Use these links to rapidly review the document
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INDEX TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

Table of Contents


UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K


ý

 

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

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015

OR

o

 

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

For the transition period from                    to                  

Commission File Number: 000-53072

Emmaus Life Sciences, Inc.
(Exact name of Registrant as specified in its charter)

Delaware
(State or Other Jurisdiction of
Incorporation or Organization)
  2834
(Primary Standard Industrial
Classification Code Number)
  41-2254389
(I.R.S. Employer
Identification No.)

21250 Hawthorne Boulevard, Suite 800, Torrance, California 90503
(Address of principal executive offices, including zip code)

(310) 214-0065
(Registrant's telephone number, including area code)

SECURITIES REGISTERED PURSUANT TO SECTION 12(b) OF THE ACT:
None

SECURITIES REGISTERED PURSUANT TO SECTION 12(g) OF THE ACT:
Common Stock, $0.001 par value

        Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes  o     No  ý

        Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act. Yes  o     No  ý

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

        Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§ 232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files). Yes  o     No  ý

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

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

Large accelerated filer o   Accelerated filer o   Non-accelerated filer o
(Do not check if
smaller reporting company)
  Smaller reporting company ý

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

        There was no aggregate market value of shares of common stock held by non-affiliates of the registrant as of June 30, 2014, the last business day of the registrant's most recently completed second fiscal quarter, because the registrant's common stock was not trading on any exchange on that date.

        There were 28,563,478 shares outstanding of the registrant's common stock, par value $0.001 per share, as of May 10, 2016. The registrant's common stock is not traded or listed on any exchange.

   


Table of Contents


TABLE OF CONTENTS

EMMAUS LIFE SCIENCES, INC.
TABLE OF CONTENTS TO ANNUAL REPORT ON FORM 10-K
FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2015

ITEM
   
  PAGE  

PART I

 

 

       

ITEM 1.

 

BUSINESS

    5  

ITEM 1A.

 

RISK FACTORS

    28  

ITEM 1B.

 

UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS

    68  

ITEM 2.

 

PROPERTIES

    68  

ITEM 3.

 

LEGAL PROCEEDINGS

    68  

ITEM 4.

 

MINE SAFETY DISCLOSURES

    70  

PART II

 

 

       

ITEM 5.

 

MARKET FOR REGISTRANT'S COMMON STOCK, RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES

    71  

ITEM 6.

 

SELECTED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL DATA

    73  

ITEM 7.

 

MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

    73  

ITEM 7A.

 

QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK

    88  

ITEM 8.

 

FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA

    88  

ITEM 9.

 

CHANGES IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE

    88  

ITEM 9A.

 

CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES

    88  

ITEM 9B.

 

OTHER INFORMATION

    91  

PART III

 

 

       

ITEM 10.

 

DIRECTORS, EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

    92  

ITEM 11.

 

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

    98  

ITEM 12.

 

SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT AND RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS

    107  

ITEM 13.

 

CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS, AND DIRECTOR INDEPENDENCE

    109  

ITEM 14.

 

PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTING FEES AND SERVICES

    112  

PART IV

 

 

       

ITEM 15.

 

EXHIBITS AND FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULES

    114  

SIGNATURES

    123  

2


Table of Contents


CAUTIONARY STATEMENT REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

        The information contained in this Annual Report on Form 10-K contains some statements that are not purely historical and that are considered "forward-looking statements" within the meaning of Section 27A if the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, which we refer to as the Securities Act, and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, which we refer to as the Exchange Act. Such forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, statements regarding our plans for our business and products; clinical studies and regulatory reviews of our products under development; our strategies and business outlook; our financial condition, results of operations and business prospects; the positioning of our products in relation to demographic and pricing trends in the relevant markets; and various other matters (including contingent liabilities and obligations and changes in accounting policies, standards and interpretations). These forward-looking statements express our management's expectations, hopes, beliefs, and intentions regarding the future. In addition, without limiting the foregoing, any statements that refer to projections, forecasts or other characterizations of future events or circumstances, including any underlying assumptions, are forward-looking statements. The words "anticipates," "believes," "continue," "could," "estimates," "expects," "intends," "may," "might," "plans," "possible," "potential," "predicts," "projects," "seeks," "should," "will," "would" and similar expressions and variations, or comparable terminology, or the negatives of any of the foregoing, may identify forward-looking statements, but the absence of these words does not mean that a statement is not forward-looking.

        The forward-looking statements contained in this Annual Report on Form 10-K are based on current expectations and beliefs concerning future developments that are difficult to predict. We cannot guarantee future performance, or that future developments affecting our company will be those currently anticipated. These forward-looking statements involve a number of risks, uncertainties (some of which are beyond our control) or other assumptions that may cause actual results or performance to be materially different from those expressed or implied by these forward-looking statements, including the following:

3


Table of Contents

        All forward-looking statements attributable to us are expressly qualified in their entirety by these risks and uncertainties. These risks and uncertainties, along with others, are also described below under the heading "Risk Factors." Should one or more of these risks or uncertainties materialize, or should any of the parties' assumptions prove incorrect, actual results may vary in material respects from those projected in these forward-looking statements. You should not place undue reliance on any forward-looking statements and should not make an investment decision based solely on these forward-looking statements. We undertake no obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, except as may be required under applicable securities laws.

4


Table of Contents


PART I

ITEM 1.    BUSINESS

        With respect to this discussion, the terms, "we," "us," "our" or the "Company" refer to Emmaus Life Sciences, Inc., and its wholly-owned subsidiary Emmaus Medical, Inc., a Delaware corporation which we refer to as Emmaus Medical, and Emmaus Medical's wholly-owned subsidiaries, Newfield Nutrition Corporation, a Delaware corporation which we refer to as Newfield Nutrition, Emmaus Medical Japan, Inc., a Japanese corporation which we refer to as EM Japan, and Emmaus Medical Europe Ltd., a U.K. corporation which we refer to as EM Europe.

Overview

        We are a biopharmaceutical company engaged in the discovery, development and commercialization of innovative treatments and therapies primarily for rare and orphan diseases. We are initially focusing our product development efforts on sickle cell disease, or SCD, a genetic disorder and a significant unmet medical need. Our lead product candidate is an oral pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment that demonstrated positive clinical results in our completed Phase 3 clinical trial for sickle cell anemia and sickle ß 0 -thalassemia, two of the most common forms of SCD.

