition in question
that has been authorized in the European Community or, if such
method exists, that the medicinal product will be of significant
benefit to those affected by that condition.
121
After a marketing authorization has been granted in the European
Community for an orphan product, no similar product may be
approved for a period of ten years. At the end of the fifth
year, however, any member state can initiate proceedings to
restrict that period to six years if it believes the criteria
for orphan designation no longer apply, for example, because the
prevalence of disease has increased or the manufacturer is
earning an unreasonable profit. In addition, competitive
products can be approved during the marketing exclusivity period
if they are not similar to the original product or are safer,
more effective or otherwise clinically superior to it.
None of our products or product candidates have been designated
as orphan drugs.
Reimbursement and
pricing controls
In many of the markets where we or our potential collaborators
would commercialize a product following regulatory approval, the
prices of pharmaceutical products are subject to direct price
controls by law and to reimbursement programs with varying price
control mechanisms.
In the United States, there has been an increased focus on drug
and biologic pricing in recent years. Although there are
currently no direct government price controls over private
sector purchases in the United States, federal legislation
requires pharmaceutical manufacturers to pay prescribed rebates
on specified drugs and biologics to enable them to be eligible
for reimbursement under public health care programs such as
Medicaid. Vaccines are generally exempt from these programs.
Various states have adopted further mechanisms that seek to
control drug and biologic prices, including by disfavoring
higher priced products and by seeking supplemental rebates from
manufacturers. Managed care has also become a potent force in
the market place that increases downward pressure on the prices
of pharmaceutical products. Federal legislation, enacted in
December 2003, has altered the way in which
physician-administered drugs and biologics covered by Medicare
are reimbursed. Under the new reimbursement methodology,
physicians are reimbursed based on a products
average sales price. This new reimbursement
methodology has generally led to lower reimbursement levels. The
new federal legislation also has added an outpatient
prescription drug benefit to Medicare, which went into effect in
January 2006. These benefits will be provided primarily through
private entities, which we expect will attempt to negotiate
price concessions from pharmaceutical manufacturers.
Public and private health care payors control costs and
influence drug and biologic pricing through a variety of
mechanisms, including through negotiating discounts with the
manufacturers and through the use of tiered formularies and
other mechanisms that provide preferential access to particular
products over others within a therapeutic class. Payors also set
other criteria to govern the uses of a drug or biologic that
will be deemed medically appropriate and therefore reimbursed or
otherwise covered. In particular, many public and private health
care payors limit reimbursement and coverage to the uses that
are either approved by the FDA or that are supported by other
appropriate evidence, such as published medical literature, and
appear in a recognized compendium. Drug compendia are
publications that summarize the available medical evidence for
particular drug products and identify which uses are supported
or not supported by the available evidence, whether or not such
uses have been approved by the FDA.
Most non-pediatric commercial vaccines are purchased and paid
for, or reimbursed by, managed care organizations, other private
health plans or public insurers or paid for directly by
patients. In the United States, pediatric vaccines are funded by
a variety of federal entitlements and grants, as well as state
appropriations. The CDC currently distributes pediatric grant
funding on a discretionary basis under the Public Health Service
Act. Federal and state governments purchase the majority of all
pediatric vaccines produced in the United States, primarily
through the Vaccine for Children Program implemented by the
U.S. Congress in 1994. The Vaccine for Children Program is
designed to help pay for vaccinations to
122
disadvantaged children, including uninsured children, children
on Medicaid and underinsured children who receive vaccinations
at federally qualified health centers.
Different pricing and reimbursement schemes exist in other
countries. In the European Community, governments influence the
price of pharmaceutical products through their pricing and
reimbursement rules and control of national health care systems
that fund a large part of the cost of those products to
consumers. Some jurisdictions operate positive and negative list
systems under which products may only be marketed once a
reimbursement price has been agreed. Other member states allow
companies to fix their own prices for medicines, but monitor and
control company profits. The downward pressure on health care
costs in general, particularly prescription drugs, has become
very intense. As a result, increasingly high barriers are being
erected to the entry of new products. In addition, in some
countries cross-border imports from low-priced markets exert a
commercial pressure on pricing within a country.
Regulations
regarding government contracting
Our status as a government contractor in the United States and
elsewhere means that we are also subject to various statutes and
regulations, including the Federal Acquisition Regulation, which
govern the procurement of goods and services by agencies of the
United States and other countries. These governing statutes and
regulations can impose stricter penalties than those normally
applicable to commercial contracts, such as criminal and civil
damages liability and suspension and debarment from future
government contracting. In addition, pursuant to various
statutes and regulations, our government contracts can be
subject to unilateral termination or modification by the
government for convenience in the United States and elsewhere,
detailed auditing requirements, statutorily controlled pricing,
sourcing and subcontracting restrictions and statutorily
mandated processes for adjudicating contract disputes.
Vaccine Injury
Compensation Program
Because the cost of vaccine related litigation had reduced
significantly the number of manufacturers willing to sell
childhood vaccines, the U.S. Congress enacted the National
Childhood Vaccine Injury Act in 1986. The Vaccine Injury
Compensation Program established under the Vaccine Injury Act is
a no-fault compensation program funded by an excise tax on each
dose of a covered vaccine and is designed to streamline the
process of seeking compensation for those injured by childhood
vaccines. The Vaccine Injury Act requires all individuals
injured by a vaccine to go through the compensation program
before pursuing others remedies. Although claimants can reject
decisions issued under the compensation program and pursue
subsequent legal action through the courts, the Vaccine Injury
Act determines the circumstances under which a manufacturer may
be found liable in a civil action. The Vaccine Injury Act may
not protect us if our products or product candidates cause
injury.
Hazardous
materials and select agents
Our development and manufacturing processes involve the use of
hazardous materials, including chemicals, bacteria, viruses and
radioactive materials, and produce waste products. Accordingly,
we are subject to federal, state and local laws and regulations
governing the use, manufacture, storage, handling and disposal
of these materials. In addition to complying with environmental
and occupational health and safety laws, we must comply with
special regulations relating to biosafety administered by the
CDC, HHS and the DoD.
The Public Health Security and Bioterrorism Preparedness and
Response Act and the Agricultural Protection Act require us to
register with the CDC and the Department of Agriculture our
possession, use or transfer of select biological agents or
toxins that could pose a threat to public health and safety, to
animal or plant health or to animal or plant products. This
legislation requires increased safeguards and
123
security measures for these select agents and toxins, including
controlled access and the screening of entities and personnel,
and establishes a comprehensive national database of registered
entities.
In particular, this legislation and related regulations require
that we:
|
|
|
develop and implement biosafety, security and emergency response
plans;
|
|
|
restrict access to select agents and toxins;
|
|
|
provide appropriate training to our employees for safety,
security and emergency response;
|
|
|
comply with strict requirements governing transfer of select
agents and toxins;
|
|
|
provide timely notice to the government of any theft, loss or
release of a select agent or toxin; and
|
|
|
maintain detailed records of information necessary to give a
complete accounting of all activities related to select agents
and toxins.
|
Other
regulations
In the United States and elsewhere, the research, manufacturing,
distribution, sale and promotion of drug and biological products
are potentially subject to regulation by various federal, state
and local authorities in addition to the FDA, including the
Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, other divisions of
HHS, such as the Office of Inspector General, the
U.S. Department of Justice and individual
U.S. Attorney offices within the Department of Justice and
state and local governments. For example, sales, marketing and
scientific and educational grant programs must comply with the
anti-kickback and fraud and abuse provisions of the Social
Security Act, the False Claims Act, the privacy provisions of
the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act and
similar state laws. Pricing and rebate programs must comply with
the Medicaid rebate requirements of the Omnibus Budget
Reconciliation Act of 1990 and the Veterans Health Care Act of
1992. All of these activities are also potentially subject to
federal and state consumer protection and unfair competition
laws.
Outside the United States, advertising and promotion of
medicinal products, along with associated commercial practices,
are often subject to significant government regulation. We are
subject to the Export Administration Regulations implemented by
the Bureau of Industry and Security governing the export of
BioThrax and technology for the development and use of pathogens
and toxins used in the development and manufacture of BioThrax
and our product candidates. In connection with our international
sales activity, we are also subject to export regulations and
other sanctions imposed by the Office of Foreign Assets Control
of the Department of the Treasury, the antiboycott provisions of
the Export Administration Act and the Internal Revenue Code and
the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act.
Litigation
BioThrax product liability litigation. We currently
are a defendant in three federal lawsuits filed on behalf of
three individuals vaccinated with BioThrax by the U.S. Army
on October 14, 2005, January 9, 2006 and
January 17, 2006 that claim damages resulting from personal
injuries allegedly suffered because of the vaccination. The
plaintiffs in each of these three lawsuits claim different
injuries and seek varying amounts of damages. The first
plaintiff alleges that the vaccine caused erosive rheumatoid
arthritis and requests damages in excess of $1 million. The
second plaintiff alleges that the vaccine caused Bells
palsy and other related conditions and requests damages in
excess of $75,000. The third plaintiff alleges that the vaccine
caused a condition that originally was diagnosed as encephalitis
related to a gastrointestinal infection and caused him to fall
into a coma for many weeks and requests damages in excess of
$10 million.
124
We have moved to dismiss these three lawsuits for lack of
personal jurisdiction, or, in the alternative to transfer the
lawsuits to federal court in Michigan. These lawsuits are in the
preliminary stages of litigation, and we believe that we are
entitled to indemnification under our contract with the DoD for
legal fees and any damages that may result from these claims. In
April 2006, the U.S. District Court for the Western
District of Michigan entered summary judgment in our favor in
four other lawsuits asserting similar claims asserted by
approximately 120 individuals. These four lawsuits had
previously been consolidated in the Michigan District Court.
The District Courts ruling in the consolidated Michigan
cases was based on two grounds. First, the District Court found
that we are entitled to protection under a Michigan state
statute that provides immunity for drug manufacturers if the
drug was approved by the FDA and its labeling is in compliance
with FDA approval, unless the plaintiffs establish that the
manufacturer intentionally withheld or misrepresented
information to the FDA and the drug would not have been
approved, or the FDA would have withdrawn approval, if the
information had been accurately submitted. Second, the District
Court found that we are entitled to the immunity afforded by the
government contractor defense, which, under specified
circumstances, extends the sovereign immunity of the United
States to government contractors who manufacture a product for
the government. Specifically, the government contractor defense
applies when the government approves reasonably precise
specifications, the product conforms to those specifications and
the supplier warns the government about known dangers arising
from the use of the product. The District Court found that we
established each of those factors. We intend to rely on similar
defenses with respect to the substantive claims asserted in our
three pending lawsuits. We expect to rely on contractual
indemnification provisions with the DoD and statutory
protections to limit our potential liability resulting from
these three lawsuits.
MilVax litigation. In 2003, six unidentified
plaintiffs filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the
District of Columbia against the U.S. government seeking to
enjoin the Anthrax Vaccine Immunization Program administered
under MilVax under which all military personnel were required to
be vaccinated with BioThrax. On October 27, 2004, the
District Court enjoined the DoD from administering BioThrax to
military personnel without their informed consent or a
Presidential waiver. This ruling was based in part on the
District Courts finding that the FDA, as part of its
review of all biological products approved prior to 1972, had
not properly issued a final order determining that BioThrax is
safe and effective and not misbranded. In December 2005, the FDA
issued a final order determining that BioThrax is safe and
effective and not misbranded. On February 9, 2006, the
U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, on
appeal of the injunction by the government, ruled that the
injunction had dissolved by its own terms as a result of the
FDAs final order and remanded the case to the District
Court with instructions that the District Court consider the
governments request to vacate the District Courts
opinion. Although we are not a party to this lawsuit, if the
District Court institutes another injunction or otherwise
restricts the administration of BioThrax by the DoD, the amount
of future purchases of BioThrax by the DoD could be limited.
Other. We are, and may in the future become,
subject to other legal proceedings, claims and litigation
arising in the ordinary course of our business in connection
with the manufacture, distribution and use of our products and
product candidates. For example, BioPort is a defendant, along
with many other vaccine manufacturers, in a series of lawsuits
that have been filed in various state and federal courts in the
United States alleging that thimerosal, a mercury-containing
preservative used in the manufacture of some vaccines, caused
personal injuries, including brain damage, central nervous
system damage and autism. No specific dollar amount of damages
has been claimed. BioPort is currently a named defendant in
41 lawsuits pending in two jurisdictions: four in
California and 37 in Illinois. The products at issue in
these lawsuits are pediatric vaccines and immune globulins.
Because we are not currently and have not historically been in
the business of manufacturing or selling pediatric vaccines, we
do not believe that we
125
manufactured the pediatric vaccines at issue in the lawsuits.
Under a contractual obligation to the State of Michigan, we
manufactured one batch of vaccine suitable for pediatric use.
However, the contract required the State to use the vaccine
solely for Michigan public health purposes. One plaintiff in a
thimerosal lawsuit alleges that he was injured by immune
globulin containing thimerosal. We previously manufactured human
immune globulin that contained thimerosal. We no longer
manufacture any products that contain thimerosal. We believe
that our defense costs for these thimerosal lawsuits will be
covered by applicable product liability insurance and have
submitted a request for coverage to our carriers for defense
costs incurred to date.
Personnel
As of August 31, 2006, we had 469 employees, including
128 employees engaged in product development,
243 employees engaged in manufacturing, six employees
engaged in sales and marketing and 92 employees engaged in
general and administrative activities. We believe that our
future success will depend in part on our continued ability to
attract, hire and retain qualified personnel. None of our
employees is represented by a labor union or covered by
collective bargaining agreements. We believe that our relations
with our employees are good.
126
Management
Our executive officers and directors and their respective ages
and positions as of August 31, 2006 are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Name
|
|
Age
|
|
Position
|
|
|
Fuad El-Hibri
|
|
|
48
|
|
President, Chief Executive Officer
and Chairman of the Board of Directors
|
Edward J. Arcuri, Ph.D.
|
|
|
55
|
|
Executive Vice President and Chief
Operating Officer
|
Robert G. Kramer, Sr.
|
|
|
49
|
|
President and Chief Executive
Officer, BioPort Corporation
|
Steven N.
Chatfield, Ph.D.
|
|
|
49
|
|
Chief Scientific Officer and
President, Emergent Product Development UK Limited
|
Daniel J. Abdun-Nabi
|
|
|
51
|
|
Senior Vice President Corporate
Affairs, General Counsel and Secretary
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kyle W. Keese
|
|
|
44
|
|
Senior Vice President Marketing
and Communications
|
Thomas K. Zink, M.D.
|
|
|
49
|
|
Senior Vice President and Chief
Medical Officer
|
R. Don Elsey
|
|
|
53
|
|
Vice President Finance, Chief
Financial Officer and Treasurer
|
Joe M. Allbaugh
|
|
|
55
|
|
Director
|
Zsolt Harsanyi, Ph.D.(1)(2)(3)
|
|
|
62
|
|
Director
|
Jerome M. Hauer
|
|
|
54
|
|
Director
|
Shahzad Malik, M.D.(1)(2)
|
|
|
39
|
|
Director
|
Ronald B. Richard(1)(2)(3)
|
|
|
50
|
|
Director
|
Louis W. Sullivan, M.D.
|
|
|
72
|
|
Director
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Member of the Audit Committee. |
|
(2) |
|
Member of the Compensation Committee. |
|
(3) |
|
Member of the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee. |
Fuad El-Hibri. Mr. El-Hibri has served as chief
executive officer and as chairman of our board of directors
since June 2004 and as president since March 2006.
Mr. El-Hibri served as chief executive officer and chairman
of the board of directors of BioPort Corporation from May 1998
until June 2004, when, as a result of our corporate
reorganization, BioPort became a wholly owned subsidiary of
Emergent.
Mr. El-Hibri
has served as chairman of Digicel Holdings, Ltd., a privately
held telecommunications firm, since August 2000. He served as
president of Digicel from August 2000 to February 2005.
Mr. El-Hibri has served as chairman of East West Resources
Corporation, a venture capital and financial consulting firm,
since June 1990. He served as president of East West
Resources from September 1990 to January 2004. Mr. El-Hibri
is a member of the board of trustees of American University and
a member of the board of directors of the International
Biomedical Research Alliance, an academic joint venture among
the NIH, Oxford University and Cambridge University. He also
serves as chairman and treasurer of El-Hibri Charitable
Foundation. Mr. El-Hibri received a masters degree in
public and private management from Yale University and a B.A. in
economics from Stanford University.
127
Edward J. Arcuri, Ph.D. Dr. Arcuri has
served as executive vice president and chief operating officer
since January 2005. Dr. Arcuri served as senior vice
president of manufacturing operations from September 2003 to
January 2005 and senior vice president of vaccine manufacturing
from January 2002 to September 2003 for MedImmune, Inc., a
biotechnology company. Dr. Arcuri served as senior vice
president, operations from May 1999 to January 2002, vice
president, manufacturing from July 1999 to May 2000 and chief
operating officer from May 2001 to January 2002 at Aviron, Inc.,
a biotechnology company, which was acquired by MedImmune in
January 2002. Prior to joining Aviron, Dr. Arcuri served in
various management positions at North American Vaccine, Inc.,
Merck & Co. and SmithKline Beecham Pharmaceuticals,
formerly SmithKline & French Laboratories.
Dr. Arcuri received both a Ph.D. and an M.S. in biology
from Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute and a B.S. in biology from
the State University of New York at Albany.
Robert G. Kramer, Sr. Mr. Kramer has
served as president and chief executive officer of BioPort
Corporation since July 2004. Mr. Kramer served as chief
financial officer of BioPort from February 1999 to August 2000,
as chief operating officer of BioPort from September 2000
to June 2004 and as president of BioPort from
October 2001 to June 2004. Prior to joining BioPort,
Mr. Kramer served in various financial management positions
at Pharmacia Corp., which was subsequently acquired by Pfizer
Inc., and with subsidiaries of Northwest Industries.
Mr. Kramer received an M.B.A. from Western Kentucky
University and a B.S. in industrial management from Clemson
University.
Steven N. Chatfield, Ph.D. Dr. Chatfield
has served as chief scientific officer since January 2005 and as
president of our subsidiary, Emergent Product Development UK
Limited, since June 2005. Dr. Chatfield served as
development director and chief scientific officer of
Microscience Limited, a U.K. biotechnology company, from March
1999 to December 2004. We acquired Microscience in June 2005.
Prior to joining Microscience, Dr. Chatfield held various
positions in the field of vaccine research and development,
including director of biotechnology at Medeva plc, director of
research at Evans Medical and several positions at Wellcome
Biotechnology and the Wellcome Foundation. Dr. Chatfield
received a Ph.D. from the Council for National Academic Awards
in association with the University of Birmingham in the United
Kingdom.
Daniel J. Abdun-Nabi. Mr. Abdun-Nabi has served
as senior vice president corporate affairs, general counsel and
secretary since December 2004. Mr. Abdun-Nabi served as
vice president and general counsel from May 2004 to December
2004. Mr. Abdun-Nabi served as general counsel for IGEN
International, Inc., a biotechnology company, and its successor
BioVeris Corporation, from September 1999 to May 2004. Prior to
joining IGEN, Mr. Abdun-Nabi served as senior vice
president, legal affairs, general counsel and secretary of North
American Vaccine, Inc. Mr. Abdun-Nabi received an L.L.M. in
taxation from Georgetown University Law Center, a J.D. from the
University of San Diego School of Law and a B.A. in
political science from the University of Massachusetts, Amherst.
Kyle W. Keese. Mr. Keese has served as
senior vice president marketing and communications since March
2006. Mr. Keese served as vice president of sales and
marketing of Emergent from June 2004 to March 2006 and of
BioPort Corporation from June 2003 to June 2004. Mr. Keese
served as vice president, business development for Antex
Biologics, Inc., a biotechnology company, from March 2001 to May
2003, when we acquired substantially all of the assets of Antex.
Prior to joining Antex, Mr. Keese served in various
business development, marketing and sales management positions
at IGEN International and Abbott Laboratories and as an officer
in the U.S. Navy. Mr. Keese received an M.B.A. from
National University and a B.A. in mathematics and computer
science from Tulane University.
Thomas K. Zink, M.D. Dr. Zink has
served as senior vice president of medical affairs and chief
medical officer since May 2006. Dr. Zink served as the
director of immunization practices and scientific affairs of
GlaxoSmithKline Vaccines, USA, a subsidiary of GlaxoSmithKline
plc, a pharmaceutical
128
company, from September 1999 to November 2004. After leaving
GlaxoSmithKline and prior to joining Emergent, Dr. Zink
served as a pro bono consultant on issues of patient safety and
consumer-driven healthcare. Prior to joining GlaxoSmithKline,
Dr. Zink served as the medical director for Prudential
HealthCare of Kansas City, Missouri Region and as the chief
medical officer of the Medicare Peer Review Organization of the
State of Missouri. Dr. Zink also spent over a decade as a
practicing physician specializing in emergency medicine.
Dr. Zink received his joint B.A./M.D. from the University
of Missouri-Kansas City and holds a current medical license as a
physician and surgeon in good standing.
R. Don Elsey. Mr. Elsey has served as
chief financial officer since March 2006 and as vice president
finance and treasurer since June 2005. Mr. Elsey served as
the director of finance and administration at IGEN
International, Inc., a biotechnology company, and its successor
BioVeris Corporation, from April 2000 to June 2005. Prior to
joining IGEN, Mr. Elsey served as director of finance at
Applera, a genomics and sequencing company, and in several
finance positions at International Business Machines, Inc.
Mr. Elsey received an M.B.A. in finance and a B.A. in
economics from Michigan State University. Mr. Elsey is a
certified management accountant.
Joe M. Allbaugh. Mr. Allbaugh has served
as a director since June 2006. Mr. Allbaugh has served as
president of Ecosphere Systems, Inc., a subsidiary of Ecosphere
Technologies, a technology company serving the homeland
security, disaster response and defense markets, since
September 2006. Mr. Allbaugh has served as president
and chief executive officer of The Allbaugh Company, LLC, a
corporate strategy and consulting services firm, since March
2003. Mr. Allbaugh served as director of the Federal
Emergency Management Agency from February 2001 to March 2003.
Previously, Mr. Allbaugh served as deputy secretary of
transportation of the Oklahoma Department of Transportation and
manager of a number of state and federal political campaigns.
Mr. Allbaugh serves on the boards of directors of Citadel
Security Software Inc., a publicly held enterprise security
software company, and UltraStrip Systems, Inc., a publicly held
technology company in the defense, homeland security and global
ship repair markets. Mr. Allbaugh also serves on the board
of advisors of Compressus Inc., a privately held software
company. Mr. Allbaugh received a B.A. in political science
from the Oklahoma State University.
Zsolt Harsanyi, Ph.D. Dr. Harsanyi
has served as a director since August 2004. Dr. Harsanyi
has served as chief executive officer and chairman of the board
of directors of Exponential Biotherapies Inc., a private
biotechnology company, since December 2004. Dr. Harsanyi
served as president of Porton International plc, a
pharmaceutical and vaccine company, from January 1983 to
December 2004. Dr. Harsanyi was a founder of Dynport
Vaccine Company LLC in September 1996. Prior to joining Porton
International, Dr. Harsanyi was vice-president of corporate
finance at E.F. Hutton, Inc. Previously, Dr. Harsanyi
directed the first assessment of biotechnology for the
U.S. Congress Office of Technology Assessment, served
as a consultant to the Presidents Commission for the Study
of Ethical Problems in Medicine and Biomedical and Behavioral
Research and was on the faculties of Microbiology and Genetics
at Cornell Medical College. Dr. Harsanyi received a Ph.D.
from Albert Einstein College of Medicine and a B.A. from Amherst
College.
Jerome M. Hauer. Mr. Hauer has served as
a director since June 2005. Mr. Hauer has served as chief
executive officer at The Hauer Group, a consulting services
firm, since March 2006. Mr. Hauer served as senior vice
president and co-chair of the homeland security practice of
Fleishman-Hillard Government Relations, a government relations
service firm, from January 2005 to March 2006. Prior to joining
Fleishman-Hillard, Mr. Hauer served as the director of
Response to Disaster and Emergencies Institute and assistant
professor at the George Washington University School of Public
Health from November 2003 to December 2004. Mr. Hauer
served as acting assistant secretary for public health emergency
preparedness of HHS from June 2002 to November 2003 and as
director of the office of public health preparedness of HHS from
May 2002 to June 2002. He also served as managing director of
the crisis and consequence management group at Kroll Associates,
a risk consulting firm, from October 2000 to February 2002.
Mr. Hauer served as the first director of the New York City
Mayors Office of Emergency Management
129
under Mayor Rudolph Giuliani. He also served as the director of
Emergency Medical Services and Emergency Management as well as
director of the Department of Fire and Buildings for the State
of Indiana under Governor Evan Bayh. Mr. Hauer serves on
the board of directors of Hollis Eden Pharmaceuticals, Inc., a
publicly held pharmaceutical company. Mr. Hauer previously
served as a member of the Health Advisory Board of the Johns
Hopkins School of Public Health and as a member of the National
Academy of Sciences Institute of Medicines Committee
to Evaluate the R&D Needs for Improving Clinical Medical
Response to Chemical or Biological Terrorism Incidents.
Mr. Hauer received an M.H.S. in public health from Johns
Hopkins University School of Hygiene and Public Health and a
B.A. from New York University.
Shahzad Malik, M.D. Dr. Malik has
served as a director since June 2005. Dr. Malik has served
as a general partner of Advent Venture Partners, a venture
capital firm, since April 1999. Prior to joining Advent Venture
Partners, Dr. Malik spent two years at McKinsey &
Company where he focused on healthcare and investment banking
and six years as a practicing physician specializing in
cardiology. Dr. Malik also serves on the board of directors
for several private biotechnology companies. Dr. Malik
received his M.D. from Cambridge University and an M.A. in
physiological sciences from Oxford University.
Ronald B. Richard. Mr. Richard has served
as a director since January 2005. Mr. Richard has served as
the president and chief executive officer of the Cleveland
Foundation, the nations oldest community foundation, since
June 2003. From August 2002 to February 2003,
Mr. Richard served as president of Stem Cell Preservation,
Inc., a start-up medical research company. After leaving Stem
Cell Preservation and prior to joining Emergent,
Mr. Richard served as a strategic business advisor for IGEN
International, Inc., a biotechnology company. Mr. Richard
served as chief operating officer of In-Q-Tel, a venture capital
fund that provides technologies to the Central Intelligence
Agency, from March 2001 to August 2002. Prior to joining
In-Q-Tel, Mr. Richard served in various senior management
positions at Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., a consumer
electronics company. Mr. Richard is a former
U.S. foreign service officer. He served in Osaka/Kobe,
Japan and as a desk officer for North Korean, Greek and Turkish
affairs at the U.S. Department of State in
Washington, D.C. Mr. Richard previously served as
chairman of the board of trustees of the International
Biomedical Research Alliance, an academic joint venture among
the NIH, Oxford University and Cambridge University.
Mr. Richard received an M.A. in international relations
from Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International
Studies and a B.A. in history from Washington University. He
holds an honorary doctorate in humane letters from Notre Dame
College.
Louis W. Sullivan, M.D. Dr. Sullivan has
served as a director since June 2006. Dr. Sullivan has
served as president emeritus of Morehouse School of Medicine
since July 2002. Dr. Sullivan served as president of
Morehouse School of Medicine from 1981 to 1989 and from 1993 to
2002. From 1989 to 1993, Dr. Sullivan was Secretary of HHS.
Dr. Sullivan also serves on the boards of directors of
United Therapeutics Corporation, BioSante Pharmaceuticals,
Inhibitex, Inc. and Henry Schein, Inc., publicly traded
biotechnology companies. He is a founder and chairman of Medical
Education for South African Blacks, Inc., a trustee of Morehouse
School of Medicine and Africare and a director of the National
Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse at Columbia University.
Dr. Sullivan recently retired from the boards of directors
of Bristol-Myers Squibb Company, 3-M Corporation, Georgia
Pacific Corporation, Cigna Corporation and Equifax, Inc.
Dr. Sullivan received his M.D. from Boston University and a
B.S. from Morehouse College.
130
Board composition
and election of directors
Our board of directors is currently authorized to have and
currently has seven members. Upon completion of this offering,
our board of directors will be divided into three classes, each
of whose members will serve for staggered three-year terms:
|
|
|
Mr. El-Hibri, Mr. Hauer and Mr. Richard will
serve as class I directors, and their terms will expire at our
2007 annual meeting;
|
|
|
|
Dr. Harsanyi and Dr. Sullivan will serve as
class II directors, and their terms will expire at our 2008
annual meeting; and
|
|
|
|
Mr. Allbaugh and Dr. Malik will serve as
class III directors, and their terms will expire at our
2009 annual meeting.
|
Upon the expiration of the term of a class of directors,
directors in that class will be eligible to be elected for a new
three-year term at the annual meeting of stockholders in the
year in which their term expires.
Until the fifth anniversary of the completion of this offering,
any change in the number of directors serving on our board and
the appointment and removal of the chairman of our board will
require the vote of at least 75% of the directors then in
office. Our directors may be removed from office only for cause
and only by the affirmative vote of holders of our capital stock
representing at least 75% of the voting power of all outstanding
stock entitled to vote. Mr. El-Hibri, through his ownership
interests in our common stock and voting arrangements among our
significant stockholders, will be able to control the election
of directors. See Description of capital stock
Anti-takeover effects of Delaware law and our certificate of
incorporation and by-laws.
Four of our current directors, Mr. Allbaugh,
Dr. Harsanyi, Dr. Malik and Mr. Richard are
independent directors, as defined in applicable Nasdaq Stock
Market rules. We refer to these directors as our
independent directors. There are no family
relationships among any of our directors or executive officers.
Board
committees
Audit
committee
The members of our audit committee are Dr. Harsanyi,
Dr. Malik and Mr. Richard. Dr. Harsanyi chairs
the committee. Our audit committee assists our board of
directors in its oversight of our accounting and financial
reporting processes and the integrity of our financial
statements, our compliance with legal and regulatory
requirements, the audits of our financial statements and the
qualifications, independence and performance of our independent
registered public accounting firm.
Upon the completion of this offering, our audit committees
responsibilities will include:
|
|
|
appointing, approving the compensation of, and assessing the
independence of our independent registered public accounting
firm;
|
|
|
overseeing the work of our independent registered public
accounting firm, including through the receipt and consideration
of reports from our independent registered public accounting
firm;
|
|
|
reviewing and discussing with management and the independent
registered public accounting firm our annual and quarterly
financial statements and related disclosures;
|
131
|
|
|
coordinating our board of directors oversight of internal
control over financial reporting, disclosure controls and
procedures and code of business conduct and ethics;
|
|
|
establishing procedures for the receipt and retention of
accounting related complaints and concerns;
|
|
|
meeting independently with our independent registered public
accounting firm and management; and
|
|
|
preparing the audit committee report required by Securities and
Exchange Commission rules.
|
All audit services to be provided to us and all non-audit
services, other than de minimis non-audit services, to be
provided to us by our independent registered public accounting
firm must be approved in advance by our audit committee.
Dr. Harsanyi and Dr. Malik are audit committee financial
experts. We believe that the composition of our audit committee
meets the requirements for independence under current Nasdaq
Stock Market and Securities and Exchange Commission rules and
regulations.
Compensation
committee
The members of our compensation committee are Dr. Harsanyi,
Dr. Malik and Mr. Richard. Mr. Richard chairs the
committee. Our compensation committee assists the board of
directors in the discharge of its responsibilities relating to
the compensation of our executive officers and establishing and
maintaining broad-based employee benefit plans and programs.