        We are in the process of preparing a new drug application, or NDA, for submission to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, or FDA, with respect to this product candidate. If the FDA accepts our submission and approves this NDA, we may be authorized to market in the United States our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD patients who are at least five years old. L-glutamine for the treatment of SCD has received Fast Track designation from the FDA, as well as Orphan Drug designation from both the FDA and the European Commission, or EC.

        We plan to market our L-glutamine treatment in the United States, if approved, either by strategic partnership or by building our own targeted sales force of approximately 30 sales representatives or some combination thereof. We intend to utilize strategic partnerships to market our treatment in the rest of the world.

        SCD is an inherited blood disorder characterized by the production of an altered form of hemoglobin which polymerizes and becomes fıbrous, causing red blood cells to become rigid and change form so that they appear sickle-shaped instead of soft and rounded. Patients with SCD suffer from debilitating episodes of sickle cell crisis, which occur when the rigid, adhesive and inflexible red blood cells occlude blood vessels. Sickle cell crisis causes excruciating pain as a result of insufficient oxygen being delivered to tissue, referred to as tissue ischemia, and inflammation. These events may lead to organ damage, stroke, pulmonary complications, skin ulceration, infection and a variety of other adverse outcomes.

        We have completed a 230 patient randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, multi-center Phase 3 clinical trial which enrolled adult and pediatric patients as young as five years of age, involving 31 sites in the United States. Our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment and the placebo were randomized by site and by patients using hydroxyurea, a chemotherapeutic agent first approved for SCD by the FDA in 1998. All participants other than those who received a placebo, including children, received up to 30 grams of pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment daily, dissolved in liquid, split between morning and evening—the same dosage as our Phase 2 clinical trial completed in 2009.

        We interpret the results of our Phase 3 clinical trial to indicate that our oral pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD, when taken on a daily basis by a patient with SCD, can potentially decrease the incidence of sickle cell crisis by restoring the flexibility and function of red blood cells in patients with SCD. Further, we interpret these results to indicate that our prescription grade L-glutamine product candidate can reduce the number of costly hospitalizations as well as unexpected

5


Table of Contents

emergency room and urgent care visits from patients with SCD. L-glutamine enhances nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide, or NAD, synthesis to reduce excessive oxidative stress in sickle red blood cells that induces much of the damage leading to characteristic symptoms of SCD.

        Although non-prescription L-glutamine supplements are available, we are not aware of any reports in peer reviewed literature demonstrating their clinical safety and effectiveness for the treatment of SCD in controlled clinical trials, and they have not been approved by the FDA as a prescription drug for SCD. We believe that our pharmaceutical grade, consistent formulation of L-glutamine may be able to meet the rigorous safety and effectiveness requirements of regulatory agencies for approval, as a prescription drug, and if so, may be preferred by treating physicians and payors as compared to non-prescription L-glutamine supplements.

        We have extensive experience in the field of SCD, including the development, outsourced manufacturing and conduct of clinical trials of our L-glutamine product candidate for the treatment of SCD. Our Chief Executive Officer, Yutaka Niihara, M.D., MPH, is a leading hematologist in the field of SCD. Dr. Niihara is licensed to practice medicine in both the United States and Japan and has been actively engaged in SCD research and the care of patients with SCD for over 20 years, primarily at the University of California Los Angeles and the Los Angeles Biomedical Research Institute at Harbor-UCLA Medical Center, or LA BioMed, a nonprofit biomedical research institute.

        To a lesser extent, we are also engaged in the marketing and sale of NutreStore L-glutamine powder for oral solution, which has received FDA approval, as a treatment for short bowel syndrome, or SBS, in patients receiving specialized nutritional support when used in conjunction with a recombinant human growth hormone that is approved for this indication. Our indirect wholly owned subsidiary, Newfield Nutrition, sells L-glutamine as a nutritional supplement under the brand name AminoPure through retail stores in multiple states in the United States and via importers and distributors in Japan, Taiwan and South Korea. Since inception, we have generated minimal revenues from the sale and promotion of NutreStore and AminoPure.

Sickle Cell Disease—Market Overview

        Sickle cell disease is a genetic blood disorder that affects 20-25 million people worldwide, and occurs with increasing frequency among those whose ancestors are from regions including sub-Saharan Africa, South America, the Caribbean, Central America, the Middle East, India and Mediterranean regions such as Turkey, Greece and Italy. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates that there are as many as 100,000 patients with SCD in the United States, and we estimate there are approximately 80,000 patients in the European Union. In regions such as Central Africa, 90% of patients with SCD die by age five and 99% of patients die by age 20. In all regions, SCD requires ongoing physician care and considerable medical intervention. The overall survival of patients in the United States with sickle cell anemia correlates with the severity of their disease state, especially the number of crises per year.

        SCD is characterized by the production of an altered form of hemoglobin which polymerizes and becomes fıbrous, causing the red blood cells of patients with SCD to become sickle-shaped, inflexible and adhesive rather than round, smooth and flexible. The complications associated with SCD occur when these inflexible and sticky cells block, or occlude, small blood vessels, which can then cause severe and chronic pain throughout the body due to insufficient oxygen being delivered to tissue, or ischemia, and inflammation. According to an article in Annals of Internal Medicine, " In the Clinic: Sickle Cell Disease " by M.H. Steinberg (September 2011), which we refer to as the Steinberg Article, this leads to long-term organ damage, diminished exercise tolerance, increased risk of stroke and infection and decreased lifespan.

6


Table of Contents

        Sickle cell crisis, a broad term covering a range of disorders, is one of the most devastating complications of SCD. Types of sickle cell crisis include:

    Vaso-occlusive crisis , characterized by obstructed blood flow to organs such as the bones, liver, kidney, eye or central nervous system;

    Aplastic crisis , characterized by acute anemia typically due to viral infection;

    Hemolytic crisis , characterized by accelerated red blood cell death and hemoglobin loss;

    Splenic sequestration crisis , characterized by painful enlargement of the spleen due to trapped red blood cells; and

    Acute chest syndrome , a potentially life-threatening obstruction of blood supply to the lungs characterized by fever, chest pain, cough and lung infiltrates.

        According to the Steinberg Article, acute chest syndrome affects more than half of all patients with SCD and is a common reason for hospitalization. Other symptoms and complications of SCD include swelling of the hands and feet, infections, pneumonia, vision loss, leg ulcers, gallstones and stroke.

        A crisis is characterized by excruciating musculoskeletal pain, visceral pain and pain in other locations. These crises occur periodically throughout the life of a person with SCD. In adults, the acute pain typically persists for 5 to 10 days or longer, followed by a dull, aching pain generally ending only after several weeks and sometimes persisting between crises. According to the Steinberg Article, frequency of sickle cell crises varies within patients with SCD from rare occurrences to occurrences several times a month. Approximately 30% of patients have rare crises, 50% have occasional crises, and 20% have weekly or monthly crises. Crisis frequency tends to increase late in the second decade of life and to decrease after the fourth decade. The overall survival of patients in the United States with sickle cell anemia correlates with the severity of their disease state, especially the number of crises per year.

        According to Hematology in Clinical Practice by Robert S. Hillman et. al. (5th ed. 2011), patients with more than 3 sickle cell crises per year will experience fatal complications during the fourth and fifth decades of life whereas patients who experience between 1 and 3 crises per year have a median survival of nearly 50 years.

        Treatment of sickle cell crisis is burdensome and expensive for patients and payors, as it encompasses costs for hospitalization, emergency room visits, urgent care visits, and prescription pain medication. According to an article in American Journal of Hematology, " The Burden of Emergency Department Use for Sickle Cell Disease: An Analysis of the National Emergency Department Sample Database " by S. Lanzkron (October 2010), there were approximately 70,000 hospitalizations and 230,000 emergency room visits with a combined emergency room and hospital inpatient charges for these SCD patients estimated to be $2.4 billion in 2006.

Limitations of the Current Standard of Care

        The only approved pharmaceutical targeting sickle cell crisis is hydroxyurea, which is available in both generic and branded formulations. Hydroxyurea, a drug originally developed as an anticancer chemotherapeutic agent, has been approved as a once-daily oral treatment for reducing the frequency of sickle cell crisis and the need for blood transfusions in adult patients with recurrent moderate-to-severe sickle cell crisis. While hydroxyurea has been shown to reduce the frequency of sickle cell crisis in some patient groups, it is not suitable for many patients due to significant toxicities and side effects and is not approved by the FDA for pediatric use. In particular, hydroxyurea can cause a severe decrease in the number of blood cells in a patient's bone marrow, which may increase the risk that the patient will develop a serious infection or bleeding, or that the patient will develop certain cancers. Another potential treatment option for SCD, bone marrow transplant, is limited in its use due

7


Table of Contents

to the lack of availability of matched donors and the risk of serious complications, including graft versus host disease, infection and potentially death, as well as by its high cost.

        Upon onset of sickle cell crisis, the current standard of care is focused on symptom management. Narcotics are typically used for the management of acute pain associated with sickle cell crisis. Pain management often starts with oral medications taken at home at the onset of pain. However, if the pain is not relieved, or if it progresses, patients may seek medical attention in a clinic setting or emergency department. Pain that is not controlled in these settings may require hospitalization for more potent pain medications, typically opioids administered intravenously. The patient must stay in the hospital to receive these intravenous pain medications until the sickle cell crisis resolves and the pain subsides. Other supportive measures during hospitalization include hydration, supplemental oxygen and treatment of any concurrent infections or other conditions.

        According to Hematology in Clinical Practice , by Robert S. Hillman et. al. (5th ed. 2011), sickle cell crisis, once it has started, almost always results in tissue damage at the affected site in the body, increasing the importance of preventative measures. While pain medications can be effective in managing pain during sickle cell crisis, they do not affect or resolve the underlying vascular occlusion, tissue ischemia or potential tissue damage. Additionally, opioid narcotics that are generally prescribed to treat pain can also lead to tissue or organ damage and resulting complications and morbidities, prolonged hospital stays and associated continuation of pain and suffering. Given the duration and frequency of sickle cell crises, addiction to these opioid narcotics is also a significant concern.

Our Solution of a Pharmaceutical Grade L-glutamine Treatment for SCD

        Our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment, if approved, may provide a safe and effective means for reducing the frequency of sickle cell crisis in patients with SCD and reducing the need for costly hospital stays or treatment with opioid narcotics. Published academic research identifies L-glutamine as a precursor to NAD and its reduced form known as NADH. NAD is the major molecule that regulates and prevents oxidative damage in red blood cells. Several published studies have identified that sickle red blood cells have a significantly increased rate of transport of glutamine, which appears to be driven by the cells' need to promote NAD synthesis, protecting against the oxidative damage and thereby leading to further improvement in their regulation of oxidative stress. In turn this made sickle red blood cells less adhesive to cells of the interior wall of blood vessels. This implied that there is decreased chance of blockage of blood vessels especially the small ones. In summary, improved regulation of oxidative stress appears to lead to less obstruction or blockage of small blood vessels, thereby alleviating a major cause of the problems that patients with SCD face.

        Several of the studies in which our Chief Executive Officer has participated have been published in peer-reviewed academic research journals. These publications include, " L-glutamine Therapy Reduces Endothelial Adhesion of Sickle Red Blood Cells to Human Umbilical Vein Endothelial Cells " by Yutaka Niihara et al., published in BMC Blood Disorders (2005), " Oral L-glutamine Therapy for Sickle Cell Anemia: I. Subjective Clinical Improvement and Favorable Change in Red Cell NAD Redox Potential " by Yutaka Niihara et al., published in the American Journal of Hematology (1998) and " Increased Red Cell Glutamine Availability in Sickle Cell Anemia: Demonstration of Increased Active Transport, Affinity, and Increased Glutamate Level in Intact Red Cells " by Yutaka Niihara et al., published in the Journal of Laboratory and Clinical Medicine (1997).

        In December 2013, we completed a Phase 3 prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo controlled, parallel-group multicenter clinical trial to measure, over a 48-week time frame, as its primary outcome, the reduction in the number of occurrences of sickle cell crises experienced by patients in the trial. This Phase 3 clinical trial enrolled a total of 230 patients across 31 clinical trial sites in the United States. Study participants included adults and children as young as five years of age. All participants other than those who received placebo, including children, received up to 30 grams of

8


Table of Contents

pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment daily, dissolved in liquid, split between morning and evening—the same dosage as our Phase 2 clinical trial completed in 2009. Patients were randomized to the study treatment using a 2:1 ratio of L-glutamine to placebo. The randomization was stratified by investigational site and hydroxyurea usage.

        The following charts summarize the results of this Phase 3 clinical trial.