Upon the completion of this offering, our compensation
committees responsibilities will include:
|
|
|
reviewing and approving, or making recommendations to the board
of directors with respect to, the compensation of our chief
executive officer and our other executive officers;
|
|
|
overseeing the evaluation of the performance of our senior
executives;
|
|
|
overseeing and administering, and making recommendations to the
board of directors with respect to, our broad-based compensation
programs and our cash and equity incentive plans;
|
|
|
reviewing and making recommendations to the board of directors
with respect to director compensation; and
|
|
|
preparing the compensation committee report required by
Securities and Exchange Commission rules.
|
Nominating and
corporate governance committee
The members of our nominating and corporate governance committee
are Dr. Harsanyi and Mr. Richard. Dr. Harsanyi
chairs the committee.
Upon the completion of this offering, our nominating and
corporate governance committees responsibilities will
include:
|
|
|
recommending to the board of directors the persons to be
nominated for election as directors or to fill vacancies and to
be appointed to each of the boards committees;
|
|
|
overseeing an annual review by the board of directors with
respect to management succession planning;
|
132
|
|
|
developing and recommending to the board of directors corporate
governance principles and guidelines; and
|
|
|
overseeing periodic evaluations of the board of directors.
|
Compensation
committee interlocks and insider participation
None of our executive officers serves as a member of the board
of directors or compensation committee, or other committee
serving an equivalent function, of any entity that has one or
more executive officers who serve as members of our board of
directors or our compensation committee. None of the members of
our compensation committee has ever been our employee.
Director
compensation
Under our director compensation program, we pay each of our
non-employee directors an annual retainer of $20,000 for service
as a director. Each non-employee director also receives a fee
for each board and committee meeting attended. The board meeting
fee is $1,500 for attendance in person and $500 for attendance
by telephone. The audit committee meeting fee is $1,500 for
attendance in person and $500 for attendance by telephone. The
compensation committee meeting fee is $1,000 for attendance in
person and $300 for attendance by telephone. Following the
completion of this offering, the nominating and corporate
governance committee meeting fee will be $1,000 for attendance
in person and $300 for attendance by telephone. Each member of
our audit committee receives an additional annual retainer of
$5,000. Each member of our compensation committee receives an
additional annual retainer of $3,000. Following the completion
of this offering, each member of our nominating and corporate
governance committee will receive an annual retainer of $3,000.
We reimburse our non-employee directors for
out-of-pocket
expenses incurred in connection with attending our board and
committee meetings.
Under the director compensation program, we have granted a
non-qualified option to purchase 15,000 shares of our
class B common stock to each of our independent directors,
unless the directors appointment was pursuant to any
transaction or other arrangement requiring such appointment, and
to each of our non-employee directors who does not qualify as an
independent director if our board of directors determined that
the option grant was necessary to attract such non-employee
director to join the board. These options vest over three years
and expire ten years from the date of grant, subject to the
directors continued service as a director. Upon a change
in control, as defined in each director stock option agreement,
we will have the option to purchase and redeem all the options
owned by the director, or held for the benefit of the director,
for a purchase price equal to the difference between the option
exercise price and the fair market value. In the event we
exercise such repurchase option, any unvested options will be
deemed fully vested on the day preceding the date of repurchase.
We have granted the following non-qualified stock options to our
independent and non-employee directors:
|
|
|
On December 1, 2004, we granted a stock option to purchase
15,000 shares at an exercise price of $7.89 per share
to Dr. Harsanyi.
|
|
|
On January 26, 2005, we granted a stock option to purchase
15,000 shares at an exercise price of $7.89 per share
to Mr. Richard.
|
|
|
On June 15, 2005, we granted a stock option to purchase
15,000 shares at an exercise price of $10.06 per share
to Mr. Hauer.
|
133
|
|
|
On June 30, 2006, we granted a stock option to purchase
15,000 shares at an exercise price of $29.58 per share
to Dr. Sullivan.
|
|
|
On June 30, 2006, we granted a stock option to purchase
15,000 shares at an exercise price of $29.58 per share
to Mr. Allbaugh.
|
Following the completion of this offering, pursuant to automatic
option grants to non-employee directors under our 2006 stock
incentive plan, we will grant each of our non-employee directors
a nonstatutory option to purchase:
|
|
|
7,500 shares of common stock upon commencement of service
on our board of directors;
|
|
|
5,000 shares of common stock, on the date of each of our
annual meetings of stockholders, provided that the director
continues serving as a director after the annual meeting and has
served on our board of directors for at least six
months; and
|
|
|
if the non-employee director is serving as the chair of one or
more committees of our board of directors, an additional
2,500 shares of common stock, on the date of each of our
annual meetings of stockholders, provided that the director
continues serving as a director after the annual meeting and has
served on our board of directors for at least six months.
|
See Stock option and other compensation
plans 2006 stock incentive plan for additional
information regarding these option grants.
134
Executive
compensation
The following table sets forth a summary of the compensation
paid or accrued during the year ended December 31, 2005 to
our chief executive officer and to our four most highly
compensated executive officers other than our chief executive
officer who were serving as executive officers as of
December 31, 2005. We refer to these individuals as our
named executive officers.
Summary
compensation table
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
compensation
|
|
|
|
|
Annual
compensation
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other annual
|
|
|
underlying
|
|
All other
|
Name and
principal position
|
|
Salary
|
|
Bonus
|
|
compensation
|
|
|
options
|
|
compensation(1)
|
|
|
Fuad El-Hibri
President, Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board of
Directors
|
|
$
|
490,818
|
|
$
|
237,215
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
75,000
|
|
$
|
7,000
|
Edward J. Arcuri, Ph.D.
Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer
|
|
|
280,192
|
|
|
94,517
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
40,000
|
|
|
|
Robert G. Kramer, Sr.
President and Chief Executive Officer, BioPort Corporation
|
|
|
371,192
|
|
|
140,816
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
40,000
|
|
|
7,000
|
Steven N. Chatfield, Ph.D.
President, Emergent Product Development UK Limited and Chief
Scientific Officer
|
|
|
225,162
|
|
|
82,250
|
|
|
38,752
|
(2)
|
|
|
20,000
|
|
|
|
Daniel J. Abdun-Nabi
Senior Vice President Corporate Affairs, General Counsel and
Secretary
|
|
|
272,631
|
|
|
110,400
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Represents the value of our contributions on behalf of the named
executive officer to our 401(k) savings plan. |
|
|
|
(2) |
|
Represents a relocation payment of $15,000 and a living
allowance of $23,752. |
135
Stock option
grants
The following table sets forth information regarding grants of
stock options to purchase shares of our common stock to our
named executive officers during the year ended December 31,
2005. Immediately prior to the completion of this offering, each
outstanding option to purchase shares of our class B common
stock automatically will become an option to purchase an equal
number of shares of our common stock.
Potential realizable values are calculated using the assumed
initial public offering price of
$ per share, which is the
midpoint of the price range set forth on the cover page of this
prospectus, and assuming that the market price appreciates from
this price at the indicated rate for the entire term of each
option and that each option is exercised and sold on the last
day of its term at the assumed appreciated price. The assumed 5%
and 10% rates of stock price appreciation are required by the
rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission and do not
represent our estimate or projection of the future price of our
common stock. Actual gains, if any, on stock option exercises
depend on the future performance of our common stock and the
date on which the options are exercised.
Option grants in
last fiscal year
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Potential
realizable
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
value at
assumed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Percentage of
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
annual rates
of
|
|
|
Number of
|
|
|
total options
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
stock price
|
|
|
shares
|
|
|
granted to
|
|
|
Exercise
|
|
|
|
appreciation
for
|
|
|
underlying
|
|
|
employees in
|
|
|
price per
|
|
Expiration
|
|
option
term(1)
|
Name
|
|
options
granted
|
|
|
fiscal
year
|
|
|
share
|
|
date
|
|
5% ($)
|
|
10% ($)
|
|
|
Fuad El-Hibri
|
|
|
75,000
|
(2)
|
|
|
30.0
|
%
|
|
$
|
10.06
|
|
|
5/25/10
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edward J. Arcuri, Ph.D.
|
|
|
40,000
|
(3)
|
|
|
16.0
|
|
|
|
7.89
|
|
|
2/9/10
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Robert G. Kramer, Sr.
|
|
|
40,000
|
(2)
|
|
|
16.0
|
|
|
|
10.06
|
|
|
5/25/10
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Steven N.
Chatfield, Ph.D.
|
|
|
20,000
|
(3)
|
|
|
8.0
|
|
|
|
7.89
|
|
|
2/9/10
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Daniel J. Abdun-Nabi
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
The dollar amounts under these columns are the result of
calculations at rates set by the Securities and Exchange
Commission and, therefore, are not intended to forecast possible
future appreciation, if any, in the price of the underlying
common stock. |
|
(2) |
|
These options vest in three annual installments, with 40% of the
original number of shares having vested on December 31,
2005 and 30% of the original number of shares vesting on each of
December 31, 2006 and December 31, 2007. |
|
(3) |
|
These options vest in three equal annual installments beginning
on December 31, 2005. |
Option exercises
and year-end option values
The following table sets forth information regarding the number
of shares of our common stock issued upon option exercises by
our named executive officers during the year ended
December 31, 2005 and the value realized by our named
executive officers. In addition, the table sets forth
information regarding the number and value of unexercised
options held by our named executive officers at
December 31, 2005. There was no public trading market for
our common stock as of December 31, 2005. Accordingly, as
permitted by the rules of the Securities and Exchange
Commission, we have calculated the value of
136
unexercised
in-the-money
options at December 31, 2005 assuming that the fair market
value of our common stock as of December 31, 2005 was equal
to the assumed initial public offering price of
$ per share, which is the
midpoint of the price range set forth on the cover page of this
prospectus, less the aggregate exercise price.
Aggregated option
exercises in last fiscal year and
fiscal year-end option values
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of
securities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
underlying
unexercised
|
|
Value of
unexercised
|
|
|
Number of
shares
|
|
|
|
options at
|
|
in-the-money
options at
|
|
|
acquired on
|
|
Value
|
|
December 31,
2005
|
|
December 31,
2005
|
Name
|
|
exercise
|
|
realized
|
|
Exercisable
|
|
Unexercisable
|
|
Exercisable
|
|
Unexercisable
|
|
|
Fuad El-Hibri
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
30,000
|
|
|
45,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edward J. Arcuri, Ph.D.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13,334
|
|
|
26,666
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Robert G. Kramer, Sr.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
178,500
|
|
|
24,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Steven N.
Chatfield, Ph.D.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,667
|
|
|
13,333
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Daniel J. Abdun-Nabi
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
25,900
|
|
|
11,100
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Employment
agreement with Steven Chatfield, Ph.D.
In September 2006, our wholly owned subsidiary, Emergent Product
Development UK Limited, formerly Emergent Europe Limited,
entered into an employment contract with Dr. Chatfield to
serve as President of Emergent Product Development UK. Under
this agreement, Dr. Chatfield is entitled to an annual base
salary of £149,914, which may be reviewed annually in the
discretion of Emergent Product Development UK.
Dr. Chatfield is also eligible to participate in any bonus
plan established by Emergent Product Development UK from time to
time. Under the agreement, Emergent Product Development UK
agreed to contribute 10% of Dr. Chatfields salary,
which amount will be capped at Inland Revenue Limits, in equal
monthly installments to a qualified pension plan, subject to
Dr. Chatfield making monthly contributions to the qualified
pension plan in an amount equal to 2.5% of his salary. Either
party may terminate the agreement upon not less than six
months prior written notice. Emergent Product Development
UK may terminate Dr. Chatfields employment without
prior notice for conduct amounting to gross misconduct or any
other equivalent conduct or performance issues. Emergent Product
Development UK may terminate Dr. Chatfields
employment for cause, as defined in the agreement, upon
providing the statutory minimum period of notice required under
English law. Subject to any contrary provision of applicable
law, Dr. Chatfields employment will end automatically
without the need for notice of termination at the end of the
month in which Dr. Chatfield reaches the age of 65.
Under the agreement, Dr. Chatfield is entitled to
protections substantially similar to those in our severance plan
and termination protection program, except Dr. Chatfield is
not entitled to a
gross-up
payment with respect to applicable taxes in the circumstances
provided in the severance plan and termination protection
program. See Severance plan and termination
protection program for additional information about our
severance plan and termination protection program. If Emergent
Product Development UK terminates Dr. Chatfields
employment without cause, as defined in the agreement, then
Dr. Chatfield is entitled to 75% of his annual base salary
and continued eligibility for employee benefits for a period of
nine months following the date of termination.
Dr. Chatfield is entitled to 100% of his annual base salary
and continued eligibility for employee benefits for a period of
137
12 months following the date of termination of his
employment under the circumstances described in the severance
plan and termination protection program in connection with a
change of control, as defined in the agreement.
Under the terms of a prior employment contract with us, which
has been superseded in all other respects, Dr. Chatfield
remains subject to the following noncompetition obligations.
Dr. Chatfield is prohibited from competing with us during
the term of his employment and for a period thereafter of not
less than six months and not more than 12 months as may be
required by us, provided that we notify Dr. Chatfield in
writing not less than three months prior to expiration of
employment or any severance pay period, or in the event of
termination by us for cause, at the time of termination, and
that we continue to pay Dr. Chatfield 50% of his base
salary in effect at termination during the additional period.
Dr. Chatfield is also prohibited, during his term of
employment and for a period of six months after termination of
employment, from inducing or soliciting our employees, including
any employees who left our employ within the previous six
months, to leave our employ or inducing or soliciting customers,
clients or business partners to reduce their relationship or
breach their agreements with us. Dr. Chatfield is also
bound by the terms of Emergent Product Development UKs
standard non-disclosure, invention and assignment agreement.
Dr. Chatfield currently serves as our chief scientific
officer pursuant to a letter agreement dated July 11, 2006.
Severance plan
and termination protection program
In May 2006, our board of directors approved a severance plan
and termination protection program effective April 1, 2006
for the benefit of employees with the title of chief executive
officer, president, executive vice president, senior vice
president or vice president who have been designated to
participate in the severance plan by our board of directors or,
with the authorization of our board of directors, by our chief
executive officer. Our chief executive officer may designate the
greater of 7% of the total number of our employees or 35
employees to be participants in the severance plan at any
particular time, on the basis of name, title, function or
compensation level. Our chief executive officer will at all
times be a participant under the severance plan and shall have
no less favorable rights under the severance plan than any other
participant. Each of our executive officers based in the United
States is currently a participant in the severance plan.
The severance plan is effective through December 31, 2009.
Commencing on December 31, 2009, and on December 31 of
each year thereafter, the severance plan will automatically
extend for additional one-year periods unless we provide
90 days prior written notice that the term will not
be extended.
If during the term of the severance plan, we terminate a
participants employment without cause, as defined in the
severance plan, then the participant will be entitled to:
|
|
|
any unpaid base salary and accrued paid time-off through the
date of termination;
|
|
|
a pro rata target annual bonus in respect of the year of
termination;
|
|
|
any bonus earned but unpaid as of the date of termination for
any previously completed year;
|
|
|
reimbursement for any unreimbursed expenses incurred by the
participant prior to the date of termination;
|
|
|
an amount equal to a specified percentage of the
participants annual base salary;
|
138
|
|
|
employee and fringe benefits and perquisites, if any, to which
the participant may be entitled as of the date of termination
under our relevant plans, policies and programs; and
|
|
|
continued eligibility for the participant and his or her
eligible dependents to receive employee benefits, for a stated
period following the participants date of termination,
except when the provision of employee benefits would result in a
duplication of benefits provided by any subsequent employer.
|
The following table sets forth the percentage of base salary and
the stated period for continued employee benefits that each of
our executive officers who participates in the plan is entitled
if we terminate the executive officers employment without
cause.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stated period
|
|
|
Percentage of
|
|
|
for continued
|
|
|
annual base
|
|
|
employee
|
Name
|
|
salary
|
|
|
benefits
|
|
|
Fuad El-Hibri
|
|
|
150
|
%
|
|
|
18 months
|
Robert G. Kramer, Sr.
|
|
|
100
|
|
|
|
12 months
|
Edward J. Arcuri, Ph.D.
|
|
|
100
|
|
|
|
12 months
|
Daniel J. Abdun-Nabi
|
|
|
100
|
|
|
|
12 months
|
Kyle W. Keese
|
|
|
100
|
|
|
|
12 months
|
Thomas K. Zink, M.D.
|
|
|
75
|
|
|
|
9 months
|
R. Don Elsey
|
|
|
75
|
|
|
|
9 months
|
|
|
We may pay any amount under the severance plan, in our sole and
absolute discretion, either in a single lump sum amount within
30 days following termination or in equal monthly
installments over the same stated period during which we have
agreed to provide continued employee benefits to the terminated
employee.
As a condition to payment of any amounts under the severance
plan, the participant is required:
|
|
|
for the same stated period during which we have agreed to
provide continued employee benefits to the terminated employee,
not to:
|
|
|
|
|
|
induce, counsel, advise, solicit or encourage our employees to
leave our employ or to accept employment with any other person
or entity,
|
|
|
|
induce, counsel, advise, solicit or encourage any person who we
employed within six months prior to that time to accept
employment with any person or entity besides us or hire or
engage that person as an independent contractor,
|
|
|
|
solicit, interfere with or endeavor to cause any of our
customers, clients or business partners to cease or reduce its
relationship with us or induce any such customer, client or
business partner to breach any agreement that such customer,
client or business partner may have with us, and
|
|
|
|
engage in or have a financial interest in any business competing
with us within any state, region or locality in which we are
then doing business or marketing products;
|
|
|
|
upon reasonable notice and at our expense, to cooperate fully
with any reasonable request that may be made by us in connection
with any investigation, litigation or other similar activity to
which we are or may be a party or may otherwise be involved and
for which the participant may have relevant information; and
|
139
|
|
|
to sign and deliver a suitable waiver and release under which
the participant will release and discharge us from and on
account of any and all claims that relate to or arise out of our
employment relationship.
|
In connection with our implementation of the severance plan, in
August 2006, we agreed to the following modifications and
clarifications to Mr. El-Hibris contractual
obligations and duties:
|
|
|
Mr. El-Hibris service as chairman of Digicel
Holdings, chairman of East West Resources, general manager of
Intervac, L.L.C. and Intervac Management, L.L.C., a member of
the board of trustees of American University, a member of the
board of directors of the International Biomedical Research
Alliance and director and treasurer of El-Hibri Charitable
Foundation and his management of his personal investments at
levels of time and attention comparable to those that
Mr. El-Hibri provided to such entities within the preceding
twelve months, do not violate his contractual obligations to us
or interfere with his ability to perform his duties to us;
|
|
|
|
it is not a violation of
Mr. El-Hibris
contractual obligations to us if he pursues a business
transaction or opportunity where such transaction or opportunity
was first presented to
Mr. El-Hibri
in his capacity as an officer or director of the entities listed
above or where such transaction or opportunity was first
presented to us and our board of directors declined to pursue
such transaction or opportunity; and
|
|
|
with respect to three employees who, at
Mr. El-Hibris
invitation, left their employment with East West Resources to
accept employment with us, it is not a violation of
Mr. El-Hibris
non-solicitation agreement to induce, counsel, advise, solicit
or encourage, or attempt to induce, counsel, advise, solicit or
encourage those employees to return to employment with East West
Resources.
|
If during the term of the severance plan, we terminate a
participants employment with cause, then the participant
will not be entitled to receive any compensation, benefits or
rights under the severance plan, and any stock options or other
equity participation benefits vested on or prior to the date of
the termination, but not yet exercised, will immediately
terminate.
If during the term of the severance plan, we terminate a
participants employment without cause or a participant
resigns for good reason, as defined in the severance plan, in
each case within 18 months following a change of control,
as defined in the severance plan, or we terminate a
participants employment prior to a change of control,
which subsequently occurs, at the request of a party involved in
the change of control, or otherwise in connection with or in
anticipation of a change of control, then the participant will
be entitled to:
|
|
|
a lump sum amount, payable within 30 days following the
date of termination, equal to the sum of:
|
|
|
|
|
|
any unpaid base salary and accrued paid time-off through the
date of termination,
|
|
|
|
a pro rata target annual bonus in respect of the year of
termination,
|
|
|
|
any bonus earned but unpaid as of the date of termination for
any previously completed year,
|
|
|
|
any unreimbursed expenses incurred by the participant prior to
the date of termination, and
|
|
|
|
an amount equal to a specified percentage of the sum of the
participants base salary and the greater of the annual
bonus that was paid to the participant in respect of the most
recently completed year or the maximum annual bonus that could
have been paid to the participant under an established bonus
plan for the most recently completed year;
|
|
|
|
employee and fringe benefits and perquisites, if any, to which
the participant may be entitled as of the date of termination of
employment under our relevant plans, policies and programs;
|
140
|
|
|
any unvested stock options held by the participant that are
outstanding on the date of termination will become fully vested
as of that date, and the period, during which any stock options
held by the participant that are outstanding on that date may be
exercised, shall be extended to a date that is the later of the
15th day of the third month following the termination date,
or December 31 of the calendar year in which the stock
option would otherwise have expired if the exercise period had
not been extended, but not beyond the final date the stock
option could have been exercised if the participants
employment had not terminated, in each case based on the term of
the option at the original grant date;
|
|
|
continued eligibility for the participant and his or her
eligible dependents to receive employee benefits, for a stated
period following the participants date of termination,
except when the provision of employee benefits would result in a
duplication of benefits provided by any subsequent employer;
|
|
|
a gross-up
payment with respect to applicable taxes on any payment to the
participant;
|
|
|
the retention for the maximum period permitted by applicable law
of all rights the participant has to indemnification from us
immediately prior to the change of control and the continuation
throughout the period of any applicable statute of limitations
of any directors and officers liability insurance
covering the participant immediately prior to the change of
control; and
|
|
|
the advancement to the participant of all costs and expenses,
including attorneys fees and disbursements, incurred by
the participant in connection with any legal proceedings that
relate to the termination of employment or the interpretation or
enforcement of any provision of the severance plan, for which
the participant will have no obligation to reimburse us if the
participant prevails in the proceeding with respect to at least
one material issue or the proceeding is settled.
|
The following table sets forth the percentage of base salary and
the stated period for continued employee benefits that each of
our executive officers who participates in the plan is entitled
under the circumstances described above in connection with a
change of control.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stated period
|
|
|
Percentage of
|
|
|
for continued
|
|
|
annual base
|
|
|
employee
|
Name
|
|
salary
|
|
|
benefits
|
|
|
Fuad El-Hibri
|
|
|
250
|
%
|
|
|
30 months
|
Robert G. Kramer, Sr.
|
|
|
200
|
|
|
|
24 months
|
Edward J. Arcuri, Ph.D.
|
|
|
200
|
|
|
|
24 months
|
Daniel J. Abdun-Nabi
|
|
|
150
|
|
|
|
18 months
|
Kyle W. Keese
|
|
|
100
|
|
|
|
12 months
|
Thomas K. Zink, M.D.
|
|
|
75
|
|
|
|
9 months
|
R. Don Elsey
|
|
|
75
|
|
|
|
9 months
|
|
|
Our chief executive officer may designate up to two participants
for whom any reason for resigning within the
30-day
period following the first anniversary of a change of control
shall also constitute good reason. Mr. El-Hibri has been
designated as a participant to receive this benefit.
All payments under the severance plan will be reduced by any
applicable taxes required by applicable law to be paid or
withheld by us. All payments and benefits provided under the
severance plan are intended to either comply with or be exempt
from Section 409A of the Internal Revenue Code. If at the
time a participants employment is terminated, the
participant is a specified employee within the meaning of
Section 409A(a)(2)(B)(ii), then any payments to the
participant that constitute nonqualified deferred
141
compensation within the meaning of Section 409A will be
delayed by a period of six months. All such payments that would
have been made to the participant during the six-month period
will be made in a lump sum in the seventh month following the
date of termination, and all remaining payments will commence in
the seventh month following the date of termination.
Our board of directors or any committee of our board of
directors is authorized to administer the plan and has authority
to adopt, amend and repeal the administrative rules, guidelines
and practices relating to the severance plan as it deems
advisable.
Limitation of
liability and indemnification
Our certificate of incorporation that will be in effect upon the
completion of this offering limits the personal liability of
directors for breach of fiduciary duty to the maximum extent
permitted by the General Corporation Law of Delaware. Our
certificate of incorporation provides that no director will have
personal liability to us or to our stockholders for monetary
damages for breach of fiduciary duty or other duty as a
director. However, these provisions do not eliminate or limit
the liability of any of our directors:
|
|
|
for any breach of their duty of loyalty to us or our
stockholders;
|
|
|
for acts or omissions not in good faith or which involve
intentional misconduct or a knowing violation of law;
|
|
|
for voting or assenting to unlawful payments of dividends or
other distributions; or
|
|
|
for any transaction from which the director derived an improper
personal benefit.
|
Any amendment to or repeal of these provisions will not
eliminate or reduce the effect of these provisions in respect of
any act or failure to act, or any cause of action, suit or claim
that would accrue or arise prior to any amendment or repeal or
adoption of an inconsistent provision. If the General
Corporation Law of Delaware is amended to provide for further
limitations on the personal liability of directors of
corporations, then the personal liability of our directors will
be further limited to the greatest extent permitted by the
General Corporation Law of Delaware.
In addition, our certificate of incorporation provides that we
must indemnify our directors and officers and we must advance
expenses, including attorneys fees, to our directors and
officers in connection with legal proceedings, subject to
limited exceptions.
We have entered into agreements to indemnify our directors and
executive officers. These agreements, among other things,
provide that we will indemnify the director or executive officer
to the fullest extent permitted by law for claims arising in his
or her capacity as our director, officer, manager, employee,
agent or representative and advance expenses, including
attorneys fees, to these individuals in connection with
legal proceedings, subject to limited exceptions. The
indemnification agreements also establish the procedures that
will apply in the event a director or officer makes a claim for
indemnification.
Stock option and
other compensation plans
Employee stock
option plan
Our employee stock option plan was adopted by our board of
directors and approved by our stockholders on June 30, 2004
and amended and restated on January 26, 2005. We refer to
this employee stock option plan, as amended and restated, as our
employee stock option plan. Our employee
142
stock option plan became effective on the date that our board of
directors adopted the plan. We assumed all options outstanding
under the BioPort Corporation employee stock option plan as of
June 30, 2004 and granted option holders replacement stock
options to purchase an equal number of shares of our
class B common stock under our employee stock option plan.
Under our employee stock option plan, the exercise period for
options under the BioPort Corporation employee stock option plan
that would have otherwise expired on June 30, 2004 was
extended to June 30, 2007. For incentive stock options, the
extension of the exercise period caused the options to be
considered nonqualified stock options after June 30, 2004.
Under our employee stock option plan, 1,250,000 shares of
our class B common stock are reserved for issuance. Our
board of directors has authorized our compensation committee to
administer our employee stock option plan. Immediately prior to
the completion of this offering, each outstanding option to
purchase shares of our class B common stock automatically
will become an option to purchase an equal number of shares of
our common stock, with no other changes to the option.
If a merger or other reorganization event occurs, options
granted under our employee stock option plan may be substituted
or assumed. In the event of our merger, consolidation or
combination with or into another corporation, other than a
merger, consolidation or combination in which we are the
surviving corporation and which does not result in any
reclassification or other change in the number of outstanding
shares of our common stock, each option holder will have the
right after the merger, consolidation or combination and during
the term of the option to receive upon exercise of the option,
for each share of common stock as to which the option could be
exercised, the kind and amount of shares of the surviving or new
corporation, cash, securities, evidence of indebtedness, other
property or any combination which would have been received upon
the merger, consolidation or combination by the holder of a
share of common stock immediately prior to the merger,
consolidation or combination. Upon the occurrence of a change in
control, as defined in our employee stock option plan, we have
the option to purchase and redeem from any option holder all the
options owned by the option holder for a purchase price equal to
the difference between the option exercise price and the fair
market value of the common stock. In the event that we exercise
our right to repurchase the options, any unvested options will
be deemed fully vested on the day preceding the date we exercise
our repurchase option. We may exercise this option at any time
during the six-month period following the date of change in
control or such longer period of time as is reasonable.
Under our employee stock option plan, no award may be granted
under the plan after June 30, 2009, unless the plan is
terminated sooner. Our board of directors may amend, suspend or
discontinue the employee stock option plan at any time, except
that stockholder approval will be required for any revision that
would increase the number of shares reserved for issuance under
the plan, or otherwise as required to comply with applicable law
or stock market requirements. No amendment may materially impair
any rights or materially increase any obligations of an option
holder under an outstanding option without the consent of the
option holder.
As of August 31, 2006, options to purchase
1,061,679 shares of our class B common stock at a
weighted average exercise price of $6.38 were outstanding under
our employee stock option plan, options to purchase
68,999 shares of class B common stock have been
exercised and options to purchase 140,551 shares of
class B common stock have been forfeited. After the
effective date of our 2006 stock incentive plan, which is
described below, we will grant no additional options under our
employee stock option plan.
2006 stock
incentive plan
Our 2006 stock incentive plan was adopted by our board of
directors on May 9, 2006 and approved by our stockholders
on ,
2006. The 2006 stock incentive plan will become effective
immediately
143
prior to the completion of this offering. The 2006 stock
incentive plan provides for the grant of incentive stock
options, non-statutory stock options, stock appreciation rights,
restricted stock, restricted stock units and other stock unit
awards. Our 2006 stock incentive plan provides that
175,000 shares of common stock, plus the number of shares
of common stock, up
to shares,
reserved for issuance under our existing employee stock option
plan that remain available for grant as of the completion of
this offering, will be reserved for issuance under the 2006
stock incentive plan immediately following this offering.
In addition, our 2006 stock incentive plan contains an
evergreen provision that allows for increases in the
number of shares available for issuance under our 2006 stock
incentive plan on the first day of the first and third quarter
of each year from 2007 though 2009. Each semi-annual increase in
the number of shares will be equal to the lowest of a specified
number of shares, a specified percentage of the aggregate number
of shares outstanding and an amount determined by our board of
directors. The following table sets forth the maximum specified
number of shares and maximum specified percentage of outstanding
shares for each semi-annual increase in the number of shares.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Maximum
|
|
|
|
Maximum
|
|
specified
|
|
|
|
specified
|
|
percentage of
|
|
|
|
number of
|
|
outstanding
|
|
|
|
shares
|
|
shares
|
|
|
|
|
First Quarter of 2007
|
|
|
149,000
|
|
|
1.5
|
%
|
Third Quarter of 2007
|
|
|
161,000
|
|
|
1.5
|
|
First Quarter of 2008
|
|
|
322,000
|
|
|
3.0
|
|
Third Quarter of 2008
|
|
|
162,000
|
|
|
1.5
|
|
First Quarter of 2009
|
|
|
326,000
|
|
|
3.0
|
|
Third Quarter of 2009
|
|
|
164,000
|
|
|
1.5
|
|
|
|
Our employees, officers, directors, consultants and advisors are
eligible to receive awards under our 2006 stock incentive plan.
Incentive stock options may only be granted to our employees.
The maximum number of shares of common stock with respect to
which awards may be granted to any participant under the plan is
100,000 per fiscal year.
In accordance with the terms of the 2006 stock incentive plan,
our board of directors has authorized our compensation committee
to administer the plan. Our compensation committee selects the
recipients of awards and determines:
|
|
|
the number of shares of common stock covered by options and the
dates upon which the options become exercisable;
|
|
|
the exercise price of options, which may not be less than 100%
of the fair market value of the stock on the date of grant;
|
|
|
the duration of options, which may not be in excess of
10 years;
|
|
|
the method of payment of the exercise price; and
|
|
|
the number of shares of common stock subject to any stock
appreciation right, restricted stock, restricted stock units or
other stock-unit awards and the terms and conditions of such
awards, including conditions for exercise, repurchase, issue
price and repurchase price.
|
144
If our board of directors delegates authority to an executive
officer, the executive officer has the power to make awards to
all of our employees, except to executive officers. Our board of
directors will fix the terms of the awards to be granted by such
executive officer, including the exercise price of such awards
and the maximum number of shares subject to awards that such
executive officer may make.
Our 2006 stock incentive plan provides for an automatic grant of
options to non-employee directors as follows:
|
|
|
7,500 shares of common stock, upon the commencement of
service on our board of directors;
|
|
|
5,000 shares of common stock, on the date of each of our
annual meetings of stockholders, provided that the director
continues serving as a director after the annual meeting and has
served on our board of directors for at least six
months; and
|
|
|
if the non-employee director is serving as the chair of one or
more committees of our board of directors, an additional
2,500 shares of common stock, on the date of each of our
annual meetings of stockholders, provided that the director
continues serving as a director after the annual meeting and has
served on our board of directors for at least six months.
|
Automatic option grants to directors will:
|
|
|
have an exercise price equal to the closing sale price of the
common stock on the Nasdaq Stock Market or the national
securities exchange on which the common stock is then traded on
the trading date immediately prior to the date of grant, or the
fair market value of the common stock on such date as determined
by our board of directors, if the common stock is not then
traded on The Nasdaq Stock Market or on a national securities
exchange;
|
|
|
vest in three equal annual installments beginning on the
anniversary of the date of grant provided that the individual is
serving on our board of directors on such date, or, with respect
to annual grants, on the date which is one business day prior to
the date of our next annual meeting, if earlier, provided that
no additional vesting will take place after the individual
ceases to serve as a director and that our board of directors
may provide for accelerated vesting in the case of death,
disability, attainment of mandatory retirement age or retirement
following at least 10 years of service;
|
|
|
expire on the earlier of 10 years from the date of grant or
three months following cessation of service on our board of
directors; and
|
|
|
contain other terms and conditions as our board of directors
determines.
|
Our board of directors may increase or decrease the number of
shares subject to automatic option grants to directors.
If a merger or other reorganization event occurs, our board of
directors will provide that all of our outstanding options are
to be assumed or substituted by the successor corporation. If
the merger or reorganization event also constitutes a change in
control event, as defined under our 2006 stock incentive plan,
the assumed or substituted options will become immediately
exercisable in full if on or prior to the first anniversary of
the reorganization event an option holders employment with
us or our succeeding corporation is terminated by the option
holder for good reason or is terminated by us or the succeeding
corporation without cause, each as defined in our 2006 stock
incentive plan. In the event the succeeding corporation does not
agree to assume, or substitute for, outstanding options, then
our board of directors will provide that all unexercised options
will become exercisable in full prior to the completion of the
merger or other reorganization event and that these options will
terminate immediately prior to the completion of the merger or
other reorganization event if not previously exercised. Our
board of
145
directors may also provide for a cash out of the value of any
outstanding options. In addition, upon the occurrence of a
change in control event that does not also constitute a
reorganization event under our 2006 stock incentive plan, each
option will continue to vest according to its original vesting
schedule, except that an option will become immediately
exercisable in full if on or prior to the first anniversary of
the change in control event an option holders employment
with us or our succeeding corporation is terminated by the
option holder for good reason or is terminated by us or our
succeeding corporation without cause.
No award may be granted under the 2006 stock incentive plan
after December 31, 2009, but the vesting and effectiveness
of awards granted before that date may extend beyond that date.
Our board of directors may amend, suspend or terminate the 2006
stock incentive plan at any time, except that stockholder
approval will be required for any revision that would materially
increase the number of shares reserved for issuance, expand the
types of awards available under the plan, materially modify plan
eligibility requirements, extend the term of the plan or
materially modify the method of determining the exercise price
of options granted under the plan, or otherwise as required to
comply with applicable law or stock market requirements.
401(k)
retirement plan
We maintain a 401(k) retirement plan that is intended to be a
tax-qualified defined contribution savings plan under
Section 401(k) of the Internal Revenue Code. Substantially
all of our employees are eligible to participate. The 401(k)
plan includes a salary deferral arrangement pursuant to which
participants may elect to reduce their current compensation by
up to the statutorily prescribed limit, equal to $15,000 in
2006, and have the amount of the reduction contributed to the
401(k) plan. We are permitted to match employees 401(k)
plan contributions. For the year ended December 31, 2005,
we have elected to match 50% of the first 6% of the eligible
employees contributions to the 401(k) plan.
Rule 10b5-1
trading plans
We expect that many of our executive officers and directors will
adopt written plans, known as
Rule 10b5-1
trading plans, in which they will contract with a broker to buy
or sell shares of our common stock on a periodic basis. Under a
Rule 10b5-1
trading plan, a broker executes trades pursuant to parameters
established by the director or officer when entering into the
plan, without further direction from them. The officer or
director may amend or terminate the plan in some circumstances.
Our executive officers and directors may also buy or sell
additional shares outside of a
Rule 10b5-1
plan when they are not in possession of material nonpublic
information. Under the terms of the
lock-up
agreements that our executive officers and directors have signed
with the underwriters for this offering, our executive officers
and directors can enter into
Rule 10b5-1
trading plans during the
180-day
lock-up
period, provided that such plan does not provide for any
transfers of common stock during the
lock-up
period or any extension thereof pursuant to the
lock-up
agreement.
146
Certain
relationships and related party transactions
Since January 1, 2003, we have engaged in the following
transactions with our executive officers, directors and holders
of more than 5% of our voting securities, and affiliates of our
executive officers, directors and holders of more than 5% of our
voting securities. We believe that all of these transactions
were on terms as favorable as could have been obtained from
unrelated third parties.
Corporate
reorganization
On June 30, 2004, we completed a corporate reorganization
in which:
|
|
|
Emergent BioSolutions Inc., a newly formed Delaware corporation,
issued 6,487,950 shares of class A common stock to
stockholders of BioPort Corporation in exchange for
6,262,554 shares of BioPort class A common stock and
225,396 shares of BioPort class B common stock;
|
|
|
we repurchased and retired all other issued and outstanding
shares of BioPort class B common stock; and
|
|
|
we assumed all outstanding stock options to purchase BioPort
class B common stock and granted option holders replacement
stock options to purchase an equal number of shares of our
class B common stock under our employee stock option plan.
|
As a result of this reorganization, BioPort became a wholly
owned subsidiary of Emergent.
Issuance of
class A common stock
The following table sets forth the number of shares of our
class A common stock that we issued to the former
stockholders of BioPort in our corporate reorganization.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of shares
of
|
Name
|
|
class A
common stock
|
|
|
Intervac, L.L.C.
|
|
|
2,890,000
|
BioPharm, L.L.C.
|
|
|
1,412,896
|
Michigan Biologics Products,
Inc.
|
|
|
672,500
|
BioVac, L.L.C.
|
|
|
555,822
|
Biologika, LLC
|
|
|
477,941
|
Intervac Management, L.L.C.
|
|
|
250,000
|
ARPI, L.L.C.
|
|
|
228,791
|
|
|
Intervac, BioPharm, Michigan Biologics Products, Biovac,
Biologika, Intervac Management and ARPI are parties to a voting
agreement dated June 30, 2004. We refer to these
stockholders collectively as the voting group. Under the voting
agreement, each stockholder in the voting group has agreed to
vote all shares of our capital stock owned by it for and against
and abstain from voting with respect to any matter as directed
by a majority in interest of the voting group as measured by the
aggregate percentage of ownership of our capital stock. Fuad
El-Hibri, our president, chief executive officer and chairman of
our board of directors, has the power to direct the voting of a
majority in interest of the voting group. As a result,
Mr. El-Hibri is considered the beneficial owner of all of
the shares held by Intervac, BioPharm, Michigan Biologics
Products, BioVac, Biologika, Intervac Management and ARPI. See
Principal and selling stockholders for additional
information regarding the beneficial ownership of our common
stock.
147
Grant of
options to purchase class B common stock
The following table sets forth the number of shares of our
class B common stock underlying options that we granted
under our employee stock option plan to our executive officers
and directors contemporaneously with our corporate
reorganization.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of shares
of
|
|
|
class B
common stock
|
|
|
underlying
options
|
Name
|
|
granted
|
|
|
Robert G. Kramer, Sr.
|
|
|
162,500
|
Daniel J. Abdun-Nabi
|
|
|
37,000
|
Kyle W. Keese
|
|
|
15,000
|
|
|
Special cash
dividend
On June 15, 2005, our board of directors declared a special
cash dividend to the holders of our outstanding shares of common
stock in an aggregate amount of approximately $5.4 million.
Our board of directors declared this special dividend in order
to distribute the net proceeds of a payment that we received as
a result of the settlement of litigation that we initiated
against Elan Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Athena Neurosciences, Inc.
and Solstice Neurosciences, Inc. BioPort filed the lawsuit in
2002 in an effort to clarify intellectual property rights and
recover royalties that BioPort asserted were owed under a series
of agreements regarding the development of botulinum toxin
products. We paid the special cash dividend on July 13,
2005 to stockholders of record as of June 15, 2005. The
following table sets forth the amount of the special cash
dividend that we paid to our 5% stockholders and their
affiliates.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amount of
special
|
Name
|
|
cash
dividend
|
|
|
Intervac, L.L.C.
|
|
$
|
2,402,864
|
BioPharm, L.L.C.
|
|
|
1,174,739
|
Michigan Biologics Products,
Inc.
|
|
|
559,144
|
BioVac, L.L.C.
|
|
|
462,133
|
Biologika, LLC
|
|
|
397,380
|
Intervac Management, L.L.C.
|
|
|
207,860
|
ARPI, L.L.C.
|
|
|
190,226
|
|
|
See Principal and selling stockholders for
additional information regarding the beneficial ownership of our
common stock.
Microscience
acquisition
On June 23, 2005, we acquired all of the outstanding shares
of capital stock of Microscience Limited from Microscience
Investments Limited, formerly Microscience Holdings plc, in
exchange for 1,264,051 shares of our class A common
stock. We subsequently renamed Microscience Limited as Emergent
Product Development UK Limited.
148
Registration
rights
Upon the completion of this offering, holders of
7,752,001 shares of our common stock as of August 31,
2006 will have the right to require us to register these shares
of common stock under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or
the Securities Act, under specified circumstances. In connection
with our acquisition of Microscience Limited, we granted to
Microscience Investments registration rights with respect to the
shares of our common stock that we issued to Microscience
Investments in the acquisition. We also have granted
registration rights with respect to shares of our common stock
to the holders of our existing class A common stock, in
addition to Microscience Investments. The following table sets
forth the number of shares of our common stock subject to these
registration rights that are held by our 5% stockholders and
their affiliates.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of shares
of
|
Name
|
|
common
stock
|
|
|
Intervac, L.L.C.
|
|
|
2,890,000
|
BioPharm, L.L.C.
|
|
|
1,412,896
|
Microscience Investments Limited
|
|
|
1,264,051
|
Michigan Biologics Products,
Inc.
|
|
|
672,500
|
BioVac, L.L.C.
|
|
|
555,822
|
Biologika, LLC
|
|
|
477,941
|
Intervac Management, L.L.C.
|
|
|
250,000
|
ARPI, L.L.C.
|
|
|
228,791
|
|
|
See Description of capital stock Registration
rights for additional information regarding these
registration rights. See Principal and selling
stockholders for additional information regarding the
beneficial ownership of our common stock.
Consulting
agreements
In January 2005, we entered into an agreement with
Fleishman-Hillard Inc. under which Fleishman-Hillard provided us
government relations, strategic consulting and communication
services. Jerome Hauer, a member of our board of directors, was
a senior vice president of Fleishman-Hillard until March 2006.
Under the agreement, we have agreed to pay Fleishman-Hillard
$20,000 per month for its services. The monthly fee
increased to $30,000 per month in March 2005. We paid
Fleishman-Hillard $342,663 in 2005 and $87,059 in the three
months ended March 31, 2006 for these services. The
agreement terminated on March 31, 2006.
In March 2006, we entered into an agreement with The Hauer Group
under which The Hauer Group provides us strategic consulting and
domestic marketing advice. Jerome Hauer is the chief executive
officer of The Hauer Group. Mr. Hauer and his wife are the
sole owners of The Hauer Group. Under the terms of the
agreement, we agreed to pay The Hauer Group $15,000 per
month for its services. The agreement expires on March 31,
2007.
In November 2004, we entered into a consulting services
agreement with Yasmine Gibellini to provide public relations
services. Ms. Gibellini is the sister of Fuad El-Hibri, our
president, chief executive officer and chairman of our board of
directors. Under the agreement, we agreed to pay
Ms. Gibellini $220 per hour for a maximum of
20 hours per week, as needed, for her services, the total
of which was not to exceed $60,000, and reimburse her reasonable
out-of-pocket
expenses. The agreement expired in June
149
2005. In March 2005, we entered into a separate consulting
agreement with Ms. Gibellini to provide sales and marketing
services. We agreed to pay Ms. Gibellini $700 per day
for a time commitment of approximately two to three days per
week, as needed, for her services, the total of which was not to
exceed $60,000, and reimburse her reasonable
out-of-pocket
expenses. In addition, we agreed to pay Ms. Gibellini a
sales commission equal to 4% of BioThrax net sales, not to
exceed $2.00 per dose, from contracts to any customer in which
Ms. Gibellini had direct involvement. The agreement
terminated on August 31, 2005. We paid Ms. Gibellini
$39,353 in 2005 and $25,200 in 2006 under these agreements.
From September 2004 through November 2004, we retained
Louis W. Sullivan, M.D., a member of our board of
directors, to provide consulting services for a fixed fee of
$25,000 per month.
Agreements with
Intergen N.V.
In November 1997, BioPort entered into a marketing agreement,
which was amended and restated in January 2000, with Intergen
N.V. Yasmine Gibellini, the chairperson of Intergen N.V., is the
sister of Fuad El-Hibri, our president, chief executive officer
and chairman of our board of directors. Ibrahim El-Hibri, the
president of Intergen, is the father of Fuad El-Hibri. Ibrahim
El-Hibri and his wife are the sole stockholders of Intergen.
Under the agreement, Intergen is the sole and exclusive
marketing representative for BioThrax and any other biodefense
vaccine that BioPort becomes licensed to manufacture or sell in
countries in the Middle East and North Africa, except Israel and
those countries to which export is prohibited by the
U.S. government. Under the agreement, we agreed to pay
Intergen a fee equal to 40% of the gross sales in these
countries. We have not paid Intergen any fee under the
agreement. The term of the agreement is scheduled to expire in
November 2007. The agreement will automatically extend for an
additional five years if BioPort achieves $5.0 million of
sales in the territory during the initial three-year term of the
agreement.
In January 2000, BioPort entered into a termination and
settlement agreement with Intergen. Under the agreement, BioPort
is obligated to pay Intergen a $70,000 settlement payment when
it receives more than $3.0 million pursuant to a contract
for sale of anthrax vaccine to a party other than the
U.S. government. The settlement payment is in consideration
for Intergens agreement to terminate a consulting
agreement entered into between the parties in November 1997 and
reduce the scope of its rights under the marketing agreement
described above. This settlement payment has not yet become due
and has not been paid.
Agreements with
East West Resources Corporation
In January 2004, BioPort entered into a consulting agreement
with East West Resources Corporation under which East West
Resources provided financial analysis, business modeling and
corporate and business development consulting services. Fuad
El-Hibri is the chairman of East West Resources and was
president of East West Resources from September 1990 to January
2004. Fuad El-Hibri and his wife are the sole stockholders of
East West Resources. The agreement terminated in September 2005.
We paid East West Resources $180,000 in 2004 and $135,000 in
2005 under the agreement.
In January 2004, BioPort entered into an amended and restated
sublease and office services agreement with East West Resources
under which East West Resources leased us office space in
Rockville, Maryland and provided us administrative,
transportation and logistics support. Under the agreement, we
agreed to pay East West Resources monthly rent of $10,707. The
monthly rent increased by 3% each year. In September 2004, we
terminated in part the agreement with respect to the lease of
office space for a settlement fee of $69,687, an amount equal to
eight months rent, including the 3% escalation fee, but
excluding the portion of monthly rent applicable to
transportation and logistics support. We paid East
150
West Resources $120,000 in 2003, $173,647 in 2004, $33,750 in
2005 and $16,040 in the six months ended June 30, 2006
under the agreement. The agreement expired on July 31, 2006.
In August 2006, we entered into a services agreement with East
West Resources under which East West Resources agreed to provide
us transportation and logistics support. Under the agreement, we
agreed to pay East West Resources a fee of $2,450 per month and
reimburse fees and expenses associated with these services. The
term of the agreement ends on July 31, 2007. The agreement
will automatically extend for additional successive terms of one
year unless terminated by either party with at least
60 days notice. Under the agreement, the monthly fee
increases by 3% each year upon extension of the term.
Airplane charter
from Simba LLC
From time to time from March 2004 until April 2006, we chartered
a private airplane for business purposes from Simba LLC. Fuad
El-Hibri and his wife own 100% of the interests in Simba.
Mr. El-Hibri also is the managing member of Simba. Simba
sold the airplane in May 2006. The plane was managed and
chartered by Frederick Aviation and was available for charter by
the general public. We paid Simba $32,148 in 2004, $33,999 in
2005 and $13,283 in the six months ended June 30, 2006 for
charter fees and reimbursement of costs. Frederick Aviation
provided us with a discount of $300 per hour from its
commercial charter rate. In all other respects, the fees and
expenses that we paid to Simba were equivalent to fees charged
to third parties for charter flights.
Employee
relationships
Mauro Gibellini, a
brother-in-law
of Fuad El-Hibri, is our vice president corporate planning and
business development. In addition, Mauro Gibellini and his wife,
Yasmine Gibellini, as tenants by the entirety, hold 100% of the
ownership interests in Biologika LLC, one of our 5%
stockholders, and have the power to dispose of all shares of our
capital stock held by Biologika. We paid total cash compensation
to Mr. Gibellini of $228,994 in 2003 and $320,765 in 2004.
We paid total cash compensation to Mr. Gibellini of
$278,969 for 2005, including an annual bonus for 2005 paid in
2006. Mr. Gibellinis current annual base salary is
$195,624. He is also eligible for an annual bonus for 2006.
Mr. Gibellini is a participant in our severance plan and
termination protection program. As of August 31, 2006, we
have granted Mr. Gibellini options to purchase 25,000
shares of our class B common stock at a weighted average
exercise price of $4.83 per share.
Mark Grunenwald, a
brother-in-law
of Fuad El-Hibri, is our manager of information systems. We paid
total cash compensation to Mr. Grunenwald of $1,115 in 2003
and $63,282 in 2004. We paid total cash compensation to
Mr. Grunenwald of $69,337 for 2005, including an annual
bonus for 2005 paid in 2006. Mr. Grunenwalds current
annual base salary is $74,000. He is also eligible for an annual
bonus for 2006.
Robert Myers, who serves as senior policy and science advisor
and director of BioPort Corporation, is also the President of
Michigan Biologics Products, Inc., one of our 5% stockholders,
and has the power to direct the disposition of all shares of our
capital stock held by Michigan Biologics Products. We paid total
cash compensation to Dr. Myers of $492,351 in 2003,
$258,369 in 2004 and $204,655 in 2005. In June 2005, BioPort
entered into an employment agreement with Dr. Myers in his
role as senior policy and science advisor to BioPort. Under this
employment agreement, Dr. Myers is entitled to an annual
base salary of $180,000 and an annual bonus of $15,000. The
employment agreement terminates upon the completion of this
offering. Upon the completion of this offering, Dr. Myers
is entitled to the following termination benefits:
|
|
|
payment of any previously unpaid base salary and accrued paid
time off and other benefits through the date of termination;
|
151
|
|
|
payment of any unpaid, pro-rated bonus through the date of
termination; and
|
|
|
a lump sum payment in the amount of $100,000, less applicable
withholding and related taxes.
|
As of August 31, 2006, we have granted Dr. Myers
options to purchase 159,604 shares of our common stock at
an exercise price of $0.25 per share.
Executive
compensation
See Management Executive compensation
and Management Stock option grants for
additional information regarding compensation of our executive
officers.
Director
compensation
See Management Director compensation for
a discussion of options granted and other compensation to our
non-employee directors.
Severance plan
and termination protection program
Our executive officers participate in our severance plan and
termination protection program. See Management
Severance plan and termination protection program for
additional information regarding these arrangements.
Indemnification
agreements
We have entered into an indemnification agreement with each of
our executive officers and directors. See
Management Limitation of liability and
indemnification for additional information regarding these
agreements.
152
Principal and
selling stockholders
The following table sets forth information with respect to the
beneficial ownership of our common stock as of August 31,
2006 by:
|
|
|
each of our named executive officers;
|
|
|
each of our directors;
|
|
|
|
all of our executive officers and directors as a group; and
|
|
|
|
each person, or group of affiliated persons, who is known by us
to beneficially own more than 5% of our common stock.
|
The information in the following table assumes that our
previously existing class A common stock has been
reclassified as common stock and all previously outstanding
shares of class B common stock have been converted into
shares of common stock prior to the completion of this offering.
The column entitled Percentage of shares beneficially
owned before offering is based on 7,782,016 shares of
our common stock outstanding as of August 31, 2006. The
column entitled Percentage of shares beneficially
owned after offering is based on shares of our common
stock to be outstanding immediately after the completion of this
offering, including
the shares
of common stock that we are selling in this offering. The
holders of our existing class A common stock have granted
an option to the underwriters to purchase up to an aggregate
of
additional shares of our common stock to cover over-allotments.
For more information regarding the shares subject to the
over-allotment option, see Selling
stockholders below. No other stockholder is participating
in the offering.
Beneficial ownership is determined in accordance with the rules
and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission and
includes voting or investment power with respect to our common
stock. In computing the number of shares of common stock
beneficially owned and percentage ownership, shares subject to
options held by a person are deemed to be outstanding and
beneficially owned by that person if the options are currently
exercisable or exercisable within 60 days of
August 31, 2006. Shares subject to options are not deemed
to be outstanding for the purpose of computing the percentage
ownership of any other person. Except as otherwise noted, the
persons and entities in this table have sole voting and
investing power with respect to all of the shares of common
stock beneficially owned by them, subject to community property
laws, where applicable. Except as otherwise set forth below, the
address of the beneficial owner is c/o Emergent
BioSolutions Inc., 300 Professional Drive, Suite 250,
Gaithersburg, Maryland 20879.
153
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Percentage of
shares
|
|
|
Number of
shares
|
|
beneficially
owned
|
Name of
beneficial owner
|
|
beneficially
owned
|
|
Before
offering
|
|
|
After
offering
|
|
|
Executive officers and
directors
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fuad El-Hibri(1)
|
|
|
7,782,001
|
|
|
99.6
|
%
|
|
|
|
Edward J. Arcuri, Ph.D.(2)
|
|
|
13,334
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
|
Robert G. Kramer, Sr.(3)
|
|
|
178,500
|
|
|
2.2
|
|
|
|
|
Steven N. Chatfield, Ph.D.(4)
|
|
|
6,667
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
|
Daniel J. Abdun-Nabi(5)
|
|
|
25,900
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
|
Joe M. Allbaugh
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Zsolt Harsanyi, Ph.D.(6)
|
|
|
10,000
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
|
Jerome M. Hauer(7)
|
|
|
5,000
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
|
Shahzad Malik, M.D.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ronald B. Richard(8)
|
|
|
5,000
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
|
Louis W. Sullivan, M.D.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All executive officers and
directors as a group (14 persons)(9)
|
|
|
8,038,902
|
|
|
99.6
|
|
|
|
|
5% stockholders
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stockholder voting group under
voting agreement dated June 30, 2004(10)
|
|
|
7,752,001
|
|
|
99.6
|
|
|
|
|
Microscience Investments
Limited(11)
|
|
|
1,264,051
|
|
|
16.2
|
|
|
|
|
Robert Myers, D.V.M.(12)
|
|
|
832,104
|
|
|
10.5
|
|
|
|
|
Mauro and Yasmine Gibellini(13)
|
|
|
502,941
|
|
|
6.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* |
|
Less than 1%. |
|
(1) |
|
Consists of the following shares of our common stock: |
|
|
|
2,890,000 shares held by Intervac, L.L.C.;
|
|
|
|
1,412,896 shares held by BioPharm, L.L.C.;
|
|
|
|
672,500 shares held by Michigan Biologics
Products, Inc.;
|
|
|
|
555,822 shares held by Biovac, L.L.C.;
|
|
|
|
477,941 shares held by Biologika LLC;
|
|
|
|
250,000 shares held by Intervac Management,
L.L.C.;
|
|
|
|
228,791 shares held by ARPI, L.L.C.;
|
|
|
|
1,264,051 shares held by Microscience
Investments Limited; and
|
|
|
|
|
|
30,000 shares subject to stock options held by
Mr. El-Hibri exercisable within 60 days of
August 31, 2006.
|
|
|
|
|
|
If the underwriters exercise their over-allotment option in
full, Mr. El-Hibri will beneficially
own shares
of our common stock after this offering, or % of our
outstanding common stock, consisting of the following shares of
our common stock: |
|
|
|
shares
held by Intervac, L.L.C.;
|
154
|
|
|
|
|
shares
held by BioPharm, L.L.C.;
|
|
|
|
shares
held by Michigan Biologics Products, Inc.;
|
|
|
|
shares
held by Biovac, L.L.C.;
|
|
|
|
shares
held by Biologika LLC;
|
|
|
|
shares
held by Intervac Management, L.L.C.;
|
|
|
|
shares
held by ARPI, L.L.C.;
|
|
|
|
shares
held by Microscience Investments Limited; and
|
|
|
|
|
|
30,000 shares subject to stock options held by
Mr. El-Hibri exercisable within 60 days of
August 31, 2006.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Robert Myers has the power to direct the disposition of all
shares of our capital stock held by Michigan Biologics Products. |
|
|
|
Mauro and Yasmine Gibellini, as tenants by the entirety, have
the power to dispose of all shares of our capital stock held by
Biologika. |
|
|
|
Janice Mugrditchian has the power to dispose of all shares of
our capital stock held by ARPI. |
|
|
|
The holders of series B preferred ordinary shares of
Microscience Investments have the power to dispose of all shares
of our capital stock held by Microscience Investments and share
the power to vote these shares with BioPharm, L.L.C. |
|
|
|
For more information regarding the beneficial ownership of these
shares, see Stockholder arrangements
below. |
|
|
|
(2) |
|
Consists of 13,334 shares of common stock subject to stock
options exercisable within 60 days of August 31, 2006. |
|
|
|
(3) |
|
Consists of 178,500 shares of common stock subject to stock
options exercisable within 60 days of August 31, 2006. |
|
|
|
(4) |
|
Consists of 6,667 shares of common stock subject to stock
options exercisable within 60 days of August 31, 2006. |
|
|
|
(5) |
|
Consists of 25,900 shares of common stock subject to stock
options exercisable within 60 days of August 31, 2006. |
|
|
|
(6) |
|
Consists of 10,000 shares of common stock subject to stock
options exercisable within 60 days of August 31, 2006. |
|
|
|
(7) |
|
Consists of 5,000 shares of common stock subject to stock
options exercisable within 60 days of August 31, 2006. |
|
|
|
(8) |
|
Consists of 5,000 shares of common stock subject to stock
options exercisable within 60 days of August 31, 2006. |
|
|
|
(9) |
|
Consists of 286,901 shares of common stock subject to stock
options exercisable within 60 days of August 31, 2006. |
|
|
|
(10) |
|
Consists of the following shares of our common stock: |
|
|
|
2,890,000 shares held by Intervac, L.L.C.;
|
|
|
|
1,412,896 shares held by BioPharm, L.L.C.;
|
|
|
|
672,500 shares held by Michigan Biologics
Products, Inc.;
|
|
|
|
555,822 shares held by Biovac, L.L.C.;
|
155
|
|
|
|
|
477,941 shares held by Biologika LLC;
|
|
|
|
250,000 shares held by Intervac Management,
L.L.C.;
|
|
|
|
228,791 shares held by ARPI, L.L.C.; and
|
|
|
|
1,264,051 shares held by Microscience
Investments Limited.
|
|
|
|
If the underwriters exercise their over-allotment option in
full, these stockholders will beneficially
own shares
of our common stock after this offering, or % of our
outstanding common stock, consisting of the following shares of
our common stock: |
|
|
|
shares
held by Intervac, L.L.C.;
|
|
|
|
shares
held by BioPharm, L.L.C.;
|
|
|
|
shares
held by Michigan Biologics Products, Inc.;
|
|
|
|
shares
held by Biovac, L.L.C.;
|
|
|
|
shares
held by Biologika LLC;
|
|
|
|
shares
held by Intervac Management, L.L.C.;
|
|
|
|
shares
held by ARPI, L.L.C.; and
|
|
|
|
shares
held by Microscience Investments Limited.
|
|
|
|
Intervac, BioPharm, Michigan Biologics Products, Biovac,
Biologika, Intervac Management and ARPI are parties to a voting
agreement dated June 30, 2004. BioPharm also is a party to
separate voting agreements with Michigan Biologics Products,
Biologika and Microscience Investments. |
|
|
|
Robert Myers has the power to direct the disposition of all
shares of our capital stock held by Michigan Biologics Products. |
|
|
|
Mauro and Yasmine Gibellini, as tenants by the entirety, have
the power to dispose of all shares of our capital stock held by
Biologika. |
|
|
|
Janice Mugrditchian has the power to dispose of all shares of
our capital stock held by ARPI. |
|
|
|
The holders of series B preferred ordinary shares of
Microscience Investments have the power to dispose of all shares
of our capital stock held by Microscience Investments. |
|
|
|
For more information regarding the beneficial ownership of these
shares, see Stockholder arrangements
below. |
|
|
|
(11) |
|
The holders of series B preferred ordinary shares of
Microscience Investments have the power to dispose of all shares
of our capital stock held by Microscience Investments and share
the power to vote these shares with BioPharm, L.L.C. Investment
funds affiliated with Apax Funds Nominees Limited, Advent
Private Equity Funds, JP Morgan Partners LLC and The Merlin
Biosciences Funds are the holders of the Microscience
Investments series B preferred ordinary shares. No holder
or group of affiliated holders of series B preferred
ordinary shares of Microscience Investments alone has the power
to direct the disposition of the shares of our capital stock
held by Microscience Investments. Microscience Investments is a
party to a voting agreement with BioPharm. For more information
regarding this voting agreement, see
Stockholder arrangements below. |
|
|
|
(12) |
|
Consists of the following shares of our common stock: |
|
|
|
672,500 shares held by Michigan Biologics
Products, Inc.; and
|
|
|
|
|
|
159,604 shares subject to stock options held by
Dr. Myers exercisable within 60 days of
August 31, 2006.
|
156
|
|
|
|
|
If the underwriters exercise their over-allotment option in
full, Dr. Myers will beneficially
own shares
of our common stock after this offering, or % of our
outstanding common stock, consisting of the following shares of
our common stock: |
|
|
|
shares
held by Michigan Biologics Products, Inc.; and
|
|
|
|
|
|
159,604 shares subject to stock options held by
Dr. Myers exercisable within 60 days of
August 31, 2006.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dr. Myers has the power to direct the disposition of all
shares of our capital stock held by Michigan Biologics Products.