GRAPHIC

Primary Endpoint—Reduction in the Frequency of Sickle Cell Crises

        Analysis of the primary endpoint of the number of sickle cell crises through 48 weeks demonstrated a 25% reduction in the median frequency of sickle cell crises (median 3 vs. 4). We have reviewed the results further and on February 25, 2016 submitted a letter to the FDA advising them of the intent to submit an NDA in the summer of 2016. With this letter, additional statistical information on our primary endpoint was provided. Included in this information was an evaluation of the efficacy of our primary endpoint using the CMH test with modified ridit scores. The following chart shows the results using the CMH test statistic with different ranking methods sent to the FDA on February 25, 2016:


Sensitivity Analysis of Number of Sickle Cell Crises and Impact of Ranking Method

 
  CMH Statistical Method Used in Test(a)  
Analysis
  Modified Ridit   Ridit   Table   Rank  

Number of Sickle Cell Crises (p-value)

    0.005     0.005     0.031     0.063  

(a)
p-values are from the CMH test with rank methods specified and controlling for hydroxyurea use and region.

        In communications with the FDA in 2010 we indicated that the statistical method for calculation of the Phase 3 sample size estimate was done via the Wilcoxon rank-sum test and was intended to mimic as much as possible the CMH test to be used in the primary analysis.

9


Table of Contents

        In the Phase 3 statistical analysis plan a rank-type scoring procedure is mentioned; however, the ranking method was not specified. The results presented to the FDA, at two meetings held in 2014, utilized the ranking method of scores=rank. This method resulted in a p-value of 0.063 which was above the pre-specified p-value of 0.045 for this analysis.

        As shown above, when the originally mentioned analytic method (CMH with modified ridit scores) that adjusts for varying strata size is utilized for the analysis of the primary endpoint, the results are highly statistically significant (p=0.005).

        Prior to this letter, we had provided the FDA with sensitivity analyses focused on the impact of stratification factors only using the ranking method of rank:


Sensitivity Analysis of Number of Sickle Cell Crises and Impact of Stratification Factors

 
  Statistical Controls Used in Test(a)  
Analysis
  Hydroxyurea use
and Region
  Hydroxyurea use
only
  Region only   None  

Number of Sickle Cell Crises

    0.063     0.008     0.014     0.005  

(a)
All p-values are from the CMH test controlling for hydroxyhurea use and region, as noted.

Secondary Endpoint—Reduction in the Frequency of Hospitalization

        We also assessed the effect of our prescription grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD by evaluating the frequency of hospitalizations for sickle cell pain as a secondary efficacy endpoint. The number of such hospitalizations, a key secondary endpoint, was significantly less, demonstrating a benefit from our prescription grade L-glutamine treatment as compared to placebo through Week 48 (a lower median number of hospitalizations of 2 vs. 3; p=0.041).

        These results utilized the same CMH test, controlling for region and hydroxyurea use, using only the ranking method of rank:


Sensitivity Analysis of Number of Hospitalizations and Impact of Stratification Factors

 
  Statistical Controls Used in Test(a)  
Analysis
  Hydroxyurea use
and Region
  Hydroxyurea use
only
  Region only   None  

Number of Hospitalizations

    0.041     0.005     0.012     0.006  

(a)
All p-values are from the CMH test controlling for hydroxyhurea use and region, as noted.

        Additional analyses were conducted to look at two key indicators which support the relevance of the efficacy findings. All such results demonstrated a benefit from our prescription grade L-glutamine treatment as compared to placebo:

    the median number of days before the first sickle cell crisis was longer in the L-glutamine group (87 days) compared to the placebo group (54 days), a difference that was statistically significant (p=0.010); and

    the median number of days in hospital was shorter in the L-glutamine group (6.5 days) compared to the placebo group (11 days) (p=0.022).

        In addition, the severity of a patient's sickle cell crises was observed in our trial. The analyses of such data from the trial showed a statistically significant lower level in the severity of crises (p=0.0167).

10


Table of Contents

Further, the data from the trial showed a statistically significant reduction in the severity of reported ACS.

        Another indication of the reduction in the frequency and severity of crises is the incidence of acute chest syndrome, or ACS, which was also part of the sickle cell crisis definition. In the study, the incidence of ACS, was found to be significantly lower with the L-glutamine treatment compared to the placebo group (26.9% of placebo patients compared to 11.9% of patients in the L-glutamine group) (p=0.006).

        Our trial results include imputation of values for patients who dropped out of the trial before reaching 48 weeks. In order to evaluate results without the imputation of values we have performed further sensitivity analyses which also showed a statistically significant lower number of sickle cell crises.

Subgroup analyses

        Subgroup analyses revealed that the observed treatment effect was consistent across regions, prior hydroxyurea use, sex and age group.

        The analysis of subgroups within the trial for efficacy showed consistent results demonstrating the benefit of our prescription grade L-glutamine treatment as compared to placebo as described in the paragraphs below.

        Efficacy across region: Subgroup analyses for efficacy as measured by the primary endpoint within regions were significant favoring L-glutamine for the number of sickle cell crises through Week 48 in two of the five regions: Northeast (median of 3 vs. 4) and West (median of 3 vs. 5). These two regions represented 48% of the patients. Two other regions favored L-glutamine, but the between-group differences were not statistically significant: South Atlantic (median of 3 vs. 4) and South Central (median of 3 vs. 4). These two regions represented 41% of the patients. The Midwest region, representing only 11% of the patients, showed no difference (median of 4 vs. 4). The number of hospitalizations for sickle cell pain showed very similar findings in both the between-group differences and statistical significance.

        Efficacy across hydroxyurea use: Subgroup analysis for efficacy across prior hydroxyurea use showed a trend favoring L-glutamine in the number of sickle cell crises through Week 48. The number of hospitalizations for sickle cell pain showed similar results with significance found in the prior hydroxyurea subgroup (median of 2 vs. 3). The no prior hydroxyurea subgroup showed a trend favoring L-glutamine in both the number of sickle cell crises (median of 3 vs. 4) and the number of such hospitalizations (median of 2 vs. 3) through Week 48.

        Efficacy across sex: Subgroup analysis for efficacy across sex showed a lower median number of sickle cell crises through Week 48 in the L-glutamine group as compared to the placebo group for both males and females (medians of 3 vs. 4 for both groups). The median number of hospitalizations for sickle cell pain was also lower in the L-glutamine group for both males and females (2 vs. 3 for both groups).