Mr. El-Hibri has the power to direct the voting of all
shares of our capital stock held by Michigan Biologics Products.
For more information regarding the beneficial ownership of these
shares, see Stockholder arrangements
below. |
|
(13) |
|
Consists of the following shares of our common stock: |
|
|
|
477,941 shares held by Biologika LLC; and
|
|
|
|
|
|
25,000 shares subject to stock options held by
Mr. Gibellini exercisable within 60 days of
August 31, 2006.
|
|
|
|
|
|
If the underwriters exercise their over-allotment option in
full, Mr. and Mrs. Gibellini will beneficially
own shares
of our common stock after this offering, or % of our
outstanding common stock, consisting of the following shares of
our common stock: |
|
|
|
shares
held by Biologika LLC; and
|
|
|
|
|
|
25,000 shares subject to stock options held by
Mr. Gibellini exercisable within 60 days of
August 31, 2006.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mr. and Mrs. Gibellini, as tenants by the entirety, have
the power to dispose of all shares of our capital stock held by
Biologika. Mr. El-Hibri has the power to direct the voting
of all shares of our capital stock held by Biologika. For more
information regarding the beneficial ownership of these shares,
see Stockholder arrangements below. |
Selling
stockholders
The holders of our existing class A common stock have
granted an option to the underwriters to purchase up to an
aggregate
of
additional shares of our common stock to cover over-allotments.
The following table sets forth for each selling stockholder the
number of shares of our common stock subject to the
over-allotment option.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of shares
of
|
|
Name
|
|
common
stock
|
|
|
|
|
157
Stockholder
arrangements
Our principal stockholders are parties to voting agreements that
result in Mr. El-Hibri having the power to direct the
voting of all shares of our capital stock owned by the
stockholders who are party to these voting agreements. A
description of these voting agreements and additional
information regarding the beneficial ownership of the shares
held by our principal stockholders are set forth below.
Voting
agreement dated June 30, 2004
Intervac, BioPharm, Michigan Biologics Products, Biovac,
Biologika, Intervac Management and ARPI are parties to a voting
agreement dated June 30, 2004. We refer to these
stockholders collectively as the voting group. Under the voting
agreement, each stockholder in the voting group has agreed to
vote all shares of our capital stock owned by it for and against
and abstain from voting with respect to any matter as directed
by a majority in interest of the voting group as measured by the
aggregate percentage of ownership of our capital stock. As
described below, Mr. El-Hibri has the power to direct the
voting of a majority in interest of the voting group. In
addition, under the voting agreement, each stockholder in the
voting group has appointed Mr. El-Hibri, in his capacity as
the general manager of Intervac, as proxy to vote the shares of
our capital stock in the manner provided in the voting
agreement. The voting agreement automatically terminates on
June 30, 2014. Under the voting agreement, any person to
whom any stockholder in the voting group transfers any shares of
our capital stock must agree to be bound by the terms of the
voting agreement, other than as a result of a transfer pursuant
to an effective registration statement filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission under the Securities Act or pursuant to
Rule 144 under the Securities Act.
Intervac,
L.L.C.
Mr. El-Hibri is the general manager of Intervac and in that
capacity has the power to vote and dispose of all shares of our
capital stock held by Intervac. The board of executive directors
of Intervac, consisting of William J. Crowe, Jr.,
Mr. El-Hibri and Nancy El-Hibri, supervises the management
of the company and has the power to remove the general manager.
Nancy El-Hibri is the wife of Mr. El-Hibri. A majority of
the executive directors of Intervac is required to decide any
matter on which the board of executive directors may take
action, including the removal of the general manager. Any member
of the board of executive directors may be removed by members of
Intervac holding more than 50% of the aggregate ownership
interests in Intervac. Mr. El-Hibri and his wife, as
tenants by the entirety, hold 32.5% of the ownership interests
in Intervac. Under a voting agreement with the William J.
Crowe, Jr. Revocable Living Trust, Mr. El-Hibri has
the power to vote an additional 18.0% of the ownership interests
in Intervac on any matter. As a result,
Mr. El-Hibri
has the power to direct the voting of more than 50% of the
aggregate ownership interests in Intervac. The voting agreement
between Mr. El-Hibri and the William J.
Crowe, Jr. Revocable Living Trust automatically terminates
on October 21, 2010.
BioPharm,
L.L.C.
Mr. El-Hibri is the holder of more than 50% of the
class B ownership units of BioPharm and in that capacity
has the power to direct the voting and disposition of all shares
of our capital stock held by BioPharm.
Michigan
Biologics Products, Inc.
Michigan Biologics Products has agreed, pursuant to a separate
voting agreement with BioPharm, to vote all shares of our
capital stock owned by it for and against and abstain from
voting with respect to any
158
matter in the same manner and to the same extent as BioPharm. As
a result, Mr. El-Hibri has the power to direct the voting
of all shares of our capital stock held by Michigan Biologics
Products. The voting agreement automatically terminates on
June 30, 2014. Under the voting agreement, any person to
whom Michigan Biologics Products transfers any shares of our
capital stock must agree to be bound by the terms of the voting
agreement, other than as a result of a transfer in a
brokers transaction or directly with a market maker,
subject to BioPharms right to purchase at fair market
value the shares that Michigan Biologics Products proposes to
sell. Robert Myers, the president of Michigan Biologics
Products, who also serves as senior science and policy advisor
and director of BioPort Corporation, has the power to direct the
disposition of all shares of our capital stock held by Michigan
Biologics Products.
Biovac,
L.L.C.
Mr. El-Hibri and his wife, as tenants by the entirety, hold
89.2% of the ownership interests in Biovac and have the power to
vote and dispose of all shares of our capital stock held by
Biovac.
Biologika
LLC
Biologika has agreed, pursuant to a separate voting agreement
with BioPharm, to vote all shares of our capital stock owned by
it for and against and abstain from voting with respect to any
matter in the same manner and to the same extent as BioPharm. As
a result, Mr. El-Hibri has the power to direct the voting
of all shares of our capital stock held by Biologika. The voting
agreement automatically terminates on June 30, 2014. Under
the voting agreement, any person to whom Biologika transfers any
shares of our capital stock must agree to be bound by the terms
of the voting agreement, other than as a result of a transfer in
a brokers transaction or directly with a market maker,
subject to BioPharms right to purchase at fair market
value the shares that Biologika proposes to sell. Mauro
Gibellini and Yasmine Gibellini, as tenants by the entirety,
hold 100% of the ownership interests in Biologika and have the
power to dispose of all shares of our capital stock held by
Biologika. Yasmine Gibellini is the sister of Mr. El-Hibri.
Mauro Gibellini is the
brother-in-law
of Mr. El-Hibri.
Intervac
Management, L.L.C.
Mr. El-Hibri is the general manager of Intervac Management
and in that capacity has the power to vote and dispose of all
shares of our capital stock held by Intervac Management.
Mr. El-Hibri is appointed as general manager pursuant to
the terms of the operating agreement of Intervac Management,
which may only be amended with the unanimous consent of the
members of Intervac Management. Mr. El-Hibri and his wife,
as tenants by the entirety, hold 31.1% of the ownership
interests in Intervac Management.
ARPI,
L.L.C.
Janice Mugrditchian holds 100% of the ownership interests in
ARPI and has the power to vote and dispose of all shares of our
capital stock held by ARPI.
Microscience
Investments Limited
Microscience Investments has agreed, pursuant to a separate
voting agreement with BioPharm, to vote all shares of our common
stock owned by it for and against and abstain from voting with
respect to any proposal in the same manner and to the same
extent as BioPharm. The voting agreement automatically
terminates upon the conclusion of our first annual meeting of
stockholders following the completion of this offering.
159
Description of
capital stock
The following description of our capital stock and provisions of
our restated certificate of incorporation, which we refer to as
our certificate of incorporation, and our amended and restated
by-laws, which we refer to as our by-laws, are summaries and are
qualified by reference to the certificate of incorporation and
the by-laws that will be in effect upon completion of this
offering. We have filed copies of these documents with the
Securities and Exchange Commission as exhibits to our
registration statement of which this prospectus forms a part.
The descriptions of the common stock and preferred stock reflect
changes to our capital structure that will occur prior to and
upon completion of this offering.
Upon the completion of this offering, our authorized capital
stock will consist of 100,000,000 shares of common stock,
$0.001 par value per share, and 15,000,000 shares of
preferred stock, $0.001 par value per share.
As of August 31, 2006, we had issued and outstanding
7,752,001 shares of class A common stock and
30,015 shares of class B common stock, held by 32
stockholders of record. As of August 31, 2006, we also had
outstanding options to purchase 1,061,679 shares of
class B common stock at a weighted average exercise price
of $6.38 per share.
Prior to the completion of this offering:
|
|
|
our class A common stock will be reclassified as common
stock and each outstanding share of our class B common
stock will be converted into one share of common stock; and
|
|
|
each outstanding option to purchase shares of our class B
common stock will automatically become an option to purchase an
equal number of shares of common stock at the same exercise
price per share.
|
Common
stock
The holders of our common stock are entitled to one vote per
share with respect to each matter presented to our stockholders
on which the holders of common stock are entitled to vote and do
not have cumulative voting rights. An election of directors by
our stockholders shall be determined by a plurality of the votes
cast by the stockholders entitled to vote on the election.
Holders of common stock are entitled to receive proportionately
any dividends as may be declared by our board of directors,
subject to any preferential dividend rights of outstanding
preferred stock.
In the event of our liquidation or dissolution, the holders of
common stock are entitled to receive ratably all assets
available for distribution to stockholders after the payment of
all debts and other liabilities and subject to the prior rights
of any outstanding preferred stock. Holders of common stock have
no preemptive, subscription, redemption or conversion rights.
The rights, preferences and privileges of holders of common
stock are subject to and may be adversely affected by the rights
of the holders of shares of any series of preferred stock that
we may designate and issue in the future.
Preferred
stock
Under the terms of our certificate of incorporation, our board
of directors is authorized to issue shares of preferred stock in
one or more series without stockholder approval. Our board of
directors has the discretion to determine the rights,
preferences, privileges and restrictions, including voting
rights, dividend rights, conversion rights, redemption
privileges and liquidation preferences, of each series of
preferred stock.
160
Authorizing our board of directors to issue preferred stock and
determine its rights and preferences has the effect of
eliminating delays associated with a stockholder vote on
specific issuances. The issuance of preferred stock or of rights
to purchase preferred stock, while providing flexibility in
connection with possible acquisitions, future financings and
other corporate purposes, could have the effect of making it
more difficult for a third party to acquire, or could discourage
a third party from seeking to acquire, a majority of our
outstanding voting stock. Currently, we have no shares of
preferred stock outstanding. Our board of directors has
authorized 100,000 shares of series A junior
participating preferred stock for issuance under our stockholder
rights plan. See Stockholder rights plan
below. We have no current plans to issue any preferred stock
other than as may be provided for by the stockholder rights plan.
Options
Upon the completion of this offering, based on options
outstanding as of August 31, 2006, we will have outstanding
options to purchase an aggregate of 1,061,679 shares of our
common stock at a weighted average exercise price of
$6.38 per share.
Anti-takeover
effects of Delaware law and our certificate of incorporation and
by-laws
Our certificate of incorporation and by-laws and Delaware law
contain provisions that could have the effect of delaying,
deferring or discouraging another party from acquiring control
of us. These provisions, which are summarized below, are
expected to discourage coercive takeover practices and
inadequate takeover bids. These provisions are also designed to
encourage persons seeking to acquire control of us to first
negotiate with our board of directors.
Immediately prior to this offering, Fuad El-Hibri, our
president, chief executive officer and chairman of our board of
directors, was the beneficial owner of 99.6% of our outstanding
common stock. Immediately following this offering,
Mr. El-Hibri will be the beneficial owner of %
of our outstanding common stock, or % of our
outstanding common stock if the underwriters exercise their
over-allotment option in full. As a result, Mr. El-Hibri
will be able to control the election of the members of our board
of directors following this offering. In addition, some of the
provisions summarized below may further enhance
Mr. El-Hibris control of our corporate affairs for at
least the next several years, including control of our board of
directors. This control could discourage others from initiating
a potential merger, takeover or other change of control
transaction that other stockholders may view as beneficial.
Number of
directors
Subject to the rights of holders of any series of preferred
stock to elect directors, our board of directors will establish
the number of directors. Until the fifth anniversary of the
completion of this offering, any change in the number of
directors will require the affirmative vote of at least 75% of
the directors then in office.
Staggered
board; removal of directors
Our certificate of incorporation and our by-laws divide our
directors into three classes with staggered three-year terms.
Our directors may be removed from office only for cause and only
by the affirmative vote of holders of our capital stock
representing at least 75% of the voting power of all outstanding
stock entitled to vote.
161
Any vacancy on our board of directors, including a vacancy
resulting from an enlargement of our board of directors, may be
filled only by the affirmative vote of a majority of our
directors present at a meeting duly held at which a quorum is
present.
The classification of our board of directors and the limitations
on the removal of directors and filling of vacancies could make
it more difficult for a third party to acquire, or discourage a
third party from seeking to acquire, control of our company.
Appointment
and removal of chairman of the board
Until the fifth anniversary of the completion of this offering,
the appointment and removal of the chairman of our board of
directors will require the affirmative vote of at least 75% of
our directors then in office. Mr. El-Hibri currently serves
as the chairman of our board of directors.
Stockholder
action by written consent; special meetings
Our certificate of incorporation and our by-laws provide that
any action required or permitted to be taken by our stockholders
must be effected at a duly called annual or special meeting of
such holders and may not be effected by any consent in writing
by such holders. Our certificate of incorporation and our
by-laws also provide that, except as otherwise required by law,
special meetings of our stockholders can only be called by our
board of directors, our chairman of the board or our president.
Advance notice
requirements
Following the second anniversary of the completion of this
offering, our by-laws establish an advance notice procedure for
stockholder proposals to be brought before an annual meeting of
stockholders, including proposed nominations of persons for
election to the board of directors. Following the second
anniversary of the completion of this offering, stockholders at
an annual meeting may only consider proposals or nominations
specified in the notice of meeting or brought before the meeting
by or at the direction of the board of directors or by a
stockholder of record on the record date for the meeting, who is
entitled to vote at the meeting and who has delivered timely
written notice in proper form to our secretary of the
stockholders intention to bring such business before the
meeting. These provisions could have the effect of delaying
until the next stockholder meeting stockholder actions that are
favored by the holders of a majority of our outstanding voting
securities.
Delaware
business combination statute
We are subject to Section 203 of the General Corporation
Law of Delaware. Subject to certain exceptions, Section 203
prevents a publicly held Delaware corporation from engaging in a
business combination with any interested
stockholder for three years following the date that the
person became an interested stockholder, unless the interested
stockholder attained such status with the approval of our board
of directors or unless the business combination is approved in a
prescribed manner. A business combination includes,
among other things, a merger or consolidation involving us and
the interested stockholder and the sale of more than
10% of our assets. In general, an interested
stockholder is any entity or person beneficially owning
15% or more of our outstanding voting stock and any entity or
person affiliated with or controlling or controlled by such
entity or person. The restrictions contained in Section 203
are not applicable to any of our existing stockholders.
162
Super-majority
voting
The General Corporation Law of Delaware provides generally that
the affirmative vote of a majority of the shares entitled to
vote on any matter is required to amend a corporations
certificate of incorporation or by-laws, unless a
corporations certificate of incorporation or by-laws, as
the case may be, requires a greater percentage. Until the second
anniversary of the completion of this offering, the affirmative
vote of holders of our capital stock representing a majority of
the voting power of all outstanding stock entitled to vote is
required to amend or repeal the provisions of our certificate of
incorporation described in this section entitled
Anti-takeover effects of Delaware law and our certificate
of incorporation and by-laws. Following the second
anniversary of the completion of this offering, the affirmative
vote of holders of our capital stock representing at least 75%
of the voting power of all outstanding stock entitled to vote is
required to amend or repeal these provisions of our certificate
of incorporation. Until the second anniversary of the completion
of this offering, the affirmative vote of either at least 75% of
the directors then in office or holders of our capital stock
representing a majority of the voting power of all outstanding
stock entitled to vote is required to amend or repeal our
by-laws. Following the second anniversary of the completion of
this offering, the affirmative vote of either a majority of the
directors present at a meeting of our board of directors or
holders of our capital stock representing at least 75% of the
voting power of all outstanding stock entitled to vote is
required to amend or repeal our by-laws.
Stockholder
rights plan
In connection with this offering, we will enter into a rights
agreement pursuant to which we will issue to our stockholders
one preferred stock purchase right for each outstanding share of
our common stock. Each right, when exercisable, will entitle the
registered holder to purchase from us a unit consisting of one
one-thousandth of a share of series A junior participating
preferred stock at a purchase price to be determined by our
board of directors at the same time the initial public offering
price of our common stock is determined. We will enter into the
rights agreement with American Stock Transfer & Trust
Company, as rights agent.
The following description is a summary of the material terms of
our stockholder rights plan. It does not restate these terms in
their entirety. We urge you to read our stockholder rights plan
because it, and not this description, defines its terms and
provisions. We have filed a copy of the rights agreement that
establishes our stockholder rights plan as an exhibit to our
registration statement of which this prospectus forms a part.
Rights. Each share of common stock will have
attached to it one right. Initially, the rights are not
exercisable and are attached to all certificates representing
outstanding shares of our common stock, and we will not
distribute separate rights certificates. The rights will only be
exercisable under limited circumstances specified in the rights
agreement when there has been a distribution of the rights and
the rights are no longer redeemable by us.
The rights will expire at the close of business on the tenth
anniversary of the date the rights plan was adopted, unless we
redeem or exchange them earlier as described below.
Prior to the rights distribution date. Prior to the
rights distribution date:
|
|
|
the rights are evidenced by our common stock certificates and
will be transferred with and only with such common stock
certificates; and
|
|
|
the surrender for transfer of any certificates of our common
stock will also constitute the transfer of the rights associated
with our common stock represented by such certificate.
|
163
Rights distribution date. The rights will separate
from our common stock, and a rights distribution date will
occur, upon the earlier of the following events:
|
|
|
10 business days following the later of (1) a public
announcement that a person or group, other than an exempted
person, has acquired, or obtained the right to acquire
beneficial ownership of 15% or more of the outstanding shares of
our common stock or (2) the first date on which one of our
executive officers has actual knowledge of such an
event; and
|
|
|
10 business days following the start of a tender offer or
exchange offer that would result in a person or group, other
than an exempted person, beneficially owning 15% or more of the
outstanding shares of our common stock.
|
The distribution date may be deferred by our board of directors
and some inadvertent actions will not trigger the occurrence of
the rights distribution date. In addition, a rights distribution
date will not occur as a result of the ownership of our stock by
the following exempted persons:
|
|
|
Fuad El-Hibri and his wife, Nancy
El-Hibri,
and any entity controlled by Fuad
El-Hibri or
Nancy
El-Hibri;
|
|
|
|
Microscience Investments Limited, unless and until such time as
Microscience Investments, together with its affiliates and
associates, directly or indirectly, becomes the beneficial owner
of any additional shares of common stock, except under certain
specified circumstances, and disregarding any shares
Microscience Investments is or becomes the beneficial owner of
solely as a result of the fact that it is a party to any of the
voting agreements described under Principal and selling
stockholders Stockholder arrangements; and
|
|
|
|
each other holder of our common stock immediately prior to this
offering to the extent such persons beneficial ownership
exceeds 15% solely as a result of the fact that the person is a
party to any of the voting agreements described under
Principal and selling stockholders Stockholder
arrangements.
|
As soon as practicable after the rights distribution date,
separate rights certificates will be mailed to the holders of
record of our common stock as of the close of business on the
rights distribution date. From and after the rights distribution
date, the separate rights certificates alone will represent the
rights. All shares of our common stock issued prior to the
rights distribution date, including shares of common stock
issued in this offering, will be issued with rights. Shares of
our common stock issued after the rights distribution date in
connection with specified employee benefit plans or upon
conversion of specified securities will be issued with rights.
Except as otherwise determined by our board of directors, no
other shares of our common stock issued after the rights
distribution date will be issued with rights.
Flip-in event. If a person or group, other than an
exempted person, becomes the beneficial owner of 15% or more of
the outstanding shares of our common stock, except as described
below, each holder of a right will thereafter have the right to
receive, upon exercise, a number of shares of our common stock,
or, in some circumstances, cash, property or other securities of
ours, which equals the exercise price of the right divided by
one-half of the current market price of our common stock on the
date the acquisition occurs. However, following the acquisition:
|
|
|
rights will not be exercisable until the rights are no longer
redeemable by us as set forth below; and
|
|
|
all rights that are, or were, under the circumstances specified
in the rights agreement, beneficially owned by any acquiring
person will be null and void.
|
The event set forth in this paragraph is referred to as a
flip-in event. A flip-in event would not occur if there is an
offer for all of our outstanding shares of common stock that at
least 75% of our board of directors determines is fair to our
stockholders and in their best interests.
164
Flip-over event. If at any time after a person or
group, other than an exempted person, has become the beneficial
owner of 15% or more of the outstanding shares of our common
stock:
|
|
|
we are acquired in a merger or other business combination
transaction in which we are not the surviving corporation;
|
|
|
we are the surviving entity in a merger of other business
combination transaction but our common stock is changed or
exchanged for stock or securities of any other person or for
cash or any other property; or
|
|
|
|
more than 50% of our assets or earning power is sold or
transferred,
|
then each holder of a right, except rights which previously have
been voided as set forth above, shall thereafter have the right
to receive, upon exercise, that number of shares of common stock
of the acquiring company which equals the exercise price of the
right divided by one-half of the current market price of that
companys common stock at the date of the occurrence of the
event. The event described in this paragraph is referred to as a
flip-over event. A flip-over event does not arise if the merger
or other transaction follows an offer for all of our outstanding
shares of common stock that at least 75% of our board of
directors determines is fair to our stockholders and in their
best interests.
Exchange of rights. At any time after a flip-in
event, when no person owns a majority of our common stock, our
board of directors may exchange the rights, other than rights
owned by the acquiring person that have become void, in whole or
in part, at an exchange ratio of one share of our common stock,
or one one-thousandth of a share of series A preferred
stock, or of a share of a class or series of preferred stock
having equivalent rights, preferences and privileges, per right.
Adjustments. The purchase price of the rights, and
the number of securities purchasable, are subject to adjustment
from time to time to prevent dilution. The number of rights
associated with each share of common stock is also subject to
adjustment in the event of a stock splits, subdivisions,
consolidations or combinations of our common stock that occur
prior to the rights distribution date.
Series A junior participating preferred
stock. Series A preferred stock purchasable upon
exercise of the rights will not be redeemable. Each share of
series A preferred stock will be entitled to receive when,
as and if declared by our board of directors, a minimum
preferential quarterly dividend payment of $10 per share
or, if greater, an aggregate dividend of 1,000 times the
dividend declared per share of our common stock. In the event of
liquidation, the holders of the series A preferred stock
will be entitled to a minimum preferential liquidation payment
of $1,000 per share, plus accrued and unpaid dividends, and
will be entitled to an aggregate payment of 1,000 times the
payment made per share of our common stock. Each share of
series A preferred stock will have 1,000 votes, voting
together with our common stock. In the event of any merger,
consolidation or other transaction in which our common stock is
changed or exchanged, each share of series A preferred
stock will be entitled to receive 1,000 times the amount
received per share of our common stock. These rights are
protected by customary antidilution provisions.
Because of the nature of the series A preferred
stocks dividend, liquidation and voting rights, the value
of one one thousandth of a share of series A preferred
stock purchasable upon exercise of each right should approximate
the value of one share of common stock.
Redemption of rights. At any time until ten business
days following the date of a public announcement that a person
or group, other than an exempted person, has acquired or
obtained the right to acquire beneficial ownership of 15% or
more of the outstanding shares of our common stock, or such
later date upon which one of our executive officers first has
actual knowledge of such event or such later date as
165
our board of directors may determine, we may redeem the rights
in whole, but not in part, at a price of $0.001 per right,
payable in cash or stock. Immediately upon the redemption of the
rights or such earlier time as established by our board of
directors, the rights will terminate and the only right of the
holders of rights will be to receive the redemption price.
Status of rights holder and tax affects. Until a
right is exercised, the holder of the right, as such, will have
no rights as a stockholder of ours, including no right to vote
or to receive dividends. Although the distribution of the rights
should not be taxable to stockholders or to us, stockholders
may, depending upon the circumstances, recognize taxable income
in the event that the rights become exercisable for our common
stock, or other consideration, or for common stock of the
acquiring company as described above.
Boards authority to amend. Our board of
directors may amend any provision of the rights agreement, other
than the redemption price, prior to the date on which the rights
are no longer redeemable. Once the rights are no longer
redeemable, our boards authority to amend the rights
agreement is limited to correcting ambiguities or defective or
inconsistent provisions in a manner that does not adversely
affect the interest of holders of rights.
Effects of the rights. The rights are intended to
protect our stockholders in the event of an unfair or coercive
offer to acquire our company and to provide our board of
directors with adequate time to evaluate unsolicited offers. The
rights may have anti-takeover effects. The rights will cause
substantial dilution to a person or group that attempts to
acquire us without conditioning the offer on a substantial
number of rights being acquired. The rights, however, should not
affect any prospective offeror willing to make an offer at a
fair price and otherwise in the best interests of us and our
stockholders, as determined by our board of directors. The
rights should not interfere with any merger or other business
combination approved by our board of directors.
Registration
rights
Upon the completion of this offering, holders of
7,752,001 shares of our common stock as of August 31,
2006 will have the right to require us to register these shares
of common stock under the Securities Act under specified
circumstances, including any additional shares issued or
distributed by way of a dividend, stock split or other
distribution in respect of these shares.
In connection with our acquisition of Microscience, we granted
to Microscience Investments registration rights with respect to
the shares of our common stock that we issued to Microscience
Investments in the acquisition. We also have granted
registration rights with respect to shares of our common stock
to the holders of our existing class A common stock, in
addition to Microscience Investments.
Registration rights held by Microscience Investments may be
transferred to the following parties if they become holders of
the shares covered by the registration rights: APAX Funds
Nominees Limited, The Merlin BioSciences Funds, The Merlin
Fund L.P., Advent Private Equity Funds, JPMorgan Partners
LLC, Merlin Equity Limited, or any subsidiary, affiliate, parent
or general partner of any of these parties.
Demand
registration rights
Subject to specified limitations and to the
lock-up
agreements with the underwriters for this offering, holders of
these registrations rights may, beginning 90 days after
this offering, require that we register all or part of our
common stock subject to the registration rights for sale under
the Securities Act. These holders may demand registration of our
common stock so long as the offering price to the public of the
shares requested to be registered is at least $25,000,000. We
are required to effect only one demand
166
registration, subject to specified exceptions for each of
Microscience and the holders of our existing class A common
stock.
Incidental
registration rights
If, after the completion of this offering, we propose to
register any of our common stock under the Securities Act,
subject to specified exceptions, either for our own account or
for the account of other security holders, holders of
registration rights are entitled to notice of the registration
and to include shares of common stock subject to the
registration rights in the registered offering.
Limitations
and expenses
With specified exceptions, the right to include shares in a
registration is subject to the right of underwriters for the
offering to limit the number of shares included in the offering.
We are required to pay one-half of all fees, costs and expenses
of any demand registration, other than underwriting discounts
and commissions.
Transfer agent
and registrar
The transfer agent and registrar for our common stock is
American Stock Transfer & Trust Company.
NASDAQ Global
Market
We have applied to have our common stock listed on The NASDAQ
Global Market under the symbol EBSI.
167
Shares eligible
for future sale
Prior to this offering, there has been no market for our common
stock, and a liquid trading market for our common stock may not
develop or be sustained after this offering. Future sales of
substantial amounts of common stock, including shares issued
upon exercise of outstanding options or in the public market
after this offering, or the anticipation of those sales, could
adversely affect market prices prevailing from time to time and
could impair our ability to raise capital through sales of our
equity securities. We have applied to have our common stock
listed on The NASDAQ Global Market under the symbol
EBSI.
Upon the completion of this offering, we will have
outstanding
shares of common stock, after giving effect to the issuance
of
shares of common stock in this offering and assuming no exercise
of options outstanding as of August 31, 2006.
Of the shares to be outstanding after the completion of this
offering,
the
shares of common stock sold in this offering will be freely
tradable without restriction under the Securities Act unless
purchased by our affiliates, as that term is defined
in Rule 144 under the Securities Act. The remaining shares
of our common stock are restricted securities under
Rule 144. Substantially all of these restricted securities
will be subject to the
180-day
lock-up
period described below.
After the
180-day
lock-up
period, these restricted securities may be sold in the public
market only if registered or if they qualify for an exemption
from registration under Rule 144 or 701 under the
Securities Act.
Rule 144
In general and subject to the
lock-up
agreements described below, under Rule 144, beginning
90 days after the date of this prospectus, a person who has
beneficially owned shares of our common stock for at least one
year, including the holding period of any prior owner other than
one of our affiliates, would be entitled to sell within any
three-month period a number of shares that does not exceed the
greater of:
|
|
|
1% of the number of shares of our common stock then outstanding,
which will equal
approximately shares
immediately after this offering; and
|
|
|
the average weekly trading volume in our common stock on The
NASDAQ Global Market during the four calendar weeks preceding
the date of filing of a Notice of Proposed Sale of Securities
Pursuant to Rule 144 with respect to the sale.
|
Sales under Rule 144 are also subject to manner of sale
provisions and notice requirements and to the availability of
current public information about us. Upon expiration of the
180-day
lock-up
period described below, 7,782,016 shares of our common
stock outstanding as of August 31, 2006 will be eligible
for sale under Rule 144, including shares eligible for
resale under Rule 144(k) as described below. We cannot
estimate the number of shares of common stock that our existing
stockholders will elect to sell under Rule 144.
Rule 144(k)
Subject to the
lock-up
agreements described below, shares of our common stock eligible
for sale under Rule 144(k) may be sold immediately upon the
completion of this offering. In general, under Rule 144(k),
168
a person may sell shares of common stock acquired from us
immediately upon the completion of this offering, without regard
to manner of sale, the availability of public information about
us or volume, if:
|
|
|
the person is not our affiliate and has not been our affiliate
at any time during the three months preceding the sale; and
|
|
|
the person has beneficially owned the shares proposed to be sold
for at least two years, including the holding period of any
prior owner other than an affiliate.
|
Upon the expiration of the 180-day lock-up period described
below, 30,015 shares of common stock outstanding as of
August 31, 2006 will be eligible for sale under
Rule 144(k).
Rule 701
In general, under Rule 701 of the Securities Act, any of
our employees, consultants or advisors who purchased shares from
us in connection with a qualified compensatory stock plan or
other written agreement is eligible to resell those shares
90 days after the effective date of this offering in
reliance on Rule 144, but without compliance with the
various restrictions, including the holding period, contained in
Rule 144. Subject to the
180-day
lock-up
period described below, 30,015 shares of our common stock
outstanding as of August 31, 2006 will be eligible for sale
in accordance with Rule 701.
Lock-up
agreements
We expect that the holders of substantially all of our currently
outstanding capital stock will agree that, without the prior
written consent of J.P. Morgan Securities Inc., they will not,
during the period ending 180 days after the date of this
prospectus, subject to exceptions specified in the
lock-up
agreements, offer, pledge, announce the intention to sell, sell,
contract to sell, sell any option or contract to purchase,
purchase any option or contract to sell, grant any option, right
or warrant to purchase, or otherwise transfer or dispose of,
directly or indirectly, any shares of our common stock or any
securities convertible into or exercisable or exchangeable for
our common stock or enter into any swap or other agreement that
transfers, in whole or in part, any of the economic consequences
of ownership of our common stock. Further, these holders have
agreed that, during this period, they will not make any demand
for, or exercise any right with respect to, the registration of
our common stock or any security convertible into or exercisable
or exchangeable for our common stock. The
180-day
lock-up
period may be extended under specified circumstances. The
lock-up
restrictions, specified exceptions and the circumstances under
which the
180-day
lock-up
period may be extended are described in more detail under
Underwriting.
Registration
rights
Subject to the
lock-up
agreements described above, upon the completion of this
offering, holders of 7,752,001 shares of our common stock
outstanding as of August 31, 2006 will have the right to
require us to register these shares of common stock under the
Securities Act under specified circumstances. After registration
pursuant to these rights, these shares will become freely
tradable without restriction under the Securities Act. See
Description of capital stockRegistration
rights for additional information regarding these
registration rights.
Stock
options
As of August 31, 2006, we had outstanding options to
purchase 1,061,679 shares of class B common stock, of
which options to purchase 813,747 shares of class B
common stock were vested as of August 31, 2006. As of
August 31, 2006, options to
purchase shares
of common stock will be vested and eligible for sale within
180 days after the date of this prospectus, subject to any
lock-up agreements applicable to these shares. Immediately prior
to the completion of this offering, each of these
169
options automatically will become an option to purchase an
equal number of shares of our common stock. Promptly following
this offering, we intend to file a registration statement on
Form S-8
under the Securities Act to register all of the shares subject
to outstanding options and options and other awards issuable
pursuant to our employee stock option plan and 2006 stock
incentive plan. See ManagementStock option and other
compensation plans for additional information regarding
these plans. Accordingly, shares of our common stock registered
under the registration statements will be available for sale in
the open market, subject to Rule 144 volume limitations
applicable to affiliates, and subject to any vesting
restrictions and
lock-up
agreements applicable to these shares.
170
Underwriting
We are offering the shares of common stock described in this
prospectus through a number of underwriters. J.P. Morgan
Securities Inc., Cowen and Company, LLC and HSBC Securities
(USA) Inc. are acting as representatives of the underwriters. We
and the selling stockholders have entered into an underwriting
agreement with the underwriters. Subject to the terms and
conditions of the underwriting agreement, we have agreed to sell
to the underwriters, and each underwriter has severally agreed
to purchase, at the initial public offering price less the
underwriting discounts and commissions set forth on the cover
page of this prospectus, the number of shares of common stock
listed next to its name in the following table:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of
|
Name
|
|
shares
|
|
|
J.P. Morgan Securities Inc.
|
|
|
|
Cowen and Company, LLC
|
|
|
|
HSBC Securities (USA) Inc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
|
|
The underwriters are committed to purchase all the shares of
common stock offered by us if they purchase any shares. The
underwriting agreement also provides that if an underwriter
defaults, the purchase commitments of non-defaulting
underwriters may also be increased or the offering may be
terminated.
The underwriters propose to offer the shares of common stock
directly to the public at the initial public offering price set
forth on the cover page of this prospectus and to certain
dealers at that price less a concession not in excess of
$ per share. Any such dealers may
resell shares to certain other brokers or dealers at a discount
of up to $ per share from the
initial public offering price. After the initial public offering
of the shares, the offering price and other selling terms may be
changed by the underwriters. The representatives have advised us
that the underwriters do not intend to confirm discretionary
sales in excess of 5% of the shares of common stock offered in
this offering.
The underwriters have an option to buy up
to
additional shares of common stock from the selling stockholders
to cover sales of shares by the underwriters that exceed the
number of shares specified in the table above. The underwriters
have 30 days from the date of this prospectus to exercise
this over-allotment option. If any shares are purchased with
this over-allotment option, the underwriters will purchase
shares from the selling stockholders in approximately the same
proportion as shown in the table above. If any additional shares
of common stock are purchased, the underwriters will offer the
additional shares on the same terms as those on which the shares
are being offered.
The underwriting fee is equal to the initial public offering
price per share of common stock less the amount paid by the
underwriters to us and the selling stockholders per share of
common stock. The underwriting fee is
$ per share. The following table
shows the per share and total underwriting discounts and
commissions to be paid to the underwriters assuming both no
exercise and full exercise of the underwriters option to
purchase additional shares.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Without over-
|
|
|
With full
over-
|
|
Underwriting
discounts and commissions
|
|
allotment
exercise
|
|
|
allotment
exercise
|
|
|
|
|
Per share
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
We estimate that the total expenses of this offering, including
registration, filing and listing fees, printing fees and legal
and accounting expenses, but excluding the underwriting
discounts and commissions, will
171
be approximately $ . Of
this total, approximately
$ is payable by us and
approximately $ is
payable by the selling stockholders.
A prospectus in electronic format may be made available on the
websites maintained by one or more underwriters, or selling
group members, if any, participating in the offering. The
underwriters may agree to allocate a number of shares to
underwriters and selling group members for sale to their online
brokerage account holders. Internet distributions will be
allocated by the representatives to underwriters and selling
group members that may make Internet distributions on the same
basis as other allocations.
We have agreed, with limited exceptions, that we will not offer,
sell, contract to sell, pledge or otherwise dispose of, directly
or indirectly, or file with the Securities and Exchange
Commission a registration statement under the Securities Act
relating to, any shares of our common stock or securities
convertible into or exchangeable or exercisable for any shares
of our common stock, or publicly disclose the intention to make
any offer, sale, pledge, disposition or filing, without the
prior written consent of J.P. Morgan Securities Inc. for a
period of 180 days after the date of this prospectus.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, if (1) during the last
17 days of the
180-day
restricted period, we issue an earnings release or material news
or a material event relating to us occurs; or (2) prior to
the expiration of the
180-day
restricted period, we announce that we will release earnings
results during the
16-day
period beginning on the last day of the
180-day
period, the restrictions described above will continue to apply
until the expiration of the
18-day
period beginning on the issuance of the earnings release or the
occurrence of the material news or material event.
Our directors and executive officers and substantially all of
our stockholders have entered into lock-up agreements with the
underwriters prior to the commencement of this offering pursuant
to which each of these persons or entities, with limited
exceptions, for a period of 180 days after the date of this
prospectus, may not, without the prior written consent of J.P.
Morgan Securities Inc., (1) offer, pledge, announce the
intention to sell, sell, contract to sell, sell any option or
contract to purchase, purchase any option or contract to sell,
grant any option, right or warrant to purchase, or otherwise
transfer or dispose of, directly or indirectly, any shares of
our common stock or any securities convertible into or
exercisable or exchangeable for our common stock or
(2) enter into any swap or other agreement that transfers,
in whole or in part, any of the economic consequences of
ownership of our common stock, whether any such transaction
described in clause (1) or (2) above is to be settled
by delivery of common stock or such other securities, in cash or
otherwise. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if (1) during the
last 17 days of the
180-day
restricted period, we issue an earnings release or material news
or a material event relating to us occurs; or (2) prior to
the expiration of the
180-day
restricted period, we announce that we will release earnings
results during the
16-day
period beginning on the last day of the
180-day
period, the restrictions described above will continue to apply
until the expiration of the
18-day
period beginning on the issuance of the earnings release or the
occurrence of the material news or material event.
The restrictions imposed by these lock-up agreements will not
apply to the transfer or disposition of shares of our common
stock or any securities convertible into or exercisable or
exchangeable for our common stock (1) as a bona fide gift,
(2) to any trust for the direct or indirect benefit of the
stockholder or the immediate family of the stockholder in a
transaction not involving a disposition for value, (3) to
any corporation, partnership, limited liability company or other
entity all of the beneficial ownership interests of which are
held by the stockholder or the immediate family of the
stockholder in a transaction not involving a disposition for
value, (4) by will, other testamentary document or
intestate succession to the legal representative, heir,
beneficiary or a member of the immediate family of the
stockholder, (5) as a distribution to partners, members or
stockholders of the stockholder in a transaction not involving a
disposition for value or (6) to any affiliate of the stockholder
or any investment fund or other entity controlled or managed by
the stockholder in a transaction not involving a disposition for
value; provided that the transferee, distributee or donee agrees
in writing to be bound by the terms of the lock-up agreement to
the same extent as if a party thereto; and, provided further
that, in the case of (3), (5) and
172
(6) above, no filing pursuant to Section 16(a) of the
Exchange Act, reporting a reduction in the beneficial ownership
of common stock shall be required or shall be voluntarily made
in connection with such transfer, other than a filing on a
Form 5 made after the expiration of the
180-day
restricted period or any extension thereof pursuant to the
lock-up agreement. In addition, the restrictions imposed by the
lock-up agreement do not apply to the sale of common stock by
the stockholder pursuant to the underwriting agreement.
Furthermore, notwithstanding the restrictions imposed by the
lock-up agreement, the stockholder may, without the prior
written consent of J.P. Morgan Securities Inc.,
(1) exercise an option to purchase shares of common stock
granted under any stock incentive plan or stock purchase plan,
(2) establish a trading plan pursuant to
Rule 10b5-1
under the Exchange Act for the transfer of common stock,
provided that such plan does not provide for any transfers of
common stock during the
180-day
restricted period or any extension thereof pursuant to the
lock-up agreement and (3) transfer shares of common stock
acquired in this offering or on the open market following this
offering.
We and the selling stockholders have agreed to indemnify the
underwriters against certain liabilities, including liabilities
under the Securities Act.
We have applied to have our common stock listed on The NASDAQ
Global Market under the symbol EBSI.
In connection with this offering, the underwriters may engage in
stabilizing transactions, which involves making bids for,
purchasing and selling shares of common stock in the open market
for the purpose of preventing or retarding a decline in the
market price of the common stock while this offering is in
progress. These stabilizing transactions may include making
short sales of the common stock, which involves the sale by the
underwriters of a greater number of shares of common stock than
they are required to purchase in this offering, and purchasing
shares of common stock on the open market to cover positions
created by short sales. Short sales may be covered
shorts, which are short positions in an amount not greater than
the underwriters over-allotment option referred to above,
or may be naked shorts, which are short positions in
excess of that amount. The underwriters may close out any
covered short position either by exercising their over-allotment
option, in whole or in part, or by purchasing shares in the open
market. In making this determination, the underwriters will
consider, among other things, the price of shares available for
purchase in the open market compared to the price at which the
underwriters may purchase shares through the over-allotment
option. A naked short position is more likely to be created if
the underwriters are concerned that there may be downward
pressure on the price of the common stock in the open market
that could adversely affect investors who purchase in this
offering. To the extent that the underwriters create a naked
short position, they will purchase shares in the open market to
cover the position.
The underwriters have advised us that, pursuant to
Regulation M of the Securities Act, they may also engage in
other activities that stabilize, maintain or otherwise affect
the price of the common stock, including the imposition of
penalty bids. This means that if the representatives of the
underwriters purchase common stock in the open market in
stabilizing transactions or to cover short sales, the
representatives can require the underwriters that sold those
shares as part of this offering to repay the underwriting
discount received by them.
These activities may have the effect of raising or maintaining
the market price of the common stock or preventing or retarding
a decline in the market price of the common stock, and, as a
result, the price of the common stock may be higher than the
price that otherwise might exist in the open market. If the
underwriters commence these activities, they may discontinue
them at any time. The underwriters may carry out these
transactions on The NASDAQ Stock Market, in the
over-the-counter
market or otherwise.
Prior to this offering, there has been no public market for our
common stock. The initial public offering price will be
determined by negotiations between us and the representatives of
the underwriters. In
173
determining the initial public offering price, we and the
representatives of the underwriters expect to consider a number
of factors, including:
|
|
|
the information set forth in this prospectus and otherwise
available to the representatives;
|
|
|
our prospects and the history and prospects for the industry in
which we compete;
|
|
|
an assessment of our management;
|
|
|
our prospects for future earnings;
|
|
|
the general condition of the securities markets at the time of
this offering;
|
|
|
the recent market prices of, and demand for, publicly traded
common stock of generally comparable companies; and
|
|
|
other factors deemed relevant by the underwriters and us.
|
Neither we nor the underwriters can assure investors that an
active trading market will develop for our common stock, or that
the shares of common stock will trade in the public market at or
above the initial public offering price.
J.P. Morgan Partners, LLC, an affiliate of J.P. Morgan
Securities Inc., through its ownership of various entities, owns
approximately 10.9% of the voting securities of Microscience
Investments Limited, which owns 16.2% of our common stock prior
to this offering. Because J.P. Morgan Securities Inc. may
be deemed an affiliate under the National Association of
Securities Dealers, Inc.s Conduct Rules, or the NASD
Rules, as a result of J.P. Morgan Partners, LLCs
ownership of more than 10% of the voting securities of
Microscience Investments Limited, J.P. Morgan Securities
Inc. may be deemed to have a conflict of interest
with us under Rule 2720 of the NASD Rules. When an NASD
member with a conflict of interest participates as an
underwriter in a public offering, the NASD Rules require that
the initial public offering price can be no higher than that
recommended by a qualified independent underwriter,
as defined by the NASD Rules. In accordance with Rule 2720
of the NASD Rules, Cowen and Company, LLC will assume the
responsibility of acting as qualified independent underwriter.
In this role, Cowen and Company, LLC will perform a due
diligence investigation and review and participate in the
preparation of the registration statement, of which this
prospectus is a part.
Certain of the underwriters and their affiliates have provided
in the past to us and our affiliates and may provide from time
to time in the future certain commercial banking, financial
advisory, investment banking and other services for us and such
affiliates in the ordinary course of their business, for which
they have received and may continue to receive customary fees
and commissions. HSBC Realty Credit Corporation, an affiliate of
HSBC Securities (USA) Inc., is the lender under a mortgage loan
for $8.5 million that we entered into in April 2006 in
connection with the purchase of a building in Frederick,
Maryland, a term loan for $10.0 million that we entered
into in August 2006 to finance a portion of the costs of our
facility expansion in Lansing, Michigan and a revolving line of
credit for up to $5.0 million that we entered into in
August 2006. In addition, from time to time, certain of the
underwriters and their affiliates may effect transactions for
their own account or the account of customers, and hold on
behalf of themselves or their customers, long or short positions
in our debt or equity securities or loans, and may do so in the
future.
Legal
matters
The validity of the common stock offered hereby will be passed
upon by Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP,
Washington, D.C. Dechert LLP, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania is
acting as counsel for the underwriters in connection with this
offering.
174
Experts
Ernst & Young LLP, independent registered public
accounting firm, has audited our consolidated financial
statements at December 31, 2005 and 2004, and for each of
the three years in the period ended December 31, 2005, as
set forth in their report. We have included our financial
statements in the prospectus and elsewhere in the registration
statement in reliance on Ernst & Young LLPs
report, given on their authority as experts in accounting and
auditing.
Where you can
find more information
We have filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission a
registration statement on
Form S-1
under the Securities Act with respect to the shares of common
stock we are offering to sell. This prospectus, which
constitutes part of the registration statement, does not include
all of the information contained in the registration statement
and the exhibits, schedules and amendments to the registration
statement. For further information with respect to us and our
common stock, we refer you to the registration statement and to
the exhibits and schedules to the registration statement.
Statements contained in this prospectus about the contents of
any contract or any other document are not necessarily complete,
and, and in each instance, we refer you to the copy of the
contract or other documents filed as an exhibit to the
registration statement. Each of theses statements is qualified
in all respects by this reference.
You may read and copy the registration statement of which this
prospectus is a part at the Securities and Exchange
Commissions public reference room, which is located at 100
F Street, N.E., Room 1580, Washington, DC 20549. You can
request copies of the registration statement by writing to the
Securities and Exchange Commission and paying a fee for the
copying cost. Please call the Securities and Exchange Commission
at
1-800-SEC-0330
for more information about the operation of the Securities and
Exchange Commissions public reference room. In addition,
the Securities and Exchange Commission maintains an Internet
website, which is located at http://www.sec.gov, that contains
reports, proxy and information statements and other information
regarding issuers that file electronically with the Securities
and Exchange Commission. You may access the registration
statement of which this prospectus is a part at the Securities
and Exchange Commissions Internet website. Upon completion
of this offering, we will be subject to the information
reporting requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,
and we will file reports, proxy statements and other information
with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
This prospectus includes statistical data that were obtained
from industry publications. These industry publications
generally indicate that the authors of these publications have
obtained information from sources believed to be reliable but do
no guarantee the accuracy and completeness of their information.
While we believe these industry publications to be reliable, we
have not independently verified their data.
175
Index to
consolidated financial statements
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page
|
|
|
|
|
F-2
|
|
Consolidated financial statements:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-3
|
|
|
|
|
F-4
|
|
|
|
|
F-5
|
|
|
|
|
F-6
|
|
|
|
|
F-7
|
|
F-1
Report of
independent registered public accounting firm
The Board of Directors and Stockholders
Emergent BioSolutions Inc. and Subsidiaries
We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of
Emergent BioSolutions Inc. and Subsidiaries as of
December 31, 2004 and 2005, and the related consolidated
statements of operations, changes in stockholders equity
and cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended
December 31, 2005. These financial statements are the
responsibility of the Companys management. Our
responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial
statements based on our audits.
We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those
standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain
reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are
free of material misstatement. We were not engaged to perform an
audit of the Companys internal control over financial
reporting. Our audits included consideration of internal control
over financial reporting as a basis for designing audit
procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not
for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of
the Companys internal control over financial reporting.
Accordingly, we express no such opinion. An audit also includes
examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and
disclosures in the financial statements, assessing the
accounting principles used and significant estimates made by
management, and evaluating the overall financial statement
presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable
basis for our opinion.
In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above
present fairly, in all material respects, the consolidated
financial position of Emergent BioSolutions Inc. and
Subsidiaries at December 31, 2004 and 2005, and the
consolidated results of their operations and their cash flows
for each of the three years in the period ended
December 31, 2005 in conformity with U.S. generally
accepted accounting principles.
/s/ Ernst & Young LLP
May 23, 2006
McLean, VA
F-2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
June 30,
|
|
(in
thousands, except
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
2006
|
|
share and per
share data)
|
|
2004
|
|
2005
|
|
|
(unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
ASSETS
|
Current assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$
|
6,821
|
|
$
|
36,294
|
|
|
$
|
15,737
|
|
Accounts receivable
|
|
|
18,637
|
|
|
2,530
|
|
|
|
1,431
|
|
Inventories
|
|
|
13,253
|
|
|
16,441
|
|
|
|
28,677
|
|
Income tax receivable
|
|
|
|
|
|
763
|
|
|
|
6,788
|
|
Deferred tax assets
|
|
|
978
|
|
|
1,989
|
|
|
|
249
|
|
Restricted cash
|
|
|
1,250
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Prepaid expenses and other current
assets
|
|
|
756
|
|
|
1,099
|
|
|
|
1,721
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current assets
|
|
|
41,695
|
|
|
59,116
|
|
|
|
54,603
|
|
Property, plant and equipment, net
|
|
|
27,269
|
|
|
30,645
|
|
|
|
48,948
|
|
Deferred tax assets, net of current
|
|
|
24
|
|
|
9,981
|
|
|
|
12,556
|
|
Other assets
|
|
|
68
|
|
|
590
|
|
|
|
3,006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets
|
|
$
|
69,056
|
|
$
|
100,332
|
|
|
$
|
119,113
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES AND
STOCKHOLDERS EQUITY
|
Current liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts payable, related party
|
|
$
|
15
|
|
$
|
22
|
|
|
$
|
2
|
|
Accounts payable, operations
|
|
|
5,505
|
|
|
10,403
|
|
|
|
9,847
|
|
Accrued compensation
|
|
|
3,710
|
|
|
6,177
|
|
|
|
5,250
|
|
Long-term indebtedness, current
portion
|
|
|
572
|
|
|
902
|
|
|
|
1,169
|
|
Notes payable to employees, current
portion
|
|
|
474
|
|
|
506
|
|
|
|
63
|
|
Income taxes payable
|
|
|
3,761
|
|
|
2,134
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred revenue
|
|
|
18,256
|
|
|
7,340
|
|
|
|
29,891
|
|
Other current liabilities
|
|
|
1,893
|
|
|
2,609
|
|
|
|
2,386
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current liabilities
|
|
|
34,186
|
|
|
30,093
|
|
|
|
48,608
|
|
Long-term indebtedness, net of
current portion
|
|
|
11,347
|
|
|
10,471
|
|
|
|
18,364
|
|
Notes payable to employees, net of
current portion
|
|
|
474
|
|
|
31
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other liabilities
|
|
|
100
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities
|
|
|
46,107
|
|
|
40,595
|
|
|
|
66,972
|
|
Stockholders equity:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred Stock, $0.01 par
value; 3,000,000 shares authorized, 0 shares issued
and outstanding at December 31, 2004 and 2005 and
June 30, 2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common Stock, Class A,
$0.01 par value; 10,000,000 shares authorized,
6,487,950, 7,752,001 and 7,752,001 shares issued and
outstanding at December 31, 2004 and 2005 and June 30,
2006, respectively
|
|
|
65
|
|
|
78
|
|
|
|
78
|
|
Common Stock, Class B,
$0.01 par value; 2,000,000 shares authorized, 0, 7,400
and 30,015 shares issued and outstanding at
December 31, 2004 and 2005 and June 30, 2006,
respectively
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additional paid-in capital
|
|
|
7,564
|
|
|
34,539
|
|
|
|
34,871
|
|
Accumulated other comprehensive loss
|
|
|
|
|
|
(276
|
)
|
|
|
(313
|
)
|
Retained earnings
|
|
|
15,320
|
|
|
25,396
|
|
|
|
17,505
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total stockholders equity
|
|
|
22,949
|
|
|
59,737
|
|
|
|
52,141
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and
stockholders equity
|
|
$
|
69,056
|
|
$
|
100,332
|
|
|
$
|
119,113
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these
consolidated financial statements.
F-3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Six months
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ended
June 30,
|
|
(in
thousands, except
|
|
Year
ended December 31,
|
|
|
(unaudited)
|
|
share and per
share data)
|
|
2003
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Product sales
|
|
$
|
55,536
|
|
|
$
|
81,014
|
|
|
$
|
127,271
|
|
|
$
|
58,506
|
|
|
$
|
20,408
|
|
Milestones and grants
|
|
|
233
|
|
|
|
2,480
|
|
|
|
3,417
|
|
|
|
813
|
|
|
|
3,261
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenues
|
|
|
55,769
|
|
|
|
83,494
|
|
|
|
130,688
|
|
|
|
59,319
|
|
|
|
23,669
|
|
Operating expense
(income):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of product sales
|
|
|
22,342
|
|
|
|
30,102
|
|
|
|
31,603
|
|
|
|
16,490
|
|
|
|
4,370
|
|
Research and development
|
|
|
6,327
|
|
|
|
10,117
|
|
|
|
18,381
|
|
|
|
4,157
|
|
|
|
14,210
|
|
Selling, general and administrative
|
|
|
19,547
|
|
|
|
30,323
|
|
|
|
42,793
|
|
|
|
17,974
|
|
|
|
20,681
|
|
Purchased in-process research and
development
|
|
|
1,824
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
26,575
|
|
|
|
26,575
|
|
|
|
|
|
Settlement of State of Michigan
obligation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3,819
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Litigation settlement
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(10,000
|
)
|
|
|
(10,000
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) from
operations
|
|
|
5,729
|
|
|
|
16,771
|
|
|
|
21,336
|
|
|
|
4,123
|
|
|
|
(15,592
|
)
|
Other income
(expense):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest income
|
|
|
100
|
|
|
|
65
|
|
|
|
485
|
|
|
|
103
|
|
|
|
326
|
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
(293
|
)
|
|
|
(241
|
)
|
|
|
(767
|
)
|
|
|
(402
|
)
|
|
|
(232
|
)
|
Other income (expense), net
|
|
|
168
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
55
|
|
|
|
(25
|
)
|
|
|
124
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total other income
(expense)
|
|
|
(25
|
)
|
|
|
(170
|
)
|
|
|
(227
|
)
|
|
|
(324
|
)
|
|
|
218
|
|
Income (loss) before provision
for income taxes
|
|
|
5,704
|
|
|
|
16,601
|
|
|
|
21,109
|
|
|
|
3,799
|
|
|
|
(15,374
|
)
|
Provision for (benefit from)
income taxes
|
|
|
1,250
|
|
|
|
5,129
|
|
|
|
5,325
|
|
|
|
958
|
|
|
|
(7,684
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss)
|
|
$
|
4,454
|
|
|
$
|
11,472
|
|
|
$
|
15,784
|
|
|
$
|
2,841
|
|
|
$
|
(7,690
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earnings (loss) per
share basic
|
|
$
|
0.68
|
|
|
$
|
1.74
|
|
|
$
|
2.21
|
|
|
$
|
0.44
|
|
|
$
|
(0.99
|
)
|
Earnings (loss) per
share diluted
|
|
$
|
0.63
|
|
|
$
|
1.61
|
|
|
$
|
2.00
|
|
|
$
|
0.39
|
|
|
$
|
(0.99
|
)
|
Weighted average number of
shares basic
|
|
|
6,570,856
|
|
|
|
6,576,019
|
|
|
|
7,136,866
|
|
|
|
6,505,085
|
|
|
|
7,771,830
|
|
Weighted average number of
shares diluted
|
|
|
7,061,537
|
|
|
|
7,104,172
|
|
|
|
7,908,023
|
|
|
|
7,200,595
|
|
|
|
7,771,830
|
|
Cash dividends per
share basic
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
0.76
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an
integral part of these consolidated financial
statements.
F-4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Class A
|
|
|
Class B
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
no-par
|
|
|
no-par
|
|
|
Class A
|
|
Class B
|
|
Additional
|
|
|
other
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
(in thousands,
except
|
|
common
stock
|
|
|
common stock
|
|
|
$0.01 par
value common stock
|
|
$0.01 par
value common stock
|
|
paid-in
|
|
|
comprehensive
|
|
|
Retained
|
|
|
stockholders
|
|
share and per
share data)
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
Amount
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
capital
|
|
|
loss
|
|
|
earnings
|
|
|
equity
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at December 31, 2002
|
|
|
6,262,554
|
|
|
$
|
2,940
|
|
|
$
|
254,384
|
|
|
$
|
69
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
1,146
|
|
|
$
|
4,155
|
|
Redemption of common stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(25,000
|
)
|
|
|
(7
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(193
|
)
|
|
|
(200
|
)
|
Issuance of common stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
152,676
|
|
|
|
39
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
39
|
|
Net Income (loss)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,454
|
|
|
|
4,454
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at December 31, 2003
|
|
|
6,262,554
|
|
|
|
2,940
|
|
|
|
382,060
|
|
|
|
101
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,407
|
|
|
|
8,448
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Redemption of common stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(199,271
|
)
|
|
|
(53
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,559
|
)
|
|
|
(1,612
|
)
|
Issuance of common stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
42,607
|
|
|
|
12
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12
|
|
Conversion of class A no-par
common stock to class A $0.01 par value common stock
|
|
|
(6,262,554
|
)
|
|
|
(2,940
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,262,554
|
|
|
63
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,877
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Conversion of class B no-par
common stock to class A $0.01 par value common stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(225,396
|
)
|
|
|
(60
|
)
|
|
|
225,396
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
58
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock-based compensation expense
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,310
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,310
|
|
Tax benefit related to the
disqualifying disposition
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
319
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
319
|
|
Net income (loss)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11,472
|
|
|
|
11,472
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at December 31, 2004
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,487,950
|
|
|
65
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,564
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15,320
|
|
|
|
22,949
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Issuance of common stock to acquire
Microscience Limited
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,264,051
|
|
|
13
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
26,988
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
27,001
|
|
Exercise of stock options
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
46,384
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
33
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
33
|
|
Redemption of common stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(38,984
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
(29
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(308
|
)
|
|
|
(337
|
)
|
Forfeiture of stock options
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(17
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(17
|
)
|
Payment of dividend
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(5,400
|
)
|
|
|
(5,400
|
)
|
Net income (loss)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15,784
|
|
|
|
15,784
|
|
Foreign currency translation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(276
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(276
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15,508
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at December 31, 2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,752,001
|
|
|
78
|
|
|
7,400
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
34,539
|
|
|
|
(276
|
)
|
|
|
25,396
|
|
|
|
59,737
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Redemption of common stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(201
|
)
|
|
|
(201
|
)
|
Issuance of common stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
22,615
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
43
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
43
|
|
Stock-based compensation expense
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
289
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
289
|
|
Net income (loss)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(7,690
|
)
|
|
|
(7,690
|
)
|
Foreign currency translation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(37
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(37
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive loss
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(7,727
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at June 30, 2006
(unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
7,752,001
|
|
$
|
78
|
|
|
30,015
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
$
|
34,871
|
|
|
$
|
(313
|
)
|
|
$
|
17,505
|
|
|
$
|
52,141
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an
integral part of these consolidated financial
statements.