        Efficacy across age: Subgroup analysis for efficacy across age (adults vs. children) showed a lower median number of sickle cell crises through Week 48 in the L-glutamine group as compared to the placebo group (3 vs. 4 for both groups). The median number of hospitalizations for sickle cell pain showed similar results in favor of L-glutamine (2 vs. 3 for both groups).

11


Table of Contents

        Regarding safety, adverse events, or AEs, were reported for 98% of patients in the L-glutamine group and 100% of the placebo group. Most AEs were mild or moderate (73.5% in the L-glutamine group, 83.4% in the placebo group). As expected in this disease population, the most common AE was sickle cell anemia with crisis, which was reported for 81.5% of patients in the L-glutamine group and 91.0% of patients in the placebo group. Other notable differences between the treatment groups (difference of about 10 percentage points or more) all favored L-glutamine treatment and included acute chest syndrome (11.9% L-glutamine, 26.9% placebo). Patients in both groups had AEs that were considered possibly related to the study medication (21.2% L-glutamine, 15.4% placebo). The majority of the possibly related AEs were due to gastrointestinal disorders.

        Serious adverse events, or SAEs, were reported for 78.1% of patients in the L-glutamine group and 87.2% of patients in the placebo group. The most common SAE was sickle cell crisis, which was reported in fewer patients treated with L-glutamine (67.5% L-glutamine, 80.8% placebo).

        In summary our trial data indicates that our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment achieved:

    a 25% reduction in the median number of sickle cell crises;

    a 33% reduction in the median number of sickle cell-related hospitalizations;

    a 41% reduction in the median number of sickle cell-related cumulative hospital days;

    a 58% lower reported incidence of sickle cell-related acute chest syndrome;

    an increase in the median number of days before the first sickle cell crisis from 54 to 87 days; and

    reported adverse events are similar between those treated with L-glutamine and placebo.

Regulatory Status of L-glutamine for SCD

        On June 11, 2014, we met with the FDA to discuss the preliminary data from our Phase 3 clinical trial and our plans to submit to the FDA a NDA, based on our single Phase 3 clinical trial. In minutes of the meeting that the FDA has provided to us, based on its review of preliminary data from our Phase 3 clinical trial, the FDA expressed concern that the primary endpoint of painful sickle cell crisis (p=0.063) did not reach the pre-specified p-value significance level of 0.045.

        The FDA commented that the primary efficacy results were inconsistent among regions, as shown by the large difference in results observed based on the stratified analyses adjusted for both region and hydroxyurea use and the stratified analysis adjusted for hydroxyurea use only. The FDA also commented that a reduction in the median number of painful sickle cell crises by one (from four to three) is not clinically meaningful and is not consistent across regions. The FDA asked us to provide explanations for the differences in results observed based on the stratified analysis adjusted for region and hydroxyurea.

        The FDA also commented on the number of patients who discontinued the study, which was greater in the L-glutamine group, and the FDA would need to understand what impact the imputation of such data, which is a method of accounting for missing information, would have on the interpretation of the results.

        Based on preliminary data, the FDA initially recommended a second Phase 3 study be conducted to support the indication for SCD and suggested enrolling patients with a higher baseline level of sickle cell crises to help demonstrate a larger difference in the mean results.

        Based on other questions we submitted to the FDA regarding the previous pre-clinical work and evidence gathered for the L-glutamine treatment related to pharmacology, toxicology, and clinical pharmacology, the FDA noted that the information provided appeared to be acceptable; however, final

12


Table of Contents

affirmations regarding such matters would be made during the FDA's review of a NDA. The FDA also made certain recommendations to the chemistry, manufacturing and controls of our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD which we believe we will be able to successfully incorporate or address.

        In September 2014 we submitted to the FDA the Clinical Study Report for our Phase 3 clinical trial, supplemental analyses and a new meeting request. Consequently, we met again with the FDA on October 15, 2014. In the minutes of the October 15 meeting, the FDA noted that it continued to be concerned that the primary endpoint did not meet the pre-specified p-value and observed that our efficacy finding would be more persuasive if supported by an additional, confirmatory study. At that time we communicated to the FDA that over-stratification in our statistical analysis plan led to the pre-specified p-value not being met. We also provided sensitivity analyses and results to address the over stratification which demonstrated a statistically significant p-value for the primary endpoint.

        At the October 15 meeting, in response to a question raised by the FDA at the June 11 meeting, we provided evidence of the clinical meaningfulness of a reduction in the median number of painful sickle cell crises by one (from four to three). In the October 15 minutes, the FDA expressed the view that the reduction of one sickle cell crises may not be clinically significant and advised us to provide all information and data to support this clinical meaningfulness and the FDA stated they will evaluate the overall clinical benefit and risk of L-glutamine based on results from our Phase 3 trial and all available safety data.

        In the October 15 minutes, the FDA reiterated certain concerns outlined in the June 11 minutes. Other questions that we posed for discussion at the October 15 meeting related to the safety of L-glutamine use, the benefit-risk margin for L-glutamine use, the sufficiency of our Phase 2 and 3 trials to support a NDA submission and whether a confirmatory study could be conducted as a post-marketing commitment. The FDA noted that its decisions regarding these questions would be made after the submission of a NDA.

        In addition to planning a confirmatory study, we plan to submit a NDA for our L-glutamine treatment for SCD during 2016 containing all efficacy and safety data through our completed Phase 3 trial and additional analyses and information in accord with the feedback the FDA provided in the context of the June 11 and October 15 meetings. We presently intend to request that our planned confirmatory study be accepted by the FDA as a study to be completed after approval of the NDA.

        There can be no assurance that the FDA will accept our submission for filing before the completion of a confirmatory study or that the information and data in the NDA will satisfy the concerns identified by the FDA.

        Regarding the submission of NDAs that include only one Phase 3 clinical trial, the FDA has in some cases accepted evidence from one clinical trial to support a finding of substantial evidence of effectiveness. A change in the law under the U.S. Food and Drug Administration Modernization Act of 1997, or Modernization Act, made clear that the FDA may consider data from only one adequate and well controlled clinical investigation and confirmatory evidence if the FDA determines that such evidence is sufficient to establish effectiveness of the medicine under study.

        In a guidance document titled "Providing Clinical Evidence of Effectiveness for Human Drug and Biological Products" (May 1998), the FDA stated that reliance on a single clinical trial is generally limited to situations in which a trial has demonstrated a clinically meaningful effect on mortality, irreversible morbidity or prevention of a disease with a potential serious outcome, and where confirmation of the result in a second trial would be impractical or unethical. The factors the FDA considers for accepting a single clinical trial include, but are not limited to, having large multi-centered studies, consistent data across subgroups, multiple endpoints, and statistically very persuasive findings.