F-5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Six months
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ended
June 30,
|
|
|
|
Year ended
December 31,
|
|
|
(unaudited)
|
|
(in
thousands)
|
|
2003
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from operating
activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss)
|
|
$
|
4,454
|
|
|
$
|
11,472
|
|
|
$
|
15,784
|
|
|
$
|
2,841
|
|
|
$
|
(7,690
|
)
|
Adjustments to reconcile net income
(loss) to net cash provided by (used in) operating activities
(net of effects of acquisitions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock-based compensation expense
(credit)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,310
|
|
|
|
(17
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
289
|
|
Non-cash gain on settlement
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3,819
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
1,214
|
|
|
|
1,867
|
|
|
|
3,549
|
|
|
|
1,492
|
|
|
|
2,002
|
|
Deferred income taxes
|
|
|
(467
|
)
|
|
|
(418
|
)
|
|
|
(10,968
|
)
|
|
|
(10,394
|
)
|
|
|
(835
|
)
|
Other obligations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
200
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss on disposal of property and
equipment
|
|
|
13
|
|
|
|
43
|
|
|
|
32
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
Purchased in-process research and
development
|
|
|
1,824
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
26,575
|
|
|
|
26,575
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash payment on State of Michigan
obligation
|
|
|
540
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capitalized interest cost
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(107
|
)
|
Changes in operating assets and
liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts receivable
|
|
|
(528
|
)
|
|
|
(15,664
|
)
|
|
|
16,107
|
|
|
|
(11,570
|
)
|
|
|
1,099
|
|
Inventories
|
|
|
(4,656
|
)
|
|
|
(1,609
|
)
|
|
|
(3,189
|
)
|
|
|
(1,267
|
)
|
|
|
(12,236
|
)
|
Income taxes
|
|
|
(1,713
|
)
|
|
|
5,794
|
|
|
|
(2,390
|
)
|
|
|
8,732
|
|
|
|
(8,160
|
)
|
Prepaid expenses and other assets
|
|
|
(244
|
)
|
|
|
50
|
|
|
|
(865
|
)
|
|
|
(1,368
|
)
|
|
|
(3,038
|
)
|
Accounts payable
|
|
|
983
|
|
|
|
2,472
|
|
|
|
5,463
|
|
|
|
24
|
|
|
|
(575
|
)
|
Accrued compensation
|
|
|
(583
|
)
|
|
|
585
|
|
|
|
2,466
|
|
|
|
(555
|
)
|
|
|
(927
|
)
|
Other current liabilities
|
|
|
(1,617
|
)
|
|
|
44
|
|
|
|
619
|
|
|
|
379
|
|
|
|
(223
|
)
|
Deferred revenue
|
|
|
11,852
|
|
|
|
3,869
|
|
|
|
(10,916
|
)
|
|
|
(10,916
|
)
|
|
|
22,551
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used in)
operating activities
|
|
|
11,072
|
|
|
|
9,196
|
|
|
|
42,250
|
|
|
|
3,973
|
|
|
|
(7,845
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from investing
activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchases of property, plant and
equipment
|
|
|
(4,123
|
)
|
|
|
(17,072
|
)
|
|
|
(6,532
|
)
|
|
|
(1,367
|
)
|
|
|
(20,203
|
)
|
Acquisitions, net of cash received
|
|
|
(3,794
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(559
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restricted cash deposits
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,250
|
)
|
|
|
1,250
|
|
|
|
(17
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from investment maturities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
147
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash used in investing
activities
|
|
|
(7,917
|
)
|
|
|
(18,175
|
)
|
|
|
(5,841
|
)
|
|
|
(1,384
|
)
|
|
|
(20,203
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from financing
activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from notes payable
|
|
|
172
|
|
|
|
10,992
|
|
|
|
31
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8,500
|
|
Proceeds from notes payable to
employees
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
947
|
|
|
|
123
|
|
|
|
123
|
|
|
|
|
|
Repayments on product supply and
royalty obligations
|
|
|
(900
|
)
|
|
|
(2,351
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Issuance of Class B common
stock
|
|
|
39
|
|
|
|
12
|
|
|
|
33
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
43
|
|
Redemption of Class B common
stock
|
|
|
(200
|
)
|
|
|
(665
|
)
|
|
|
(337
|
)
|
|
|
(193
|
)
|
|
|
(201
|
)
|
Principal payments on notes payable
|
|
|
(38
|
)
|
|
|
(184
|
)
|
|
|
(1,110
|
)
|
|
|
(461
|
)
|
|
|
(814
|
)
|
Debt issuance costs
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(70
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payment of dividend
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(5,400
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used in)
financing activities
|
|
|
(927
|
)
|
|
|
8,681
|
|
|
|
(6,660
|
)
|
|
|
(531
|
)
|
|
|
7,528
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Effect of exchange rate changes on
cash and cash equivalents
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(276
|
)
|
|
|
735
|
|
|
|
(37
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net increase (decrease) in cash and
cash equivalents
|
|
|
2,228
|
|
|
|
(298
|
)
|
|
|
29,473
|
|
|
|
2,793
|
|
|
|
(20,557
|
)
|
Cash and cash equivalents at
beginning of period
|
|
|
4,891
|
|
|
|
7,119
|
|
|
|
6,821
|
|
|
|
6,821
|
|
|
|
36,294
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents at end of
period
|
|
$
|
7,119
|
|
|
$
|
6,821
|
|
|
$
|
36,294
|
|
|
$
|
9,614
|
|
|
$
|
15,737
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Supplemental disclosure of cash
flow information:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash paid during the year for
interest
|
|
$
|
99
|
|
|
$
|
170
|
|
|
$
|
696
|
|
|
$
|
144
|
|
|
$
|
148
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash paid during the year for
income taxes
|
|
$
|
4,280
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
17,985
|
|
|
$
|
500
|
|
|
$
|
1,200
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Supplemental information on non
cash investing and financing activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Issuance of common stock to acquire
Microscience Limited
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
27,001
|
|
|
$
|
27,001
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an
integral part of these consolidated financial
statements
F-6
Emergent
BioSolutions Inc. and subsidiaries
Notes to consolidated financial statements
(dollars in thousands, except per
share data)
|
|
1.
|
Nature of the
business and organization
|
Emergent Biosolutions Inc. (the Company or Emergent) is a
biopharmaceutical company focused on the development,
manufacture and commercialization of immunobiotics. The Company
operates in two business segments: biodefense and commercial.
The Company commenced operations as BioPort Corporation
(BioPort) in September 1998 through an acquisition from the
Michigan Biologic Products Institute of rights to the marketed
product, BioThrax, vaccine manufacturing facilities at a
multi-building campus on approximately 12.5 acres in
Lansing, Michigan and vaccine development and production
know-how. Following this acquisition, the Company completed
renovations at the Lansing facilities that had been initiated by
the State of Michigan. In December 2001, the U.S. Food and
Drug Administration (FDA) approved a supplement to the
Companys manufacturing facility license for the
manufacture of BioThrax at the renovated facilities. In June
2004, the Company completed a corporate reorganization
(Reorganization) in which:
|
|
|
Emergent issued 6,487,950 shares of Class A Common
Stock in exchange for 6,262,554 shares of BioPort
class A common stock and 225,396 shares of BioPort
class B common stock;
|
|
|
all other issued and outstanding shares of BioPort class B
common stock were repurchased and retired; and
|
|
|
all outstanding stock options to purchase BioPort class B
common stock were assumed by Emergent and option holders were
granted replacement stock options to purchase an equal number of
shares of Class B Common Stock of Emergent.
|
As a result of the Reorganization, BioPort became a wholly owned
subsidiary of Emergent. The Company acquired its portfolio of
commercial vaccine candidates through an acquisition of
Microscience Limited (Microscience) in a share exchange in June
2005 and an acquisition of substantially all of the assets of
Antex Biologics Inc. (Antex) for cash in May 2003. The Company
has renamed Microscience as Emergent Product Development UK
Limited.
|
|
2.
|
Summary of
significant accounting policies
|
Basis of
presentation and consolidation
The accompanying consolidated financial statements include the
accounts of Emergent and its wholly owned subsidiaries. All
significant intercompany accounts and transactions have been
eliminated in consolidation.
Unaudited interim
financial information
The accompanying interim consolidated balance sheet as of
June 30, 2006, the statements of operations and cash flows
for the six months ended June 30, 2005 and 2006 and the
consolidated statement of changes in stockholders equity
for the six months ended June 30, 2006 are unaudited. These
unaudited interim consolidated financial statements have been
prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally
accepted in the United States. In the opinion of the
Companys management, the unaudited interim consolidated
financial statements have been prepared on the same basis as the
audited consolidated financial statements and include all
adjustments necessary for the fair presentation of the
Companys statement of financial position, results of
operations and its cash flows for the six months ended
June 30, 2005 and 2006. The results for the six months
ended June 30, 2006 are not necessarily indicative of the
results to be expected for the year ending December 31,
2006. All references to June 30,
F-7
2006 or to the six months ended June 30, 2005 and 2006 in
the notes to the consolidated financial statements are unaudited.
Use of
estimates
The preparation of 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
the disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date
of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues
and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could
differ from those estimates.
Cash and cash
equivalents
Cash equivalents are highly liquid investments with a maturity
of 90 days or less at the date of purchase and consist of
time deposits and investments in money market funds with
commercial banks and financial institutions and high-quality
corporate bonds. Also, the Company maintains cash balances with
financial institutions in excess of insured limits. The Company
does not anticipate any losses with such cash balances. At
December 31, 2004 and 2005 and June 30, 2006, the
Company maintained all of its cash and cash equivalents in three
financial institutions.
Fair value of
financial instruments
The carrying amounts of the Companys short-term financial
instruments, which include cash and cash equivalents, accounts
receivable and accounts payable, approximate their fair values
due to their short maturities. The carrying value and fair value
of long-term indebtedness were $11,821 and $11,409,
respectively, at December 31, 2004 and $10,502 and $10,089,
respectively, at December 31, 2005. The carrying value and
fair value of long-term indebtedness were $18,364 and $17,664,
respectively, at June 30, 2006.
Restricted
cash
Restricted cash at December 31, 2004 consists of a
certificate of deposit held by a bank as collateral for a letter
of credit acting as a security deposit on a loan. This
certificate of deposit was redeemed by the Company in October
2005.
Significant
customers and accounts receivable
The Companys primary customers are the
U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) and U.S. Department
of Health and Human Services (HHS). For the years ended
December 31, 2003, 2004 and 2005 and the six months ended
June 30, 2005 and 2006, sales of BioThrax to the DoD and
HHS comprised 100%, 99% and 96% and 98% and 81% of total
revenues, respectively. As of December 31, 2004 and 2005
and June 30, 2006, the Companys receivable balances
were comprised of 96% and 38% and 23%, respectively, from these
customers. Unbilled accounts receivable, included in accounts
receivable, totaling $3,772 and $1,418 and $86 as of
December 31, 2004 and 2005 and June 30, 2006,
respectively, relate to various service contracts for which
product has been delivered or work has been performed, though
invoicing has not yet occurred. Accounts receivable are stated
at invoice amounts and consist primarily of amounts due from the
DoD and HHS as well as amounts due under reimbursement contracts
with other government entities and non-government and
philanthropic organizations. If necessary, the Company records a
provision for doubtful receivables to allow for any amounts
which may be unrecoverable. This provision is based upon an
analysis of the Companys prior collection experience,
customer creditworthiness and current economic trends. As of
December 31, 2004 and 2005 and June 30, 2006, an
allowance for doubtful accounts was not recorded, as the prior
collection history from these customers indicates collection is
likely.
F-8
Concentrations of
credit risk
Financial instruments that potentially subject the Company to
concentrations of credit risk consist primarily of cash and cash
equivalents and accounts receivable. The Company places its cash
and cash equivalents with high quality financial institutions.
Management believes that the financial risks associated with its
cash and cash equivalents are minimal. Because accounts
receivable consist of amounts due from the U.S. federal
government for product sales and from government agencies under
government grants, management deems there to be minimal credit
risk.
Inventories
Inventories are stated at the lower of cost or market, with cost
being determined using a standard cost method, which
approximates average cost. Average cost consists primarily of
material, labor and manufacturing overhead expenses and includes
the services and products of third party suppliers. The Company
analyzes its inventory levels quarterly and writes down, in the
applicable period, inventory that has become obsolete, inventory
that has a cost basis in excess of its expected net realizable
value and inventory in excess of expected customer demand. The
Company also writes off in the applicable period the costs
related to expired inventory.
Property, plant
and equipment
Property, plant and equipment are stated at cost. Depreciation
is computed using the straight-line method over the following
estimated useful lives:
|
|
|
|
|
|
Buildings
|
|
|
39 years
|
|
Furniture and equipment
|
|
|
3-7 years
|
|
Internal-use software
|
|
|
Lesser of 3 years or product life
|
|
Leasehold improvements
|
|
|
Lesser of the asset life or life of lease
|
|
|
|
Upon retirement or sale, the cost of assets disposed of and the
related accumulated depreciation are removed from the accounts
and any resulting gain or loss is credited or charged to
operations. Repairs and maintenance costs are expensed as
incurred.
The Company capitalizes costs associated with purchased software
from the time the preliminary project stage is completed until
the software is ready for use. Under the provisions of the
Statement of Positions (SOP)
No. 98-1,
Accounting for the Costs of Computer Software Developed or
Obtained for Internal Use, the Company capitalizes costs
associated with software developed or obtained for internal use
when the preliminary project stage is completed. Capitalized
costs include only: (1) external direct costs of materials
and services consumed in developing or obtaining internal use
software and (2) payroll and payroll-related costs for
employees who are directly associated with and who devote time
to the internal use software project during the development
stage. Capitalization of such costs ceases before training and
other post implantation software activities occur. Computer
software maintenance costs related to software development are
expensed as incurred.
Income
taxes
Income taxes are accounted for using the liability method.
Deferred tax assets and liabilities are recognized for future
tax consequences attributable to differences between financial
statement carrying amounts of existing assets and liabilities
and their respective tax bases and operating loss carryforwards.
Deferred tax assets and liabilities are measured using enacted
tax rates expected to apply to taxable income in the year in
which those temporary differences are expected to be recovered
or settled.
The Company records valuation allowances to reduce deferred tax
assets to the amounts that it anticipates will be realized. The
Company considers future taxable income and ongoing tax planning
F-9
strategies in assessing the need for valuation allowances. In
general, if the Company determines that it is able to realize
more than the recorded amounts of net deferred tax assets in the
future, net income will increase in the period in which the
determination is made. Likewise, if the Company determines that
it is not able to realize all or part of the net deferred tax
asset in the future, net income will decrease in the period in
which the determination is made. The Company applies any
reversals of valuation allowance related to an acquired deferred
tax asset against other intangibles before impacting net income.
Under sections 382 and 383 of the Internal Revenue Code, if
an ownership change occurs with respect to a loss
corporation, as defined, there are annual limitations on
the amount of net operating losses and deductions that are
available. Due to the acquisition of Microscience in 2005, the
Company believes the use of the operating losses will be
significantly limited.
The Companys ability to realize deferred tax assets
depends upon future taxable income as well as the limitations
discussed above. For financial reporting purposes, a deferred
tax asset must be reduced by a valuation allowance if it is more
likely than not that some portion or all of the deferred tax
assets will not be realized prior to expiration.
Revenue
recognition
The Company recognizes revenues from product sales in accordance
with Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 104, Revenue
Recognition (SAB No. 104). SAB No. 104
requires recognition of revenues from product sales that require
no continuing performance by the Company if four basic criteria
have been met:
|
|
|
there is persuasive evidence of an arrangement;
|
|
|
delivery has occurred and title has passed to the Companys
customer;
|
|
|
the fee is fixed and determinable and no further obligation
exists; and
|
|
|
collectibility is reasonably assured.
|
All revenues from product sales are recorded net of applicable
allowances for sales returns, rebates, special promotional
programs, and discounts. For arrangements where the risk of loss
has not passed to the customer, the Company defers the
recognition of revenue until such time that risk of loss has
passed. Also, the cost of revenue associated with amounts
recorded as deferred revenue is recorded in inventory until such
time as risk of loss has passed.
Under the Companys contract with the DoD, title to the
product passes to the DoD upon submission of the first invoice.
The earnings process is complete upon FDA release of the product
for sale and distribution. Following FDA release of the product,
the product is segregated for later shipment, and all deferred
revenue related to the released product is recognized in
accordance with the bill and hold requirements under
SAB 104.
In December 2005, the Securities and Exchange Commission
released an interpretation with respect to the accounting for
sales of vaccines and bioterror countermeasures to the federal
government for placement into the strategic national stockpile.
This interpretation provides for revenue recognition for
specifically identified products purchased for the strategic
national stockpile in the event that all requirements for
revenue recognition, as specified in Statement of Financial
Accounting Concepts No. 5, Recognition and Measurement
in Financial Statements of Business Enterprises, are not
met. This interpretation is applicable to the Companys
contracts with HHS, but because the Company recognizes revenue
upon delivery of product, the Company has not applied this
guidance.
The Company recognizes revenue from upfront and milestone
payments in accordance with Emerging Issues Task Force (EITF)
Issue
No. 00-21,
Accounting for Revenue Arrangements with Multiple
Deliverables (EITF
No. 00-21),
which addresses whether, for revenue recognition purposes, there
is one or several elements in an arrangement. The Company
recognizes revenue from milestone payments upon
F-10
achievement of pre-defined scientific events that require
substantive effort if achievement of the milestone was not
readily assured at the inception of the agreement.
Payments received by the Company for the reimbursement of
expenses for research and development activities are recorded in
accordance with EITF Issue No. 99-19, Reporting Revenue Gross
as Principal Versus Net as an Agent (EITF
No. 99-19).
Pursuant to EITF
No. 99-19,
for transactions in which the Company acts as principal, with
discretion to choose suppliers, bears credit risk and performs a
substantive part of the services, revenue is recorded at the
gross amount of the reimbursement. Costs associated with these
reimbursements are reflected as a component of research and
development expenses.
Impairment of
long-lived assets
In accordance with Statement of Financial Accounting Standards
No. 144, Accounting for the Impairment or Disposal of
Long-Lived Assets (SFAS No. 144), the Company
assesses the recoverability of its long-lived assets by
determining whether the carrying value of such assets can be
recovered through undiscounted future operating cash flows. If
impairment is indicated, the Company measures the amount of such
impairment by comparing the fair value to the carrying value.
The Company has recorded no impairment losses for the years
ended December 31, 2003, 2004 and 2005 and the six months
ended June 30, 2006.
Research and
development
Research and development costs are expensed as incurred.
Research and development costs primarily consist of salaries,
materials and related expenses for personnel and facility
expenses. Other research and development expenses include fees
paid to consultants and outside service providers and the costs
of materials used in clinical trials and research and
development.
Purchased
in-process research and development
The Company accounts for purchased in-process research and
development in accordance with the Statement of Financial
Accounting Standards No. 2, Accounting for Research and
Development Costs (SFAS No. 2) along with
Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) Interpretation
No. 4, Applicability of FASB Statement No. 2 to
Business Combinations Accounted for by the Purchase
Method an interpretation of FASB Statement
No. 2 (FIN 4). Under these standards, the Company
is required to determine whether the technology relating to a
particular research and development project acquired through an
acquisition has an alternative future use. If the determination
is that the technology has no alternative future use, the
acquisition amount not directly attributed to fixed assets is
expensed. Otherwise, the Company capitalizes and amortizes the
costs incurred over their estimated useful lives of the
technology acquired.
Comprehensive
income (loss)
Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 130,
Reporting Comprehensive Income (SFAS No. 130),
requires the presentation of the comprehensive income (loss) and
its components as part of the financial statements.
Comprehensive income is comprised of net income (loss) and other
changes in equity that are excluded from net income (loss). The
Company includes gains and losses on intercompany transactions
with foreign subsidiaries that are considered to be long-term
investments and translation gains and losses incurred when
converting its subsidiaries financial statements from
their functional currency to the U.S. dollar in accumulated
other comprehensive income (loss).
Foreign
currencies
The local currency is the functional currency for the
Companys foreign subsidiaries and, as such, assets and
liabilities are translated into U.S. dollars at year-end
exchange rates. Income and expense items are
F-11
translated at average exchange rates during the year.
Translation adjustments resulting from this process are charged
or credited to other comprehensive income (loss).
Certain risks and
uncertainties
The Company has derived substantially all of its revenue from
sales of BioThrax under contracts with the DoD and HHS. The
Companys ongoing U.S. government contracts do not
necessarily increase the likelihood that it will secure future
comparable contracts with the U.S. government. The Company
expects that a significant portion of the business that it will
seek in the near future, in particular for BioThrax, will be
under government contracts that present a number of risks that
are not typically present in the commercial contracting process.
U.S. government contracts for BioThrax require annual
funding decisions by the government and are subject to
unilateral termination or modification by the government. The
Company may fail to achieve significant sales of BioThrax to
customers in addition to the U.S. government, which would
harm its growth opportunities. The Company may not be able to
sustain or increase profitability. The Company is spending
significant amounts for the expansion of its manufacturing
facilities. The Company may not be able to manufacture BioThrax
consistently in accordance with FDA specifications. Other than
BioThrax, all of the Companys product candidates are
undergoing clinical trials or are in early stages of
development, and failure is common and can occur at any stage of
development. None of the Companys product candidates other
than BioThrax has received regulatory approval.
Earnings per
share
Basic net income (loss) attributable to common stockholders per
share of common stock excludes dilution for potential common
stock issuances and is computed by dividing net income (loss)
attributable to common stockholders by the weighted average
number of shares outstanding for the period. Diluted net income
(loss) attributable to common stockholders per share reflects
the potential dilution that could occur if securities or other
contracts to issue common stock were exercised or converted into
common stock.
F-12
The following table presents the calculation of basic and
diluted net income per share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Six months
ended
|
|
|
|
Year ended
December 31,
|
|
June 30,
|
|
|
|
2003
|
|
2004
|
|
2005
|
|
2005
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
|
Numerator:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss)
|
|
$
|
4,454
|
|
$
|
11,472
|
|
$
|
15,784
|
|
$
|
2,841
|
|
$
|
(7,690
|
)
|
Denominator:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted-average number of
shares basic
|
|
|
6,570,856
|
|
|
6,576,019
|
|
|
7,136,866
|
|
|
6,505,085
|
|
|
7,771,830
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dilutive securities
stock options
|
|
|
490,681
|
|
|
528,152
|
|
|
771,157
|
|
|
695,509
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted-average number of
shares diluted
|
|
|
7,061,537
|
|
|
7,104,172
|
|
|
7,908,023
|
|
|
7,200,595
|
|
|
7,771,830
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earnings (loss) per
share basic
|
|
$
|
0.68
|
|
$
|
1.74
|
|
$
|
2.21
|
|
$
|
0.44
|
|
$
|
(0.99
|
)
|
Earnings (loss) per
share diluted
|
|
$
|
0.63
|
|
$
|
1.61
|
|
$
|
2.00
|
|
$
|
0.39
|
|
$
|
(0.99
|
)
|
|
|
The Company has taken into consideration the disclosure required
by the Participating Securities and the Two-Class Method under
FASB Statement No. 128 (EITF No. 03-6).
Accounting for
stock-based compensation
As of June 30, 2006, the Company has one stock-based
employee compensation plan, the Emergent BioSolutions Employee
Stock Option Plan (the Emergent Plan), described more fully in
Note 10 Stockholders Equity. Through
December 31, 2005, the Company accounted for grants under
the Emergent Plan using the intrinsic value method in accordance
with the provisions of Accounting Principles Board (APB),
Opinion No. 25, Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees
(APB No. 25) and has provided the pro forma disclosures
of net income (loss) and net income (loss) per share in
accordance with SFAS No. 123, Accounting for
Stock-Based Compensation (SFAS No. 123) using the
fair value method. Under APB No. 25, compensation expense
is based on the difference, if any, on the date of the grant
between the fair value of the Companys stock and the
exercise price of the option and is recognized ratably over the
vesting period of the option. The Company accounted for equity
instruments issued to non-employees in accordance with
SFAS No. 123 and EITF Issue
No. 96-18,
Accounting for Equity Instruments That Are Issued to Other
Than Employees for Acquiring, or in Conjunction with Selling
Goods or Services (EITF
No. 96-18).
Effective January 1, 2006, the Company adopted the fair
value provisions of SFAS No. 123 (revised 2004),
Share Based Payment (SFAS No. 123(R)), using
the modified prospective method. Under the fair value
recognition provisions of SFAS No. 123(R), the Company
recognizes stock-based compensation net of an estimated
forfeiture rate.
Under the modified prospective method, compensation cost
recognized in 2006 includes: (1) compensation cost for all
share-based payments granted prior to but not yet vested as of
December 31, 2005, based on the grant date fair value
estimated in accordance with the original provisions of
SFAS No. 123, and (2) compensation cost for all
share-based payments granted subsequent to December 31,
2005, based on the grant date fair value estimated in accordance
with the provisions of SFAS No. 123(R). As a result
F-13
of adopting SFAS No. 123(R) on January 1, 2006,
the Companys loss before income taxes and net loss for the
six months ended June 30, 2006 is approximately $289 higher
than if it had continued to account for share-based compensation
under APB No. 25. Both basic and diluted losses per share
for the six months ended June 30, 2006 are $0.04 lower than
if the Company had continued to account for share-based
compensation under APB No. 25. Results for prior periods
have not been restated. Based on options granted to employees as
of June 30, 2006, total compensation expense not yet
recognized related to unvested options is approximately $870,
after tax. The Company expects to recognize that expense over a
weighted average period of 3.5 years.
The Company has utilized the Black-Scholes valuation model for
estimating the fair value of all stock options granted. The fair
value of each option is estimated on the date of grant. Set
forth below are the weighted-average assumptions used in valuing
the stock options granted and a discussion of the Companys
methodology for developing each of the assumptions used:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year ended
December 31,
|
|
|
Six months ended
June 30,
|
|
|
|
2003
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
|
Expected dividend yield
|
|
|
0
|
%
|
|
|
0
|
%
|
|
|
0
|
%
|
|
|
0
|
%
|
|
|
0
|
%
|
Expected volatility
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
|
52
|
%
|
|
|
50
|
%
|
|
|
50
|
%
|
|
|
52
|
%
|
Risk-free interest rate
|
|
|
3.15
|
%
|
|
|
2.93
|
%
|
|
|
3.68
|
%
|
|
|
3.60
|
%
|
|
|
5.21
|
%
|
Expected average life of options
(years)
|
|
|
2.7
|
|
|
|
2.5
|
|
|
|
2.9
|
|
|
|
2.9
|
|
|
|
3.0
|
|
Forfeiture rate
|
|
|
0
|
%
|
|
|
0
|
%
|
|
|
0
|
%
|
|
|
0
|
%
|
|
|
0
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expected dividend yield The Company does not
pay regular dividends on its common stock and does not
anticipate paying any dividends in the foreseeable future.
|
|
|
Expected volatility Volatility is a measure
of the amount by which a financial variable, such as share
price, has fluctuated (historical volatility) or is expected to
fluctuate (expected volatility) during a period. The Company
uses the historical volatility of similar companies over the
preceding three-year period to estimate expected volatility.
Since 2003, the annual volatility of these similar companies has
ranged from 18.4% to 29.4%, with an average of 23.4%.
|
|
|
Risk-free interest rate This is the average
U.S. Treasury rate with a term that most closely resembles
the expected life of the option for the quarter in which the
option was granted.
|
|
|
Expected average life of options This is the
period of time that the options granted are expected to remain
outstanding. This estimate is based primarily on the employee
position profile of option holders and the trading lock out
periods that result from the employees access to stock price
sensitive information.
|
|
|
Forfeiture rate This is the estimated
percentage of options granted that are expected to be forfeited
or cancelled on an annual basis before becoming fully vested.
The Company estimates the forfeiture rate based on past turnover
data with further consideration given to the level of the
employees to whom the options were granted.
|
Prior to the adoption of SFAS No. 123(R), the Company
presented all tax benefits of deductions resulting from the
exercise of stock options as operating cash flows in the
statement of cash flows. SFAS No. 123(R) requires the
cash flows resulting from the tax benefits of deductions in
excess of the compensation cost recognized for those options
(excess tax benefits) to be classified as financing cash flows.
There were no excess tax benefits classified as a financing cash
inflow in the period ended June 30, 2006.
F-14
The following table illustrates the effect on net income (loss)
and net income (loss) per share if the Company had applied the
fair value recognition provisions of SFAS No. 123 to
stock-based employee compensation for the three years ended
December 31, 2003, 2004 and 2005 and for the six months
ended June 30, 2005 and 2006. The reported and pro forma
net income (loss) and net income (loss) per share for the six
month period ended June 30, 2006 are the same because
stock-based compensation expense is recorded under the
provisions of SFAS No. 123(R) for that period.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year ended
December 31,
|
|
|
Six months ended
June 30,
|
|
|
|
2003
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
|
Net income, as reported
|
|
$
|
4,454
|
|
|
$
|
11,472
|
|
|
$
|
15,784
|
|
|
$
|
2,841
|
|
|
$
|
(7,690
|
)
|
Add: Stock-based compensation in
reported net income, net of taxes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,801
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
188
|
|
Deduct: Total stock-based
compensation expense determined under the fair value based
method for all awards, net of taxes
|
|
|
(133
|
)
|
|
|
(3,185
|
)
|
|
|
(258
|
)
|
|
|
(81
|
)
|
|
|
(188
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pro forma net income
|
|
$
|
4,321
|
|
|
$
|
11,088
|
|
|
$
|
15,526
|
|
|
$
|
2,760
|
|
|
$
|
(7,690
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss) attributable to
common stockholders per common share basic
|
|
$
|
0.68
|
|
|
$
|
1.74
|
|
|
$
|
2.21
|
|
|
$
|
0.44
|
|
|
$
|
(0.99
|
)
|
Net income (loss) attributable to
common stockholders per common share diluted
|
|
$
|
0.63
|
|
|
$
|
1.61
|
|
|
$
|
2.00
|
|
|
$
|
0.39
|
|
|
$
|
(0.99
|
)
|
Pro forma net income (loss)
attributable to common stockholders per common share
basic
|
|
$
|
0.66
|
|
|
$
|
1.69
|
|
|
$
|
2.18
|
|
|
$
|
0.42
|
|
|
$
|
(0.99
|
)
|
Pro forma net income (loss)
attributable to common stockholders per common share
diluted
|
|
$
|
0.61
|
|
|
$
|
1.56
|
|
|
$
|
1.96
|
|
|
$
|
0.38
|
|
|
$
|
(0.99
|
)
|
|
|
Recent accounting
pronouncements
In June 2006, the FASB issued FASB Interpretation 48,
Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes an
interpretation of FASB Statement No. 109, Accounting for
Income Taxes (FIN 48). FIN 48 clarifies the
accounting for uncertainty in income taxes. FIN 48
prescribes a recognition threshold and measurement attribute for
the financial statement recognition and measurement of a tax
position taken or expected to be taken in a tax return.
FIN 48 requires that the Company recognize in its financial
statements, the impact of a tax position, if that position is
more likely than not of being sustained on audit, based on the
technical merits of the position. FIN 48 also provides
guidance on derecognition, classification, interest and
penalties, accounting in interim periods and disclosure. The
provisions of FIN 48 are effective for fiscal years
beginning after December 15, 2006, with the cumulative
effect of the change in accounting principle recorded as an
adjustment to opening retained earnings. The Company is
currently evaluating the impact of adopting FIN 48 on the
financial statements.
In March 2006, the FASB issued Statement No. 156,
Accounting for Servicing of Financial Assets an
amendment of FASB Statement No. 140
(SFAS No. 156). SFAS No. 156 requires an
entity to recognize a servicing asset or servicing liability
each time it undertakes an obligation to service a financial
asset by entering into a servicing contract based on certain
conditions. The provisions of SFAS No. 156 are
effective for fiscal years beginning after September 15,
2006. SFAS No. 156 will have no immediate impact on
the Companys consolidated financial statements.
F-15
In February 2006, the FASB issued Statement No. 155,
Accounting for Certain Hybrid Financial
Instruments an amendment of FASB Statements
No. 133 and 140 (SFAS No. 155).
SFAS No. 155 permits fair value remeasurement for any
hybrid financial instrument that contains an embedded derivative
that otherwise would require bifurcation, clarifies which
interest-only strips and principal-only strips are not subject
to the requirements of Statement No. 133, establishes a
requirement to evaluate interests in securitized financial
assets to identify interests that are freestanding derivatives
or that are hybrid financial instruments that contain an
embedded derivative requiring bifurcation, clarifies that
concentrations of credit risk in the form of subordination are
not embedded derivatives and amends Statement No. 140 to
eliminate the prohibition on a qualifying special-purpose entity
from holding a derivative financial instrument that pertains to
a beneficial interest other than another derivative financial
instrument. The provisions of SFAS No. 155 are
effective for fiscal years beginning after September 15,
2006. SFAS No. 155 will have no immediate impact on
the Companys consolidated financial statements.
Reclassifications
Certain prior period amounts have been reclassified to conform
to the current year presentation.
Microscience
Limited
On June 23, 2005, Emergent Europe, Inc., (EEI), a
wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company incorporated in Delaware,
completed the acquisition of Microscience pursuant to the terms
and conditions of the Share Exchange Agreement dated
June 23, 2005 (Exchange Agreement) by and among EEI and
Microscience Holdings plc, a public limited liability company
incorporated in England. At the closing date, the Company,
through EEI, issued Microscience shareholders
1,264,051 shares of the Companys Class A Common
Stock in exchange for all of the outstanding stock of
Microscience. Shares of Class A Common Stock of the Company
were valued for financial statement purposes at $21.36 per
share. The Companys board of directors determined the fair
value of the shares issued after taking into account the
recommendation of management and the assessments provided by a
third party valuation specialist. The results of operations for
Microscience from June 23, 2005 are included in the
accompanying consolidated statements of operations.