13


Table of Contents

Sales and Marketing Plans for our SCD Product Candidate

        We plan to work with strategic partners to market our SCD product candidate on a worldwide basis. This effort could lead to a global strategic partner or a group of regional partners. This would permit us to access established sales, marketing and regulatory organizations to sell, distribute and provide regulatory compliance for our product sales. This would also permit us to focus our resources on the development of future pipeline products.

        Although we have started a formal process, if we are not able to find a strategic partner on acceptable terms for the United States market, subject to FDA approval of our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD, we intend to build a focused sales and marketing force of approximately 30 sales representatives to commercialize this product in the United States. We intend to focus our sales and marketing efforts across several different groups, including patients, physicians, health care providers, hospitals, treatment centers, insurance carriers, non-profit associations, and potentially, collaborating pharmaceutical or biotechnology companies. Our in-house product specialists and sales representatives will focus on the following tasks as part of our marketing strategy:

    promote our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD to SCD specialist physicians and key opinion leaders;

    starting with our 31 clinical trial sites, promote awareness of our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD at all U.S. community-based treatment centers;

    develop collateral materials and informational packets about our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD to educate patients and physicians and garner industry support;

    establish collaborative relationships with non-profit organizations and patient advocacy groups that focus on SCD; and

    identify license partners and other international opportunities to commercialize our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD, if approved by international regulatory authorities.

Currently Marketed Products

        We currently market two L-glutamine-based products, NutreStore and AminoPure, in the United States and certain other territories. We generate limited revenues from the sale of these products, which we consider to be non-core operations.

        NutreStore is our FDA-approved prescription L-glutamine powder for oral solution for the treatment of SBS in conjunction with an approved recombinant human growth hormone and other customary SBS management. Patients with SBS have had half or more of their small intestine surgically removed or have a poorly functioning small intestine due to inflammatory bowel disease. These patients cannot adequately absorb nutrition through their small intestine and thus require long-term intravenous nutrition, which is expensive, inconvenient, and poses significant infection risk. As cited in the NutreStore label, after four weeks of treatment with NutreStore, the patients enrolled in the Phase 3 trial showed:

    Reduced mean frequency of intravenous nutrition in days per week from 5.4 to 1.2;

    Reduced mean intravenous nutritional volume in liters per week from 10.5 to 2.9; and

    Reduced mean intravenous nutritional calories per week from 7,895 to 2,144.

        NutreStore is distributed through local treating medical centers and physicians. We also provide the product to the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, U.S. Department of Defense, U.S. Coast Guard and Public Health Service (Indian Health Service).

14


Table of Contents

        AminoPure is our dietary supplement L-glutamine, sold through our indirect wholly-owned subsidiary, Newfield Nutrition Corporation. AminoPure is currently sold in several U.S. states, and we export the product to Japan, Taiwan and South Korea. AminoPure is subject to regulation under the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act of 1994.

CellSeed Collaboration

        In April 2011, we entered into a Research Agreement dated as of April 8, 2011 (the "Research Agreement") and an Individual Agreement dated as of April 8, 2011 (the "Individual Agreement") with the Japanese company CellSeed, Inc., or CellSeed, and, in August 2011, we entered into an addendum to the Research Agreement. Pursuant to the Individual Agreement, CellSeed granted us the exclusive right to manufacture, sell, market and distribute Cultured Autologous Oral Mucosal Epithelial Cell Sheet, or CAOMECS, for the treatment of corneal impairments in the United States, which we would be able to exercise only after receiving FDA marketing approval for the product, and agreed to disclose to us its accumulated information package for the joint development of CAOMECS. Under the Individual Agreement, we agreed to pay CellSeed $1.5 million, which we paid in February 2012. The technology acquired under the Individual Agreement was used to support an ongoing research and development project and we believe the technology has alternative future uses in other future development initiatives. Pursuant to the Research Agreement, we and CellSeed formed a relationship regarding the future research and development of cell sheet engineering regenerative medicine products, and the future commercialization of such products.

        On December 29, 2015, we and CellSeed terminated the Research Agreement and the Individual Agreement. As a result of these terminations, we no longer have an obligation to pay CellSeed any further amounts under these agreements, including the $8.5 million that would have been due within 30 days after CellSeed's delivery of an accumulated information package and our acceptance thereof, and we may not have an active license with respect to CellSeed's CAOMECS technology. We are currently negotiating the terms of new license agreements with CellSeed which have not been finalized as of this time. There can be no assurance that we will be able to negotiate new agreements and licenses with CellSeed, and if we are unable to do so, we may discontinue our efforts to research and commercialize CAOMECS for the treatment of corneal diseases.

        A cell sheet is a composite of cells grown and harvested in an intact sheet, rather than as individual cells. These cell sheets can be used for tissue transplantation. CellSeed's technology involves culturing cells on a surface coated with a temperature-responsive polymer. The thinness of this polymer coating is measured at the nanometer scale. The cells cultured on this polymer can be harvested intact as a composite cell sheet. Using a patient's own oral mucosal cells, we are working toward being able to grow and harvest a cell sheet for directly transplanting onto the cornea of the patient's affected eye to repair the damaged cornea.

        Our lead CAOMECS program is for treatment of corneal diseases. CAOMECS products are in preclinical development and have not been approved for marketing in the United States or any jurisdiction. The development of therapeutic products based on this cell sheet technology is in its early stages. We are not aware that cell sheets of the type that CellSeed and we are developing for treating corneal and other diseases are currently being used or sold by any third parties. The potential market for the corneal cell sheet products that CellSeed and we are developing includes patients with damaged corneas, which we believe represents a small percentage of the approximately 40,000 corneal transplants in the United States performed each year. The principal steps to development of a corneal cell sheet product include engaging a manufacturer compliant with applicable current good manufacturing practice, or cGMP, regulations and sufficient manufacturing capacity, conducting preclinical studies and human clinical trials, obtaining FDA approval of the product, training physicians who will use the product and perform procedures with the product and marketing the product.