Total purchase consideration consisted of:
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair value of common stock
|
|
$
|
27,001
|
|
Direct acquisition costs
|
|
|
1,194
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total purchase consideration
|
|
$
|
28,195
|
|
|
|
The acquisition was accounted for using the purchase method of
accounting, as required by SFAS No. 141, Business
Combinations (SFAS No. 141). All of the acquired
assets and assumed liabilities of Microscience were recorded at
their estimated fair market values on the acquisition date,
which approximated net book value.
F-16
The purchase price was allocated as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current assets
|
|
$
|
1,441
|
|
Property and equipment
|
|
|
863
|
|
Current liabilities
|
|
|
(684
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net assets acquired
|
|
|
1,620
|
|
In-process research and development
|
|
|
26,575
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total purchase consideration
|
|
$
|
28,195
|
|
|
|
In connection with the transaction, the Company recorded a
charge of $26,575 for acquired research projects associated with
products in development for which, at the acquisition date,
technological feasibility had not been established and no
alternative future use existed. Because Microscience was a
development stage company that had not commenced its planned
principal operations, the transaction was accounted for as an
acquisition of assets rather than as a business combination and,
therefore, goodwill was not recorded.
Antex Biologics
Inc.
On May 31, 2003, BioPort completed the acquisition of
assets from Antex, a subsidiary of Antex Pharma Inc. (Pharma
and, together with Antex, Sellers), pursuant to the terms and
conditions of the Asset Purchase Agreement dated April 10,
2003 (the Purchase Agreement) by and among BioPort and Sellers.
Pursuant to the Purchase Agreement, BioPort acquired from
Sellers all of the assets and assumed certain liabilities for
cash of $3,400 and transaction costs of $394. The amount of
consideration was determined on the basis of arms length
negotiations between BioPort and Sellers. The results of
operations for Antex from May 31, 2003 are included in the
accompanying consolidated statements of operations.
F-17
Total purchase consideration consisted of:
|
|
|
|
|
Purchase price
|
|
$
|
3,400
|
Direct acquisition costs
|
|
|
394
|
|
|
|
|
Total purchase consideration
|
|
$
|
3,794
|
|
|
The acquisition was accounted for using the purchase method of
accounting, as required by SFAS No. 141. All of the
acquired assets and assumed liabilities of Antex were recorded
at their estimated fair market value on the acquisition date,
which approximated book value.
The purchase price was allocated as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
Current assets
|
|
$
|
279
|
Property and equipment
|
|
|
1,691
|
In-process research and
development consideration
|
|
|
1,824
|
|
|
|
|
Total purchase consideration
|
|
$
|
3,794
|
|
|
In connection with the transaction, the Company recorded a
charge of $1,824 for acquired research projects associated with
products in development for which, at the acquisition date,
technological feasibility had not been established and no
alternative future use existed. Because Antex was a development
stage company that had not commenced its planned principal
operations, the transaction was accounted for as an acquisition
of assets rather than as a business combination and, therefore,
goodwill was not recorded.
Accounts receivable consist of the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
June 30,
|
|
|
2004
|
|
2005
|
|
2006
|
|
|
Billed
|
|
$
|
14,865
|
|
$
|
1,112
|
|
$
|
739
|
Unbilled
|
|
|
3,772
|
|
|
1,418
|
|
|
692
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
18,637
|
|
$
|
2,530
|
|
$
|
1,431
|
|
|
Inventories consist of the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
June 30,
|
|
|
2004
|
|
2005
|
|
2006
|
|
|
Raw materials and supplies
|
|
$
|
1,947
|
|
$
|
2,229
|
|
$
|
2,094
|
Work-in-process
|
|
|
6,674
|
|
|
9,547
|
|
|
26,330
|
Finished goods
|
|
|
4,632
|
|
|
4,665
|
|
|
253
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Inventories
|
|
$
|
13,253
|
|
$
|
16,441
|
|
$
|
28,677
|
|
|
F-18
|
|
6.
|
Property, plant
and equipment
|
Property, plant and equipment consist of the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
June 30,
|
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
|
Land and improvements
|
|
$
|
2,963
|
|
|
$
|
2,995
|
|
|
$
|
5,124
|
|
Buildings and leasehold
improvements
|
|
|
13,496
|
|
|
|
14,143
|
|
|
|
22,220
|
|
Furniture and equipment
|
|
|
10,563
|
|
|
|
12,520
|
|
|
|
14,015
|
|
Internal-use software
|
|
|
3,818
|
|
|
|
3,937
|
|
|
|
3,937
|
|
Construction in-progress
|
|
|
2,086
|
|
|
|
6,197
|
|
|
|
14,787
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
32,925
|
|
|
|
39,792
|
|
|
|
60,083
|
|
Less: Accumulated depreciation and
amortization
|
|
|
(5,657
|
)
|
|
|
(9,147
|
)
|
|
|
(11,135
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property, plant and equipment, net
|
|
$
|
27,269
|
|
|
$
|
30,645
|
|
|
$
|
48,948
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization expense was $1,214, $1,867 and
$3,549 for the years ended December 31, 2003, 2004 and
2005, respectively, and $1,492 and $2,002 for the six months
ended June 30, 2005 and 2006, respectively. For the years
ended December 31, 2003, 2004 and 2005, depreciation and
amortization expense included approximately $0, $209 and $1,257,
respectively, related to internally developed software. For the
six months ended June 30, 2005 and 2006, depreciation and
amortization expense included approximately $628 and $628,
respectively, related to internally developed software.
In connection with the acquisition of Microscience in 2005 as
further described in Note 3 Acquisitions, the
Company acquired a facility lease deposit totaling $454. The
deposit remains in effect as of June 30, 2006.
|
|
8.
|
Other current
liabilities
|
Other current liabilities consist of the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
June 30,
|
|
|
2004
|
|
2005
|
|
2006
|
|
|
Contract costs
|
|
$
|
3
|
|
$
|
445
|
|
$
|
647
|
Professional fees
|
|
|
1,462
|
|
|
1,390
|
|
|
1,134
|
Interest payable
|
|
|
71
|
|
|
146
|
|
|
155
|
Property taxes and other
|
|
|
357
|
|
|
628
|
|
|
450
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
1,893
|
|
$
|
2,609
|
|
$
|
2,386
|
|
|
F-19
|
|
9.
|
Long-term debt
and related party notes payable
|
The components of long term-debt and related party notes payable
are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
June 30,
|
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
|
Term Loan dated October 2004;
6.625%, due October 2011
|
|
$
|
7,000
|
|
|
$
|
7,000
|
|
|
$
|
7,000
|
|
Forgivable Loan dated October
2004; 3.0%, due March 2013
|
|
|
2,500
|
|
|
|
2,500
|
|
|
|
2,500
|
|
ERP Term Loan dated
August 2004; prime less 0.375%, due September 2007
|
|
|
2,280
|
|
|
|
1,760
|
|
|
|
1,440
|
|
Term Loan dated April 2006;
LIBOR plus 3%, due April 2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8,500
|
|
Employee notes payable for stock
redemption; 6%, due 2006
|
|
|
947
|
|
|
|
537
|
|
|
|
63
|
|
Other
|
|
|
140
|
|
|
|
113
|
|
|
|
93
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total notes payable
|
|
|
12,867
|
|
|
|
11,909
|
|
|
|
19,596
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less current portion of notes
payable
|
|
|
(1,046
|
)
|
|
|
(1,408
|
)
|
|
|
(1,232
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term portion of notes payable
|
|
$
|
11,821
|
|
|
$
|
10,502
|
|
|
$
|
18,364
|
|
|
|
In April 2006, the Company completed the acquisition of a
150,000 square foot facility in Frederick, Maryland for
$9,750. This facility was previously under a lease which
contained an option to purchase the facility. The Company paid
$1,250 in cash and financed the remaining balance with a bank
loan in the amount of $8,500. This loan requires monthly
principal and interest payments from May 2006 through April 2011
of $72 with a balloon payment for the remaining unpaid principal
and interest due in April 2011. The interest rate is a floating
rate based on the three month LIBOR plus 3% (8.5% as of
June 30, 2006). The loan is collateralized by the
150,000 square foot facility. The loan requires the Company
to comply with certain non-financial covenants.
In October 2004, the Company entered into a Secured Conditional
Loan with the Maryland Economic Development Assistance Fund for
$2.5 million. The proceeds of the loan were used to
reimburse the Company for eligible costs it incurred to purchase
a building in Frederick, Maryland. The loan is secured by a
$1,250 letter of credit and a security interest in the building.
The Company is required to pay an annual fee of 1% to maintain
the letter of credit. The borrowing bears interest at
3% per annum, and the term of the loan ends March 31,
2013. The principal and related accrued interest may be forgiven
if specified employment levels are achieved and maintained
through December 2012, at least $42,900 in project costs are
expended prior to December 2009 and the Company occupies the
building through December 2012. The loan requires the Company to
employ at least 280 full-time employees at the Companys
facilities in Frederick, Maryland as of December 31, 2009 and
maintain at least 280 full-time employees through December 31,
2012. If as of December 31, 2009, 2010, 2011 or 2012 the Company
employs fewer than 280 and more than 225 full-time employees at
the Companys facilities in Frederick, Maryland, then the
Company will be required to repay $9 of principal plus accrued
interest for each position not filled below the target level of
280 employees. If as of December 31, 2009, 2010, 2011 or 2012
the Company employs fewer than 225 full-time employees at the
Companys facilities in Frederick, Maryland, then the
Company will be required to repay the entire outstanding
principal amount of the loan plus accrued interest. This loan is
guaranteed by all of the subsidiaries of the Company.
In connection with the purchase of the building in Frederick,
Maryland discussed above, the Company entered into a loan
agreement for $7,000 with a bank to finance the remaining
portion of the purchase price. The borrowing accrues interest at
6.625% per annum through October 2006. The Company is
required to make interest only payments through that date.
Beginning in November 2006, the Company
F-20
will begin to make monthly payments of $62, based upon a
15 year amortization schedule. In November 2009, the
monthly payments will be adjusted based upon a 12 year
amortization schedule. All unpaid principal and interest is due
in full in October 2011. The Company is required to maintain
certain financial and non-financial covenants including a
minimum tangible net worth of not less than $5,000 and a debt
coverage ratio of not less than 1.1 to 1. This loan is
guaranteed by all of the subsidiaries of the Company.
During 2004, the Company implemented an Enterprise Resource
Planning (ERP) system. The Company financed $2,280 of the costs
through the issuance of a term loan. The loan bears interest at
prime less 0.375% (8.38% as of June 30, 2006) and is
due in September 2007. Monthly payments escalate from $40 to
$106 over the term. The ERP system provides security for the
loan.
In 2004, the Company issued notes as consideration for the
repurchase of outstanding class B common stock of BioPort.
These notes were issued to various current and past employees
who were issued equity as a result of earlier stock option
exercises. Amounts are payable in annual installments, through
2006, and bear interest at 6%.
Scheduled principal repayments and maturities on long-term debt
as of December 31, 2005 are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
$
|
1,408
|
2007
|
|
|
1,302
|
2008
|
|
|
317
|
2009
|
|
|
2,838
|
2010 and thereafter
|
|
|
6,045
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
11,910
|
|
|
Line of
credit
On April 1, 2005, the Company, through BioPort, obtained a
line of credit that provides for borrowings of up to $10,000.
The line of credit initially expired on May 1, 2006, but
has been extended to October 1, 2006. The line of credit is
secured by accounts receivable and bears interest at the prime
rate less 0.375%. BioPort is subjected to certain covenants,
including maintenance of specified equity levels on a quarterly
basis. BioPort is currently in compliance with those covenants.
There was no outstanding balance for this line of credit as of
June 30, 2006.
Preferred
stock
The Company is authorized to issue up to 3,000,000 shares
of preferred stock, $0.01 par value per share (Preferred
Stock). Any preferred stock issued may have dividend rates,
voting rights, conversion privileges, redemption
characteristics, and sinking fund requirements as approved by
the Companys board of directors. As of June 30, 2006,
no preferred stock has been issued.
Common
stock
The Company currently has two classes of common stock authorized
and outstanding: class A common stock, $0.01 par value
per share (Class A Common Stock), and class B common
stock, $0.01 par value per share (Class B Common
Stock). The Company is authorized to issue up to
10,000,000 shares of the Class A Common Stock and
2,000,000 shares of the Class B Common Stock. Holders
of Class A Common Stock are entitled to one vote for each
share of Class A Common Stock held on all matters as
F-21
may be provided by law. Holders of Class B Common Stock are
not entitled to vote the shares of Class B Common Stock,
except as otherwise required by law.
Holders of Class A Common Stock and Class B Common
Stock are entitled to receive ratably dividends payable as and
when declared by the Companys board of directors. On
June 15, 2005, the Companys board of directors
declared a special cash dividend to the holders of outstanding
shares of Class A Common Stock and Class B Common
Stock in an aggregate amount of $5,400. The Companys board
of directors declared this special dividend in order to
distribute the net proceeds of a payment received as a result of
the settlement of litigation initiated in 2002 by BioPort
against Elan Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Athena Neurosciences, Inc.
and Solstice Neurosciences, Inc. in an effort to clarify
intellectual property rights, including the recovery of
royalties and other costs and fees, to which BioPort believed it
was entitled under a series of agreements regarding the
development of botulinum toxin products. The Company paid the
special cash dividend on July 13, 2005 to stockholders of
record as of June 15, 2005. No regular dividends have been
declared or paid.
Each share of Class B Common Stock will automatically
convert into one share of Class A Common Stock immediately
prior to the closing of the first underwritten sale of the
Companys securities pursuant to an effective registration
statement under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended.
Following conversion, the Class B Common Stock will be
eliminated and no further shares may be issued.
Prior to the formation of the Company, BioPort issued
class A no-par voting common stock (BioPort Class A
Common Stock) and class B no-par non-voting common stock
(BioPort Class B Common Stock) to fund operations. BioPort,
at its sole discretion, elected to redeem 25,000 shares of
BioPort Class B Common Stock for $200 during the year ended
December 31, 2003.
In June 2004, in the Reorganization, the Company issued
6,487,950 shares of Class A Common Stock in exchange for
6,262,551 shares of BioPort Class A Common Stock and
225,396 shares of BioPort Class B Common Stock held by
BioPharm, L.L.C. The Company repurchased and retired the
remaining issued and outstanding shares of BioPort Class B
Common Stock from former employees. Approximately
189,000 shares of BioPort were repurchased at
$7.89 per share and 9,800 shares of BioPort were
repurchased at $11.84 per share. Shares were repurchased
for $665 in cash and the issuance of $947 in notes payable. See
Note 9 Long-term debt and related party notes
payable, for additional information related to the former
employee notes payable.
During the year ended December 31, 2005, the Company
repurchased 38,984 shares of Class B Common Stock with
an original weighted average cost of $0.76 per share, for $337.
Stock
options
As of June 30, 2006, the Company has one stock-based
employee compensation plan, the Emergent Plan, under which the
Company has granted options to purchase shares of Class B
Common Stock.
Prior to the Reorganization, BioPort had a separate stock option
plan (BioPort plan) under which options were granted to purchase
BioPort Class B Common Stock. The exercise price and
vesting schedule for options were determined by BioPorts
board of directors, or a committee thereof, which was
established to administer the BioPort plan options.
As of June 30, 2004, options to purchase
677,381 shares of BioPort Class B Common Stock were
outstanding under the BioPort plan. Pursuant to the
Reorganization, all outstanding BioPort plan options were
assumed by Emergent and option holders were granted replacement
stock options to purchase an equal number of shares of
Class B Common Stock of Emergent. The exercise period for
the replacement options was extended to June 30, 2007. The
BioPort options were scheduled to expire on June 30, 2004.
In connection with the Reorganization, the Company recorded
stock-based compensation expense as a result of the issuance of
the stock options to purchase Class B Common Stock. Based
upon the guidance
F-22
in APB No. 25, because the stock options granted for
Class B Common Stock provided for an extended term over
that of the cancelled BioPort plan options, a new measurement
date was created and the Company recorded as stock-based
compensation expense the excess of the intrinsic value of the
modified options over the intrinsic value of the BioPort plan
options when originally issued. This resulted in stock-based
compensation expense of $2,801, net of taxes, for the year ended
December 31, 2004.
Outside of the reorganization, options to purchase an additional
112,000 shares of Class B common stock of Emergent
under the Emergent Plan were granted during the year ended
December 31, 2004.
The terms and conditions of stock options (including price,
vesting schedule, term and number of shares) under the Emergent
plan are determined by the Companys compensation
committee, which administers the Emergent Plan.
Each option granted under the Emergent Plan becomes exercisable
as specified in the relevant option agreement, and no option can
be exercised after ten years from the date of grant, beginning
one year after the date of grant.
The Emergent Plan has both incentive and non qualified stock
option features. Under the plan, the Company may grant options
totaling up to 1,250,000 shares of Class B Common
Stock. The exercise price of each incentive option must be not
less than 100% of the fair market value of the shares on the
date of grant, except in the case of the incentive stock options
being granted to a 10% stockholder, in which case the exercise
price must be not less than 110% of the fair market value of the
shares on the date of grant.
The following is a summary of stock option plan activity:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
BioPort
Plan
|
|
Emergent
Plan
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
average
|
|
|
|
|
average
|
|
Aggregate
|
|
|
Number
|
|
|
exercise
|
|
Number
|
|
|
exercise
|
|
intrinsic
|
|
|
of
shares
|
|
|
price
|
|
of
shares
|
|
|
price
|
|
value
|
|
|
Outstanding at December 31,
2002
|
|
|
803,242
|
|
|
$
|
0.25
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
Granted
|
|
|
103,500
|
|
|
|
13.05
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercised
|
|
|
(152,676
|
)
|
|
|
0.26
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forfeited
|
|
|
(77,235
|
)
|
|
|
0.80
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding at December 31,
2003
|
|
|
676,831
|
|
|
|
2.17
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercisable at December 31,
2003
|
|
|
458,696
|
|
|
|
0.58
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Granted
|
|
|
47,391
|
|
|
|
3.11
|
|
|
281,898
|
|
|
|
7.89
|
|
|
|
Exercised
|
|
|
(42,607
|
)
|
|
|
0.27
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Converted from BioPort to Emergent
Plan
|
|
|
(677,381
|
)
|
|
|
1.24
|
|
|
677,381
|
|
|
|
1.24
|
|
|
|
Forfeited
|
|
|
(4,234
|
)
|
|
|
1.36
|
|
|
(57,784
|
)
|
|
|
3.44
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding at December 31,
2004
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
901,495
|
|
|
$
|
3.27
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercisable at December 31,
2004
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
860,279
|
|
|
|
2.95
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Granted
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
280,000
|
|
|
|
11.19
|
|
|
|
Exercised
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(46,384
|
)
|
|
|
0.91
|
|
|
|
Forfeited
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(43,032
|
)
|
|
|
7.57
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding at December 31,
2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,092,079
|
|
|
$
|
5.11
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-23
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
BioPort
Plan
|
|
Emergent
Plan
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
average
|
|
|
|
|
average
|
|
Aggregate
|
|
|
Number
|
|
exercise
|
|
Number
|
|
|
exercise
|
|
intrinsic
|
|
|
of
shares
|
|
price
|
|
of
shares
|
|
|
price
|
|
value
|
|
|
Exercisable at December 31,
2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
852,481
|
|
|
$
|
3.50
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Granted (unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
57,500
|
|
|
|
29.58
|
|
|
|
Exercised (unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(22,615
|
)
|
|
|
1.86
|
|
|
|
Forfeited (unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(39,485
|
)
|
|
|
5.52
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding at June 30, 2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,087,479
|
|
|
$
|
6.46
|
|
$
|
25,142,514
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercisable at June 30, 2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
820,047
|
|
|
$
|
3.89
|
|
$
|
21,067,007
|
|
The weighted average remaining contractual term of options
outstanding and exercisable as of June 30, 2006 was
2.31 years and 1.52 years, respectively.
The weighted average grant date fair value of options granted
during the years ended December 31, 2003, 2004 and 2005 was
$7.97, $2.73 and $4.28, respectively, and $10.37 for the six
months ended June 30, 2006. The total intrinsic value of
options exercised during the years ended December 31, 2003,
2004 and 2005 and during the six months ended June 30, 2006
was $1,165, $325 and $563 and $518, respectively.
At December 31, 2005, stock options outstanding and vested
by exercise price were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Options
outstanding
|
|
Options
exercisable
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
average
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
|
|
remaining
|
|
average
|
|
|
|
average
|
Range
of
|
|
Number
|
|
contractual
|
|
exercise
|
|
Number
|
|
exercise
|
exercise
prices
|
|
outstanding
|
|
life
(years)
|
|
price
|
|
exercisable
|
|
price
|
|
|
$ 0.25
|
|
|
342,879
|
|
|
1.50
|
|
$
|
0.25
|
|
|
342,879
|
|
$
|
0.25
|
0.28
|
|
|
162,500
|
|
|
1.50
|
|
|
0.28
|
|
|
162,500
|
|
|
0.28
|
4.43
|
|
|
16,100
|
|
|
1.50
|
|
|
4.43
|
|
|
16,100
|
|
|
4.43
|
7.89
|
|
|
400,600
|
|
|
2.69
|
|
|
7.89
|
|
|
279,002
|
|
|
7.89
|
10.06
|
|
|
135,000
|
|
|
4.96
|
|
|
10.06
|
|
|
48,000
|
|
|
10.06
|
24.52
|
|
|
35,000
|
|
|
4.65
|
|
|
24.52
|
|
|
4,000
|
|
|
24.52
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,092,079
|
|
|
2.46
|
|
$
|
5.11
|
|
|
852,481
|
|
$
|
3.50
|
|
|
The Companys board of directors considered the assessments
of valuation specialists in determining the fair value of the
Class B Common Stock underlying stock options granted
during 2005 and as of December 31, 2003, 2004 and 2005. The
assessments of these valuation specialists were based upon the
application of the income and market approaches consistent with
the practice aid issued by the American Institute of Certified
Public Accountants entitled Valuation of Privately Held
Company Equity Securities Issued as Compensation. Under the
income approach, the valuation specialists used a discounted
cash flow analysis based on projections of future cash flow to
determine an estimated value. Under the market approach, the
valuation specialists analyzed comparable public companies and
developed an estimated value for the Class B Common Stock
based on revenues, earnings and enterprise values. The values
derived by each of these methods were adjusted for lack of
voting rights, minority interest and lack of marketability of
the Class B Common Stock.
F-24
Options granted from July 1, 2005 through June 30,
2006 are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
Weighted
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
Number of
|
|
average
|
|
average
|
|
average
|
|
|
options
|
|
exercise
|
|
fair value of
|
|
intrinsic
|
Month
of grant
|
|
granted
|
|
price
|
|
common stock
|
|
value(1)
|
|
|
July 2005
|
|
|
10,000
|
|
|
24.52
|
|
|
24.52
|
|
|
|
September 2005
|
|
|
5,000
|
|
|
24.52
|
|
|
24.52
|
|
|
|
November 2005
|
|
|
10,000
|
|
|
24.52
|
|
|
24.52
|
|
|
|
June 2006
|
|
|
57,500
|
|
|
29.58
|
|
|
29.58
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Intrinsic value reflects the amount by which the value of the
shares as of the grant date exceeds the exercise price of the
options. |
Significant components of the provision for income taxes
attributable to operations consist of the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Six months
|
|
|
|
Year ended
December 31,
|
|
|
ended
June 30,
|
|
|
|
2003
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
|
Current
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Federal
|
|
$
|
1,717
|
|
|
$
|
5,547
|
|
|
$
|
16,093
|
|
|
$
|
9,236
|
|
|
$
|
(6,949
|
)
|
State
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
200
|
|
|
|
200
|
|
|
|
100
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current
|
|
|
1,717
|
|
|
|
5,547
|
|
|
|
16,293
|
|
|
|
9,436
|
|
|
|
(6,849
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Federal
|
|
|
(416
|
)
|
|
|
(372
|
)
|
|
|
(9,769
|
)
|
|
|
(9,241
|
)
|
|
|
(832
|
)
|
State
|
|
|
(51
|
)
|
|
|
(46
|
)
|
|
|
(1,199
|
)
|
|
|
(1,153
|
)
|
|
|
(3
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total deferred
|
|
|
(467
|
)
|
|
|
(418
|
)
|
|
|
(10,968
|
)
|
|
|
(10,394
|
)
|
|
|
(835
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total provision (benefit) for
income taxes
|
|
$
|
1,250
|
|
|
$
|
5,129
|
|
|
$
|
5,325
|
|
|
$
|
(958
|
)
|
|
$
|
(7,684
|
)
|
|
The Companys net deferred tax asset consists of the
following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
June 30,
|
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
|
Net operating loss carryforward
|
|
$
|
666
|
|
|
$
|
2,242
|
|
|
$
|
3,259
|
|
Purchased in-process research and
development
|
|
|
645
|
|
|
|
721
|
|
|
|
703
|
|
Stock compensation
|
|
|
1,457
|
|
|
|
1,696
|
|
|
|
1,670
|
|
Foreign deferrals
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10,114
|
|
|
|
13,068
|
|
Other
|
|
|
883
|
|
|
|
3,198
|
|
|
|
2,707
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred tax asset
|
|
|
3,651
|
|
|
|
17,971
|
|
|
|
21,407
|
|
Fixed assets
|
|
|
(1,859
|
)
|
|
|
(1,387
|
)
|
|
|
(1,131
|
)
|
Other
|
|
|
(124
|
)
|
|
|
(393
|
)
|
|
|
(629
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred tax liability
|
|
|
(1,983
|
)
|
|
|
(1,780
|
)
|
|
|
(1,760
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Valuation allowance
|
|
|
(666
|
)
|
|
|
(4,221
|
)
|
|
|
(6,842
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net deferred tax asset
|
|
$
|
1,002
|
|
|
$
|
11,970
|
|
|
$
|
12,805
|
|
|
F-25
Net operating loss carryforwards of approximately
$84 million will begin to expire in the year 2018 if
unused. The use of the Companys net operating loss
carryforwards may be restricted due to changes in Company
ownership. The Company paid $4,280, $0, and $17,985 in income
taxes in 2003, 2004, and 2005, respectively. For the
six months ended June 30, 2005 and 2006, the company
paid $500 and $1,200 in income taxes, respectively.
The provision for income taxes differs from the amount of taxes
determined by applying the U.S. federal statutory rate to
loss before provision for income taxes as a result of the
following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year ended
December 31,
|
|
|
Six months ended
June 30,
|
|
|
|
2003
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
|
Federal tax at statutory rates
|
|
$
|
1,996
|
|
|
$
|
5,863
|
|
|
$
|
7,388
|
|
|
$
|
1,330
|
|
|
$
|
(5,176
|
)
|
State taxes, net of federal benefit
|
|
|
(230
|
)
|
|
|
(714
|
)
|
|
|
(2,329
|
)
|
|
|
(1,504
|
)
|
|
|
(390
|
)
|
Impact of foreign operations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2,278
|
)
|
|
|
(191
|
)
|
|
|
(1,846
|
)
|
Change in valuation allowance
|
|
|
187
|
|
|
|
479
|
|
|
|
3,558
|
|
|
|
691
|
|
|
|
2,621
|
|
Tax credits
|
|
|
(441
|
)
|
|
|
(492
|
)
|
|
|
(474
|
)
|
|
|
(237
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Other differences
|
|
|
(255
|
)
|
|
|
11
|
|
|
|
(214
|
)
|
|
|
864
|
|
|
|
(3,118
|
)
|
Permanent differences
|
|
|
(7
|
)
|
|
|
(18
|
)
|
|
|
(326
|
)
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
225
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Federal tax at statutory rates
|
|
$
|
1,250
|
|
|
$
|
5,129
|
|
|
$
|
5,325
|
|
|
$
|
958
|
|
|
$
|
(7,684
|
)
|
|
The Company is the subject of an ongoing federal income tax
audit for the tax year ended December 31, 2004. The
potential financial statement impact of the audit cannot be
estimated at this time. Accordingly, the Company has not
recorded any reserve relating to this audit.
During 1999, the Company established a defined contribution
savings plan under Section 401(k) of the Internal Revenue
Code. The 401(k) Plan covers substantially all employees. Under
the 401(k) Plan, employees may make elective salary deferrals.
The Company provides for matching of qualified deferrals up to
50% of the first 6% of the employees salary. During the
years ended December 31, 2003, 2004 and 2005, the Company
made matching contributions of approximately $182, $452 and
$520, respectively. During the six months ended
June 30, 2005 and 2006, the Company made matching
contributions of approximately $236 and $282, respectively.
|
|
13.
|
Commitments and
settlement gains
|
Leases
The Company leases laboratory and office facilities, office
equipment and vehicles under various operating lease agreements.
The Company leases office and laboratory space in Gaithersburg,
Maryland under a noncancelable operating lease that contains a
3% annual escalation and expires on November 30, 2008. For
the years ended December 31, 2003, 2004 and 2005 and the
six months ended June 30, 2005 and 2006, total rent
expense was $890, $1,334 and $2,526 and $1,074 and $882,
respectively.
Future minimum payments under operating lease obligations as of
December 31, 2005 are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
$
|
1,689
|
2007
|
|
|
1,249
|
2008
|
|
|
1,188
|
2009
|
|
|
56
|
|
|
|
|
Total minimum lease payments
|
|
$
|
4,182
|
|
F-26
Vendor
contracts
In accordance with a recently signed research contract, the
Company is committed to spending a minimum of $200 in research
and development activities by September 2007. To date, the
Company has incurred minimal expenditures under this contract.
Litigation
In June 2002, BioPort initiated a lawsuit against Élan
Pharmaceuticals and related entities in an effort to clarify
intellectual property rights, including the recovery of
royalties and other costs and fees, to which BioPort believed it
was entitled under a set of 1991 agreements and to clarify
intellectual property rights associated with those agreements.
BioPort sought damages, injunctive relief and declaratory
relief. On June 27, 2005, the Company obtained a settlement
pursuant to which Élan and related entities agreed to pay
the Company $10,000. Payment of such settlement was received by
the Company in July 2005. The agreement also clarified the
parties intellectual property rights. Upon receipt of the
settlement from Élan Pharmaceuticals and related entities,
the Company distributed a net settlement amount (total proceeds
from the settlement less reserves for applicable federal and
state income taxes, legal expenses related to the suit and other
miscellaneous expenses) of $5,400 to all Company stockholders of
record as of June 15, 2005.
In 1998, the Company recorded obligations related to the initial
purchase agreement of Michigan Biologic Products Institute of
$10,119. During 2004, the Company settled its entire remaining
purchase obligations to the State of Michigan for $6,300,
resulting in a gain of $3,819, which is reflected as a component
of operations on the accompanying statement of operations.
From time to time, the Company is involved in product liability
claims and other litigation considered normal in the nature of
its business. The Company does not believe that any such
proceedings would have a material, adverse effect on the results
of its operations.
14. Related
party transactions
Simba LLC, a Maryland based limited liability company 100% owned
by the Companys Chief Executive Officer and his wife,
provides chartered air transportation. Simba offers its services
to the Company on a discount from Simbas normal commercial
rate. For the years ended December 31, 2003, 2004 and 2005
and the six months ended June 30, 2005 and 2006, the
Company paid approximately $0, $32 and $34 and $28 and $13,
respectively, for transportation on an as needed basis for
business purposes. As of May 2006, this arrangement has been
terminated.