15


Table of Contents

        Since 2011, an Emmaus-led team at LA BioMed has been conducting preclinical studies on corneal cell sheet technology. Subject to filing an investigational new drug application, or IND, that the FDA allows to become effective, we are preparing to begin our first clinical studies with human participants. We currently intend, if our clinical studies are successful, to file with the FDA a Biological License Application, or BLA, for this product. Based on the current status of our research and development efforts relating to this technology, we anticipate it will be six to seven years or longer before we would be able to submit and obtain FDA approval of a BLA that would allow us to begin to commercialize this product in the United States. If the product is approved for marketing, we plan to build a cGMP level facility as part of our U.S. commercialization plan for this technology.

        We estimate that the cost to develop products based on corneal cell sheet technology in the United States will be approximately $3.0 million, in addition to any payments that may be due to licensors. This estimate includes the anticipated cost of obtaining FDA approval for the corneal cell sheets and assumes that we will need the FDA to approve a BLA for the corneal cell sheets, rather than a NDA. We estimate that we will need another $2.4 million to commercialize any approved products based on corneal cell sheet technology.

Research and Development

        The Company spent $1.6 million and $2.0 million respectively in 2015 and 2014 on research and development. None of these costs are borne or sponsored by our customers.

Raw Materials and Manufacturing

        Our SCD treatment uses pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine. This differs from non-pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine available as a nutritional supplement. The manufacturing of large quantities of pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine is a complex and expensive undertaking, which we believe discourages entry of third parties into the market. As a result of these challenges, there are limited alternative suppliers from which we can obtain the pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine required to manufacture our current products and our SCD treatment product under development.

        We currently obtain, and plan to continue to obtain, our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine from Ajinomoto North America, Inc., a subsidiary of Ajinomoto U.S.A. referred to as Ajinomoto, a Japanese food, amino acid and pharmaceutical company, and from Kyowa Hakko Bio Co., Ltd., a Japanese pharmaceutical company referred to as Kyowa. Ajinomoto and Kyowa together produce the majority of pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine approved for sale in the United States.

        Ajinomoto has provided pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine to us free of charge for our clinical work, including our completed Phase 2 and Phase 3 clinical trials. Pursuant to a letter of intent between Emmaus Medical and Ajinomoto, we agreed to purchase or cause relevant third party purchasers to purchase from Ajinomoto all of the L-glutamine that we will need for our commercial products. Pursuant to the letter of intent, we will be permitted to source pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine from third party suppliers for up to 10% of our requirement for L-glutamine on a back-up basis. If, however, a competitor of Ajinomoto offers us more favorable price of L-glutamine of like grade with similar terms and conditions, we may respond to such offer in writing and request Ajinomoto to reconsider then-current price. We also currently source pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine from Kyowa for our NutreStore product.

        Eventually we plan to enter into exclusive long term supply contracts with these manufacturers for pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine for our SCD treatment that will require these companies to agree not to sell L-glutamine as a nutritional supplement or pharmaceutical for SCD applications. We do not currently have long term supply contracts with these manufacturers for L-glutamine or any other compound. As such, there is no assurance we will be able to obtain agreements for obtaining pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine from these proposed suppliers on terms acceptable to us, or on an

16


Table of Contents

exclusive basis, or that these suppliers will not experience an interruption in supply that could materially and adversely affect our business.

        Our commercial products must be packaged by a facility that meets FDA requirements for cGMP. Packaging Coordinators, Inc., or PCI, of Rockville, Illinois, has handled the packaging for our Phase 2 and Phase 3 clinical trials of our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD, and we intend to use the same company for commercial packaging of the product, if approved. PCI packaged L-glutamine for the clinical trials that resulted in the FDA's marketing approval for L-glutamine for SBS using the same dosage and packaging protocol as we expect to use for the treatment of SCD. Previous compliance with cGMP requirements for the packaging of pharmaceutical products, however, does not guarantee the ability to maintain cGMP compliance for the packaging of pharmaceutical products in the future.

Facilities

        We lease office space under operating leases from unrelated entities. The rent expense during the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014 amounted to $492,919 and $277,866, respectively.

        We lease approximately 13,329 square feet of office space for our headquarters in Torrance, California, at a base rental of $32,509 per month. The lease relating to this space expires on March 31, 2019. We lease an additional office suite in Torrance, California at a base rent of $1,960 per month for 1,400 square feet. The lease relating to this space expires on February 19, 2017.

        In addition, EM Japan leases 1,322 total square feet of office space in Tokyo, Japan and 1,313 square feet of office space in Osaka, Japan. The leases relating to these spaces will expire on September 30, 2016 and February 19, 2018, respectively. We believe our existing facilities are adequate for our operations at this time and we expect to be able to renew the office lease for our headquarters on commercially reasonable terms. In the event we determine that we require additional space to accommodate expansion of our operations, we believe suitable facilities will be available in the future on commercially reasonable terms as needed.

Employees

        As of December 31, 2015, we had 22 employees, 15 of whom are full time, and we retained two consultants. We have not experienced any work stoppages and we consider our relations with our employees to be good.

Competition

        The biopharmaceutical industry is highly competitive and subject to rapid and significant technological change. While we believe that our development experience and scientific knowledge provide us with competitive advantages, we face potential competition from both large and small pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, academic institutions, governmental agencies (such as the National Institutes of Health) and public and private research institutions. In comparison to us, many of the entities against whom we are competing, or against whom we may compete in the future, have significantly greater financial resources and expertise in research and development, manufacturing, preclinical testing, conducting clinical trials, obtaining regulatory approvals and marketing approved products. Smaller or early stage companies may also prove to be significant competitors, particularly through collaborative arrangements with large and established companies.

        Mergers and acquisitions in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries may result in increasing concentration of resources among a smaller number of our competitors. These competitors compete with us in recruiting and retaining qualified scientific and management personnel and

17


Table of Contents

establishing clinical trial sites and patient registration for clinical trials, as well as in acquiring technologies complementary to, or necessary for, our product development programs.

        Any product candidates that we successfully develop and commercialize will compete with existing therapies and new therapies that may become available in the future. The key competitive factors affecting the success of each of our product candidates, if approved, are likely to be their safety, efficacy, convenience, price, the level of proprietary and generic competition, and the availability of coverage and reimbursement from government and other third-party payors. Our commercial opportunity could be reduced or eliminated if our competitors develop and commercialize products that are safer or more effective, have fewer or less severe side effects, or are more convenient or less expensive 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, which could result in their establishing a strong market position before we are able to enter the market.