The Company has entered into marketing and sales contracts with
family members of the Chief Executive Officer to market and sell
BioThrax in certain international territories if certain
conditions are met. A consulting arrangement with the Chief
Executive Officers sister requires a payment of 4% of net
sales, not to exceed $2.00 per dose, under the agreement. A
marketing arrangement with an entity affiliated with the Chief
Executive Officer and his family requires a payment of 40% of
gross sales in countries in the Middle East and North Africa,
except Israel. No royalty payments under these agreements have
been triggered for the years ended December 31, 2003, 2004
and 2005 and the six months ended June 30, 2005 and 2006.
These arrangements have been terminated.
For the years ended December 31, 2003, 2004 and 2005 and
the six months ended June 30, 2005 and 2006, the Company
paid approximately $116, $494 and $794, and $378 and $246,
respectively, in consulting and lease and transportation
arrangements with various persons or entities affiliated with
the Chief Executive Officer or two members of the board of
directors. Accounts payable for these services as of
June 30, 2006 was $2. The Company currently has an
agreement with a director to perform corporate strategic issues
consultation and directed project support to the marketing and
communications group
F-27
and an agreement with East West Resources Corporation, a
company owned by the Chief Executive Officer, to provide
transportation and logistical support.
The Company operates in two business segments: biodefense and
commercial. In the biodefense business, the Company develops and
commercializes products for use against biological agents that
are potential weapons of bioterrorism. Revenues in this segment
relate to the Companys FDA approved product, BioThrax. In
the commercial business, the Company develops products for use
against infectious diseases with significant unmet or
underserved medical needs. Revenues in this segment consist
primarily of development and grant revenues received under
collaboration and grant arrangements. The all other segment
relates to the general operating costs of the business and
includes costs of the centralized services departments, which
are not allocated to the other segments. The assets in this
segment consist of cash and fixed assets.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reportable
segments
|
|
|
|
Biodefense
|
|
Commercial
|
|
|
All
other
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
External revenue
|
|
$
|
128,219
|
|
$
|
2,469
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
130,688
|
|
Research and development
|
|
|
10,327
|
|
|
6,962
|
|
|
|
1,092
|
|
|
|
18,381
|
|
Interest revenue
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
485
|
|
|
|
485
|
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(767
|
)
|
|
|
(767
|
)
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
2,911
|
|
|
411
|
|
|
|
226
|
|
|
|
3,548
|
|
Net income (loss)
|
|
|
58,632
|
|
|
(40,325
|
)
|
|
|
2,523
|
|
|
|
15,784
|
|
Assets
|
|
|
40,502
|
|
|
5,489
|
|
|
|
54,341
|
|
|
|
100,332
|
|
Expenditures for long-lived assets
|
|
$
|
3,286
|
|
$
|
3,052
|
|
|
$
|
194
|
|
|
$
|
6,532
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
2004
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
External revenue
|
|
$
|
82,585
|
|
$
|
909
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
83,494
|
|
Research and development
|
|
|
6,279
|
|
|
1,136
|
|
|
|
2,702
|
|
|
|
10,117
|
|
Interest revenue
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
65
|
|
|
|
65
|
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(241
|
)
|
|
|
(241
|
)
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
1,685
|
|
|
169
|
|
|
|
10
|
|
|
|
1,867
|
|
Net income (loss)
|
|
|
21,776
|
|
|
(5,428
|
)
|
|
|
(4,876
|
)
|
|
|
11,472
|
|
Assets
|
|
|
51,626
|
|
|
3,491
|
|
|
|
13,939
|
|
|
|
69,056
|
|
Expenditures for long-lived assets
|
|
$
|
8,320
|
|
$
|
668
|
|
|
$
|
8,084
|
|
|
$
|
17,072
|
|
F-28
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reportable
segments
|
|
|
|
Biodefense
|
|
Commercial
|
|
|
All
other
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
2003
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
External revenue
|
|
$
|
55,536
|
|
$
|
233
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
55,769
|
|
Research and development
|
|
|
4,352
|
|
|
477
|
|
|
|
1,498
|
|
|
|
6,327
|
|
Interest revenue
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
100
|
|
|
|
100
|
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(293
|
)
|
|
|
(293
|
)
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
1,153
|
|
|
61
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss)
|
|
|
6,106
|
|
|
(1,459
|
)
|
|
|
(193
|
)
|
|
|
(4,454
|
)
|
Asset
|
|
|
28,266
|
|
|
2,462
|
|
|
|
7,119
|
|
|
|
37,847
|
|
Expenditures for long-lived assets
|
|
$
|
4,020
|
|
$
|
103
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
4,123
|
|
|
|
The accounting policies of the segments are the same as those
described in the summary of significant accounting policies in
Note 2 Summary of significant accounting
policies. There are no inter-segment transactions.
|
|
16.
|
Quarterly
financial data (unaudited)
|
Quarterly financial information for the years ended
December 31, 2005 and 2004 is presented in the following
tables:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three months
ended
|
|
|
March 31
|
|
June 30
|
|
|
September 30
|
|
December 31
|
|
|
Fiscal year 2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
$
|
15,261
|
|
$
|
44,058
|
|
|
$
|
27,581
|
|
$
|
43,788
|
Income (loss) from operations
|
|
|
425
|
|
|
3,699
|
|
|
|
4,498
|
|
|
12,714
|
Net income (loss)
|
|
|
225
|
|
|
2,616
|
|
|
|
3,410
|
|
|
9,533
|
Net income (loss) per share, basic
|
|
|
0.03
|
|
|
0.40
|
|
|
|
0.44
|
|
|
1.23
|
Net income (loss) per share,
diluted
|
|
|
0.03
|
|
|
0.37
|
|
|
|
0.40
|
|
|
1.11
|
Fiscal year 2004
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
$
|
20,360
|
|
$
|
13,044
|
|
|
$
|
22,241
|
|
$
|
27,848
|
Income (loss) from operations
|
|
|
3,758
|
|
|
(7,632
|
)
|
|
|
8,063
|
|
|
12,582
|
Net income (loss)
|
|
|
2,582
|
|
|
(5,271
|
)
|
|
|
5,580
|
|
|
8,560
|
Net income (loss) per share, basic
|
|
|
0.39
|
|
|
(0.79
|
)
|
|
|
0.86
|
|
|
1.32
|
Net income (loss) per share,
diluted
|
|
|
0.37
|
|
|
(0.79
|
)
|
|
|
0.79
|
|
|
1.22
|
|
|
In July 2006, the Company entered into a lease agreement for
approximately 23,000 square feet of office space in Rockville,
Maryland. Annual rent begins at $600 per year and escalates at
approximately 3% per year over the ten year term of the lease.
The Company has a five year renewal option at the end of the
initial term.
In August 2006, the Company entered into a term loan for $10,000
and a revolving credit loan for up to $5,000. Under
the term loan, the Company is required to make monthly principal
payments beginning in April 2007. A residual principal payment
of approximately $4.0 million is due upon maturity in
August 2011. Upon the Companys request, the term loan is
subject to an extension term in the sole discretion of the
lender for five additional years until August 2016 for an
extension fee of 1.00% of the
F-29
principal balance of the loan. If the term of the loan were
extended, the Company would be required to continue to make
monthly principal payments through maturity in August 2016 in
lieu of the residual principal payment otherwise due in August
2011. Interest is payable monthly and accrues at an annual rate
equal to LIBOR plus 3.75%.
Under the revolving credit loan, the Company is not required to
repay outstanding principal until October 2007. In October 2007,
the outstanding principal under the revolving credit loan will
convert to a term loan with required monthly principal payments
through maturity in August 2011. Interest is payable monthly and
accrues at an annual rate equal to LIBOR plus 3.75%. The Company
also is required to pay a fee on a quarterly basis equal to
0.50% of the average daily difference between $5.0 million and
the amount outstanding under the revolving credit loan.
The term loan and revolving credit loan are secured by
substantially all of BioPorts assets, other than accounts
receivable under BioThrax supply contracts with the DoD and HHS.
The Company is required to maintain on an annual basis a minimum
tangible net worth of not less than the sum of 85% of tangible
net worth for the most recently completed fiscal year plus 25%
of current net operating profit after taxes. In addition, the
Company is required to maintain on a quarterly basis a ratio of
earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization
for the most recent four quarters to the sum of current
obligations under capital leases and principal obligations and
interest expenses for borrowed money, in each case due and
payable for the following four quarters, of not less than 1.25
to 1.00.
F-30
shares
Common stock
Prospectus
JPMorgan
Cowen and Company
HSBC
,
2006
Until ,
2006 (25 days after the date of this prospectus), all
dealers that buy, sell or trade our common stock, whether or not
participating in this offering, may be required to deliver a
prospectus. This is in addition to the dealers obligation
to deliver a prospectus when acting as underwriters and with
respect to their unsold allotments or subscriptions.
PART II
INFORMATION
NOT REQUIRED IN PROSPECTUS
|
|
Item 13.
|
Other
Expenses of Issuance and Distribution
|
The
following table indicates the expenses to be incurred in
connection with the offering described in this Registration
Statement, other than underwriting discounts and commissions,
all of which will be paid by the Registrant. All amounts are
estimated except the Securities and Exchange Commission
registration fee and the National Association of Securities
Dealers Inc. filing fee.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
Securities and Exchange Commission
registration fee
|
|
$
|
9,229
|
National Association of Securities
Dealers Inc. fee
|
|
|
9,125
|
Nasdaq Stock Market listing fee
|
|
|
*
|
Accountants fees and expenses
|
|
|
*
|
Legal fees and expenses
|
|
|
*
|
Blue Sky fees and expenses
|
|
|
*
|
Transfer Agents fees and
expenses
|
|
|
*
|
Printing and engraving expenses
|
|
|
*
|
Miscellaneous
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
|
Total Expenses
|
|
$
|
*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
To be filed
by amendment.
|
|
|
Item 14.
|
Indemnification
of Directors and Officers
|
Section 102
of the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware permits
a corporation to eliminate the personal liability of directors
of a corporation to the corporation or its stockholders for
monetary damages for a breach of fiduciary duty as a director,
except where the director breached his duty of loyalty, failed
to act in good faith, engaged in intentional misconduct or
knowingly violated a law, authorized the payment of a dividend
or approved a stock repurchase in violation of Delaware
corporate law or obtained an improper personal benefit. The
Registrants restated certificate of incorporation provides
that no director of the Registrant shall be personally liable to
it or its stockholders for monetary damages for any breach of
fiduciary duty as director, notwithstanding any provision of law
imposing such liability, except to the extent that the General
Corporation Law of the State of Delaware prohibits the
elimination or limitation of liability of directors for breaches
of fiduciary duty.
Section 145
of the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware provides
that a corporation has the power to indemnify a director,
officer, employee, or agent of the corporation and certain other
persons serving at the request of the corporation in related
capacities against expenses (including attorneys fees),
judgments, fines and amounts paid in settlements actually and
reasonably incurred by the person in connection with an action,
suit or proceeding to which he is or is threatened to be made a
party by reason of such position, if such person acted in good
faith and in a manner he reasonably believed to be in or not
opposed to the best interests of the corporation, and, in any
criminal action or proceeding, had no reasonable cause to
believe his conduct was unlawful, except that, in the case of
actions brought by or in the right of the corporation, no
indemnification shall be made with respect to any claim, issue
or matter as to which such person shall have been adjudged to be
liable to the corporation unless and only to the extent that the
Court of Chancery or other adjudicating court determines that,
despite the adjudication of liability
II-1
but in view
of all of the circumstances of the case, such person is fairly
and reasonably entitled to indemnify for such expenses which the
Court of Chancery or such other court shall deem proper.
The
Registrants restated certificate of incorporation provides
that the Registrant will indemnify each person who was or is a
party or threatened to be made a party to any threatened,
pending or completed action, suit or proceeding, whether civil,
criminal, administrative or investigative (other than an action
by or in the right of the Registrant) by reason of the fact that
he or she is or was, or has agreed to become, a director or
officer of the Registrant, or is or was serving, or has agreed
to serve, at the Registrants request as a director,
officer, partner, employee or trustee of, or in a similar
capacity with, another corporation, partnership, joint venture,
trust or other enterprise, including any employee benefit plan,
(all such persons being referred to hereafter as an
Indemnitee), or by reason of any action alleged to
have been taken or omitted in such capacity, against all
expenses (including attorneys fees), judgments, fines and
amounts paid in settlement actually and reasonably incurred by
or on behalf of Indemnitee in connection with such action, suit
or proceeding and any appeal therefrom, if Indemnitee acted in
good faith and in a manner which Indemnitee reasonably believed
to be in, or not opposed to, the best interests of the
Registrant, and, with respect to any criminal action or
proceeding, had no reasonable cause to believe his or her
conduct was unlawful. The Registrants restated certificate
of incorporation provides that the Registrant will indemnify any
Indemnitee who was or is a party to or threatened to be made a
party to any threatened, pending or completed action or suit by
or in the right of the Registrant to procure a judgment in our
favor by reason of the fact that the Indemnitee is or was, or
has agreed to become, a director or officer of the Registrant,
or is or was serving, or has agreed to serve, at our request, as
a director, officer, partner, employee or trustee of or in a
similar capacity with, another corporation, partnership, joint
venture, trust or other enterprise, (including any employee
benefit plan), or by reason of any action alleged to have been
taken or omitted in such capacity, against all expenses
(including attorneys fees) and, to the extent permitted by
law, amounts paid in settlement actually and reasonably incurred
by or on behalf of Indemnitee in connection with such action,
suit or proceeding and any appeal therefrom, if Indemnitee acted
in good faith and in a manner which Indemnitee reasonably
believed to be in, or not opposed to, the best interests of the
Registrant, except that no indemnification shall be made with
respect to any claim, issue or matter as to which Indemnitee
shall have been adjudged to be liable to the Registrant, unless,
and only to the extent, that the Court of Chancery of Delaware
or the court in which such action or suit was brought shall
determine upon application that, despite the adjudication of
such liability but in view of all the circumstances of the case,
Indemnitee is fairly and reasonably entitled to indemnity for
such expense (including attorneys fees) which the Court of
Chancery of Delaware or the court in which such action or suit
was brought shall deem proper. Notwithstanding the foregoing, to
the extent that an Indemnitee has been successful, on the merits
or otherwise, in defense of any action, suit or proceeding,
Indemnitee shall be indemnified by the Registrant against all
expenses (including attorneys fees) actually and
reasonably incurred in connection therewith. Expenses must be
advanced to an Indemnitee under certain circumstances.
The
Registrant has entered into agreements to indemnify the
Registrants directors and executive officers. These
agreements, among other things, provide that the Registrant will
indemnify the director or executive officer to the fullest
extent permitted by law for claims arising in his or her
capacity as a director, officer, manager, employee, agent or
representative of the Registrant. The indemnification agreements
also establish the procedures that will apply in the event a
director or officer makes a claim for indemnification.
The
Registrant maintains a general liability insurance policy which
covers certain liabilities of directors and officers of the
Registrant arising out of claims based on acts or omissions in
their capacities as directors or officers.
In any
underwriting agreement the Registrant enters into in connection
with the sale of common stock being registered hereby, the
underwriters will agree to indemnify, under certain conditions,
the Registrant,
II-2
the
Registrants directors, the Registrants officers and
persons who control the Registrant with the meaning of the
Securities Act of 1933, as amended, against certain liabilities.
|
|
Item 15.
|
Recent
Sales of Unregistered Securities
|
Set forth
below is information regarding shares of class A and
class B common stock issued, and options granted, by the
Registrant for class B common stock within the past three
years. Also included is the consideration, if any, received by
the Registrant for such shares, options and information relating
to the section of the Securities Act, or rule of the Securities
and Exchange Commission, under which exemption from registration
was claimed.
(a) Issuance
of Securities
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
On
June 30, 2004, the Registrant issued an aggregate of
6,487,950 shares of class A common stock to
stockholders of BioPort Corporation in exchange for an equal
number of outstanding shares of common stock of BioPort. All
other issued and outstanding shares of common stock of BioPort
were repurchased and retired. As a result of this exchange,
BioPort became a wholly owned subsidiary of the Registrant.
|
|
|
(2)
|
On
June 23, 2005, the Registrant issued an aggregate of
1,264,051 shares of class A common stock to
Microscience Investments Limited, formerly Microscience Holdings
plc, in connection with the acquisition of all the outstanding
shares of capital stock of Microscience Limited.
|
No
underwriters were involved in the foregoing issuances of
securities. The securities described in this
section (a) of Item 15 were issued to investors
in reliance upon the exemption from the registration
requirements of the Securities Act, as set forth in
Section 4(2) under the Securities Act, relative to
transactions by an issuer not involving any public offering, to
the extent an exemption from such registration was required. All
stockholders to whom shares of class A common stock
described above were issued represented to the Registrant in
connection with such issuances that they were acquiring the
shares for their own account, for investment, and not with a
view to the sale or distribution, and that they had sufficient
knowledge and experience in financial matters so as to be
capable of evaluating the merits and risks of purchasing the
shares. The stockholders received written disclosures that the
securities had not been registered under the Securities Act and
that any resale must be made pursuant to a registration
statement or an available exemption from such registration.
(b) Stock
Option Grants
Since
inception, we have issued options to certain employees and
directors to purchase an aggregate of 1,271,229 shares of
our class B common stock as of August 31, 2006. As of
August 31, 2006, options to purchase 68,999 shares of
class B common stock had been exercised, options to
purchase 140,551 shares of class B common stock had
been forfeited and options to purchase 1,061,679 shares of
class B common stock remained outstanding at a weighted
average exercise price of $6.38 per share.
The issuance
of stock options and the common stock issuable upon the exercise
of such options as described in this section (b) of
Item 15 were issued pursuant to written compensatory plans
or arrangements with our employees, directors and consultants,
in reliance on the exemption provided by Section 3(b) of
the Securities Act and Rule 701 promulgated thereunder. All
recipients either received adequate information about the
Registrant or had access, through employment or other
relationships, to such information.
All of the
foregoing securities are deemed restricted securities for
purposes of the Securities Act. All certificates representing
the issued shares of common stock described in this Item 15
included appropriate legends setting forth that the securities
had not been registered and the applicable restrictions on
transfer.
II-3
The exhibits
to the registration statement are listed in the
Exhibit Index to this registration statement and are
incorporated by reference herein.
|
|
|
|
(a)
|
The
undersigned registrant hereby undertakes to provide to the
underwriters at the closing specified in the underwriting
agreement, certificates in such denominations and registered in
such names as required by the underwriters to permit prompt
delivery to each purchaser.
|
|
|
(b)
|
Insofar as
indemnification for liabilities arising under the Securities Act
of 1933 may be permitted to directors, officers and controlling
persons of the registrant pursuant to the foregoing provisions,
or otherwise, the registrant has been advised that, in the
opinion of the Securities and Exchange Commission, such
indemnification is against public policy as expressed in the
Securities Act and is, therefore, unenforceable. In the event
that a claim for indemnification against such liabilities (other
than the payment by the registrant of expenses incurred or paid
by a director, officer or controlling person of the registrant
in the successful defense of any action, suit or proceeding) is
asserted by such director, officer or controlling person in
connection with the securities being registered, the registrant
will, unless in the opinion of its counsel the matter has been
settled by controlling precedent, submit to a court of
appropriate jurisdiction the question whether such
indemnification by it is against public policy as expressed in
the Securities Act and will be governed by the final
adjudication of such issue.
|
|
|
(c)
|
The
undersigned registrant hereby undertakes that:
|
|
|
|
|
(i)
|
For purposes
of determining any liability under the Securities Act of 1933,
the information omitted from the form of prospectus filed as
part of this registration statement in reliance upon
Rule 430A and contained in the form of prospectus filed by
the registrant pursuant to Rule 424(b)(1) or (4) or
497(h) under the Securities Act shall be deemed to be part of
the registration statement as of the time it was declared
effective.
|
|
|
|
|
(ii)
|
For purposes
of determining any liability under the Securities Act, each
post-effective amendment that contains a form of prospectus
shall be deemed to be a new registration statement relating to
the securities offered therein, and the offering of such
securities at that time shall be deemed to be the initial bona
fide offering thereof.
|
II-4
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to
the requirements of the Securities Act, the Registrant has duly
caused this Amendment No. 2 to the Registration
Statement to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned,
thereunto duly authorized, in the City of Gaithersburg, State of
Maryland on the 25th day of September 2006.
EMERGENT
BIOSOLUTIONS INC.
Fuad El-Hibri
President,
Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board of Directors
Pursuant to
the requirements of the Securities Act, this Amendment
No. 2 to the Registration Statement has been signed by the
following persons in the capacities and on the dates indicated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Signature
|
|
Title
|
|
Date
|
|
/s/ Fuad
El-Hibri
Fuad
El-Hibri
|
|
President, Chief Executive Officer
and Chairman of the Board of Directors
(Principal Executive Officer)
|
|
September 25, 2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ R.
Don Elsey
R.
Don Elsey
|
|
Vice President Finance,
Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer
(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)
|
|
September 25, 2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
*
Joe
M. Allbaugh
|
|
Director
|
|
September 25, 2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
*
Zsolt
Harsanyi, Ph.D
|
|
Director
|
|
September 25, 2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
*
Jerome
M. Hauer
|
|
Director
|
|
September 25, 2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
*
Shahzad
Malik, M.D.
|
|
Director
|
|
September 25, 2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
*
Ronald
B. Richard
|
|
Director
|
|
September 25, 2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
*
Louis
Sullivan, M.D.
|
|
Director
|
|
September 25, 2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
*By:
|
|
/s/ Fuad
El-Hibri
Fuad
El-Hibri
Attorney-in-fact
|
|
|
|
|
II-1
EXHIBIT INDEX
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit
|
|
|
Number
|
|
Description
|
|
|
1
|
.1**
|
|
Form of Underwriting Agreement
|
|
3
|
.1*
|
|
Amended and Restated Certificate
of Incorporation of the Registrant
|
|
3
|
.2*
|
|
Form of Restated Certificate of
Incorporation of the Registrant to be effective upon completion
of the offering
|
|
3
|
.3*
|
|
Bylaws of the Registrant
|
|
3
|
.4*
|
|
Form of Amended and Restated
By-laws of the Registrant to be effective upon the completion of
the offering
|
|
4
|
.1**
|
|
Specimen certificate evidencing
shares of common stock
|
|
4
|
.2*
|
|
Registration Rights Agreement,
dated June 23, 2005, between the Registrant and
Microscience Investments Limited, formerly Microscience Holdings
plc
|
|
4
|
.3*
|
|
Registration Rights Agreement,
dated September 22, 2006, among the Registrant and the entities
listed on Schedule 1 thereto
|
|
4
|
.4**
|
|
Rights Agreement, to be entered
into between the Registrant and the Rights Agent
|
|
5
|
.1*
|
|
Form of Opinion of Wilmer Cutler
Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP to be issued prior to effectiveness
|
|
9
|
.1*
|
|
Voting and Right of First Refusal
Agreement, dated October 21, 2005 between the William J.
Crowe, Jr. Revocable Living Trust and Fuad El-Hibri
|
|
9
|
.2*
|
|
Voting Agreement, dated
June 30, 2004, between BioPharm, L.L.C. and Michigan
Biologics Products, Inc.
|
|
9
|
.3*
|
|
Voting Agreement, dated
June 30, 2004, between BioPharm, L.L.C. and Biologika,
L.L.C.
|
|
9
|
.4*
|
|
Voting Agreement, dated
June 30, 2004, by and among the stockholders named therein
|
|
9
|
.5*
|
|
Voting Agreement, dated August 11,
2006, between BioPharm, L.L.C. and Microscience Investments
Limited, formerly Microscience Holdings plc
|
|
10
|
.1*
|
|
Employee Stock Option Plan, as
amended and restated
|
|
10
|
.2*
|
|
Form of Director Stock Option
Agreement
|
|
10
|
.3**
|
|
2006 Stock Incentive Plan
|
|
10
|
.4**
|
|
Form of Incentive Stock Option
Agreement under 2006 Stock Incentive Plan
|
|
10
|
.5**
|
|
Form of Nonstatutory Stock Option
Agreement under 2006 Stock Incentive Plan
|
|
10
|
.6**
|
|
Severance Plan and Termination
Protection Program
|
|
10
|
.7*
|
|
Form of Indemnity Agreement
|
|
10
|
.8*
|
|
Contract
No. W9113M-04-D-0002,
dated January 3, 2004, between BioPort Corporation and
U.S. Army Space and Missile Defense Command, as amended
|
|
10
|
.9*
|
|
Contract
No. 200-2005-11811,
dated May 5, 2005, between BioPort Corporation and
Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Public Health
Emergency Preparedness and Office of Research and Development
Coordination, as amended
|
|
10
|
.10*
|
|
Filling Services Agreement, dated
March 18, 2002, between BioPort Corporation and
Hollister-Stier Laboratories LLC, as amended
|
|
10
|
.11*
|
|
BT Vaccine License Agreement,
dated November 23, 2004, between the Registrant and the
Health Protection Agency
|
|
10
|
.12*
|
|
BT Vaccine Development Agreement,
dated November 23, 2004, between the Registrant and the
Health Protection Agency
|
|
10
|
.13*
|
|
rBot Vaccine License Agreement,
dated November 23, 2004, between the Registrant and the
Health Protection Agency
|
|
10
|
.14*
|
|
rBot Vaccine Development
Agreement, dated November 23, 2004, between the Registrant
and the Health Protection Agency
|
|
10
|
.15*
|
|
Exclusive Distribution Agreement,
dated November 23, 2004, between the Registrant and the
Health Protection Agency
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit
|
|
|
Number
|
|
Description
|
|
|
10
|
.16*
|
|
Investment Agreement relating to
Microscience Holdings plc, dated March 18, 2005, among the
Wellcome Trust, Microscience Investments Limited, formerly
Microscience Holdings plc, and Emergent Product Development
UK Limited, formerly Microscience Limited, as amended
|
|
10
|
.17*
|
|
Standard Employment Contract,
dated September 22, 2006, between Emergent Product
Development UK Limited, formerly Emergent Europe Limited, and
Steven N. Chatfield
|
|
10
|
.18*
|
|
Letter Agreement, dated
July 11, 2006, between the Registrant and Steven N.
Chatfield
|
|
10
|
.19*
|
|
Consulting Services Agreement,
dated March 1, 2006, between the Registrant and The Hauer
Group
|
|
10
|
.20*
|
|
Amended and Restated Marketing
Agreement, dated January 1, 2000, between BioPort
Corporation and Intergen N.V., as amended
|
|
10
|
.21*
|
|
Lease, dated December 1,
1998, between ARE-QRS, Corp. and Antex Biologics Inc., as amended
|
|
10
|
.22*
|
|
Lease (540 Eskdale Road, Winnersh
Triangle, Wokingham, Berkshire), dated December 13, 1996,
between Slough Properties Limited and Azur Environmental
Limited, as assigned to Emergent Product Development UK Limited,
formerly Microscience Limited
|
|
10
|
.23*
|
|
Lease (545 Eskdale Road, Winnersh
Triangle, Wokingham, Berkshire), dated December 13, 1996,
between Slough Properties Limited and Azur Environmental
Limited, as assigned to Emergent Product Development UK Limited,
formerly Microscience Limited
|
|
10
|
.24*
|
|
Lease Agreement, dated
June 27, 2006, between Brandywine Research LLC and the
Registrant
|
|
10
|
.25*
|
|
Amended and Restated Loan
Agreement, dated July 29, 2005, between BioPort Corporation
and Fifth Third Bank, as amended
|
|
10
|
.26*
|
|
Loan and Security Agreement, dated
October 14, 2004, among the Registrant, Emergent Commercial
Operations Frederick Inc., formerly Advanced BioSolutions, Inc.,
Antex Biologics Inc., BioPort Corporation and Mercantile Potomac
Bank
|
|
10
|
.27*
|
|
Promissory Note, dated
October 14, 2004, from Emergent Commercial Operations
Frederick Inc., formerly Advanced BioSolutions, Inc., to
Mercantile Potomac Bank
|
|
10
|
.28*
|
|
Loan Agreement, dated
October 15, 2004, between Emergent Commercial Operations
Frederick Inc., formerly Advanced BioSolutions, Inc., and the
Department of Business and Economic Development
|
|
10
|
.29*
|
|
Deed of Trust Note, dated
October 14, 2004, between Emergent Commercial Operations
Frederick Inc., formerly Advanced BioSolutions, Inc., and the
Department of Business and Economic Development
|
|
10
|
.30*
|
|
Term Note, dated August 10,
2004, from BioPort Corporation to Fifth Third Bank
|
|
10
|
.31*
|
|
Loan Agreement, dated
April 25, 2006, among the Registrant, Emergent Frederick
LLC and HSBC Realty Credit Corporation (USA)
|
|
10
|
.32*
|
|
Bond Purchase Agreement, dated
March 31, 2005, between the County Commissioners of
Frederick County, Emergent Commercial Operations Frederick Inc.,
formerly Emergent Biologics Inc., and Mercantile Potomac Bank
|
|
10
|
.33*
|
|
License and Co-development
Agreement, dated May 6, 2006, between Emergent Product
Development UK Limited, formerly Emergent Europe Limited, and
Sanofi Pasteur, S.A.
|
|
10
|
.34**
|
|
Product Supply Agreement, dated
June 12, 2006, between Emergent Product Development
Gaithersburg Inc. and Talecris Biotherapeutics, Inc.
|
|
10
|
.35*
|
|
Election of Fuad El-Hibri to
Participate in the Severance Plan and Termination Protection
Program
|
|
10
|
.36*
|
|
Services Agreement, dated August
1, 2006, between East West Resources Corporation and the
Registrant
|
|
10
|
.37*
|
|
Director Compensation Program
|
|
10
|
.38*
|
|
Revolving Credit Note, dated July
29, 2005, from BioPort Corporation to Fifth Third Bank
|
|
10
|
.39*
|
|
Promissory Note, dated April 25,
2006, from Emergent Frederick LLC to HSBC Realty Credit
Corporation (USA)
|
|
10
|
.40*
|
|
Loan Agreement, dated August 25,
2006, among the Registrant, BioPort Corporation and HSBC Realty
Credit Corporation (USA)
|
|
10
|
.41*
|
|
Promissory Note (Term Note), dated
August 25, 2006, from BioPort Corporation to HSBC Realty Credit
Corporation (USA)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit
|
|
|
Number
|
|
Description
|
|
|
10
|
.42*
|
|
Promissory Note (Revolving Credit
Loan), dated August 25, 2006, from BioPort Corporation to HSBC
Realty Credit Corporation (USA)
|
|
21
|
.1**
|
|
Subsidiaries of the Registrant
|
|
23
|
.1
|
|
Consent of Independent Registered
Public Accounting Firm
|
|
23
|
.2**
|
|
Consent of Wilmer Cutler Pickering
Hale and Dorr LLP (included in Exhibit 5.1)
|
|
24
|
.1*
|
|
Powers of Attorney (included on
signature page)
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
Previously
filed.
|
|
**
|
|
To be filed
by amendment.
|
|
|
|
Confidential
treatment requested. Confidential materials omitted and filed
separately with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
|
exv23w1
Exhibit 23.1
Consent
of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
We consent to the reference to our firm under the caption Experts and to the use of our report
dated May 23, 2006, in the Registration Statement (Amendment
No. 2 to Form S-1 No. 333-136622) and related Prospectus of Emergent
BioSolutions Inc. and Subsidiaries for the registration of an aggregate of $86,250,000 of its
common stock.
/s/ Ernst & Young LLP
McLean, Virginia
September 25, 2006