Sickle Cell Disease

        Our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD is being developed as a therapy to reduce the frequency of sickle cell crisis in patients with SCD. The only approved drug targeting a reduction in the frequency of sickle cell crisis is hydroxyurea, which is available in both generic and branded formulations. While hydroxyurea has been shown to reduce the frequency of sickle cell crisis in some patient groups, it is not suitable for all patients because it can have significant toxicities and side effects. Additionally, hydroxyurea has not been approved by the FDA for pediatric use in SCD patients.

        There is a high level of interest in SCD and we understand several academic centers and pharmaceutical companies are researching new treatments and therapies for SCD. There are studies underway testing different compounds that target various aspects of SCD pathophysiology. We are aware of three studies targeting the reduction or duration of vaso occlusive crisis events in patients with SCD which are currently in Phase 3 clinical trials sponsored by Eli Lilly, Mast Therapeutics, Inc. and Pfizer.

        We are also aware of efforts to develop cures for SCD through approaches such as bone marrow transplant and gene therapy. Although bone marrow transplant is currently available for SCD patients, its use is limited by the lack of availability of matched donors and by the risk of serious complications, including graft versus host disease and infection. Attempts to develop a cure through gene therapy remain at an early stage, but if these attempts were to succeed and receive regulatory approval, this could limit the market for a product such as our L-glutamine product candidate.

        L-glutamine is marketed and sold without a prescription as a nutritional supplement. Although our L-glutamine treatment for SCD requires pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine, which we believe offers a more consistent quality and purity profile than non-pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine sold as a nutritional supplement, our L-glutamine product candidate for the treatment for SCD may compete with non-pharmaceutical grade alternative sources of L-glutamine. If our L-glutamine treatment for SCD is approved, we expect that it will be priced at a significant premium over non-prescription L-glutamine products. Furthermore, we face similar competition in respect of our own L-glutamine product marketed as a nutritional supplement.

Oral Mucosa Epithelial Cell Sheet

        The development of regenerative medicine products using CAOMECS technology is in the early stages. Although there are many academic centers and biotechnology companies working on regenerative medicine in various fields, we are not aware of any treatments using cell sheet technology that have been approved by the FDA. We are, however, aware of academic centers and biotechnology companies that are researching stem cells in various forms, including in cell sheets, with potential applications for the treatment of limbal stem cell deficiency, or LSCD, a disease of the cornea.

18


Table of Contents

        For example, two academic centers outside the United States researching the transplantation of cells as a treatment for LSCD are the Centre Hospitalier National d'Ophtalmologie des Quinze-Vingts located in Paris, France, who we believe is conducting Phase 2 clinical trials evaluating the survivability of transplanted epithelium, and the Instituto Universitario de Oftalmobiología Aplicada located in Valladolid, Spain, who we believe has completed Phase 3 clinical trials looking at the viability and safety of mesenchymal stem cell transplants but the study results are not published. We are also aware of Holostem Terapie Avanzate, an Italian biotechnological company, who we believe is working with autologous cultures of limbal stem cells for corneal regeneration and restoration of visual acuity in patients with severe corneal chemical and thermal burns associated with total unilateral or severe bilateral LSCD. Holostem Terapie Avanzate has received conditional marketing approval from the European Commission for its therapy based on autologous stem cells for patients with severe cornea damage.

        Currently, the standard of care for LSCD patients is the treatment of symptoms. This treatment may include use of artificial tears, topical cyclosporine or topical steroids. In more advanced cases, the treatment plan will likely include surgery. The initial surgical interventions may include management of eyelid positioning, insertion of small plugs into the openings in the eye that allows tears to drain or partially sew the eyelids together to protect the cornea prior to considering transplantation of healthy limbal tissue using either cultured cells or whole tissue grafts. The source of the transplanted tissue can be from the patient's own cells from their healthy eye, matched living donors, or cadavers. Similar to other transplantations, there is the risk of serious complications, including graft versus host disease when not using the patient's own tissue.

        In regenerative medicine and cell-based therapy, cell transplantation success not only depends on the cells, but also on the carrier/scaffold used, as it is not possible to graft separate cells in a suspension. Biodegradable polymers were the key technology for the first generation of cell therapy. Tremendous efforts have been made since to develop biofilms, acellular matrix (blood products e.g.; fibrin gel, amniotic membranes, etc.) to carry and deliver the cells to the target site. However, the risks of infection due to blood products or biomaterials cannot be completely denied. It has been repeatedly reported that decomposition of biodegradable transplanted scaffolds used for cell transplantations caused inflammation, foreign body reaction and cell damage. The use of an innovative temperature-responsive culture surface vessel technology eliminates these issues and, for the first time, offers the possibility to culture and engineer any type of cells to safely transplant cell-sheets to target organs for regenerative purpose, drug delivery, or tissue replacement.

        This cell-sheet-based regenerative medicine technology is advanced, simple and has already shown dramatic results in pilot studies in Japan and Europe. An important feature of this novel and innovative cell sheet therapy is that harvested cell-sheets retain intact basal membranes and intact extracellular matrix (fibronectin, laminin, collagen type IV), eliminating the inherent risks of suture during transplantation. Another innovative feature this cell sheet therapy is that the construction of multiple layered cell sheets is made possible during the culture process and that cell sheet harvesting is achieved without harmful enzymes use (trypsin or dispase) that may damage the cell-based therapeutic potential.

        This technology has the unique potential to construct in vitro stratified tissue equivalents by alternately layering different harvested cell sheets to provide regenerated tissue architectures. This novel technique thus holds promise for the study of cell-cell communications and angiogenesis in reconstructed, three-dimensional environments, as well as for tissues engineering with complex, multicellular architectures.

19


Table of Contents

Government Regulation

        In 2001, the FDA granted Orphan Drug designation to L-glutamine for the treatment of SCD. In 2005, the FDA granted Fast Track designation to our clinical study program of L-glutamine for treating SCD. The FDA also approved, in 2004, our NDA for our L-glutamine product for the treatment of SBS. In addition, in July 2012, the European Commission, or EC, granted Orphan Drug designation to L-glutamine for the treatment of SCD. We describe below the significance of these designations and of data exclusivity under the Hatch/Waxman Act.

        Orphan Drug Designation.     The FDA has authority under the U.S. Orphan Drug Act to grant Orphan Drug designation to a drug or biological product intended to treat a rare disease or condition. This law defines a rare disease or condition generally as one that affects fewer than 200,000 individuals in the United States, or more than 200,000 individuals in the United States and for which there is no reasonable expectation that the cost of the development and distribution of the orphan product in the United States will be recovered from sales of the product. Being granted Orphan Drug designation provides tax benefits to mitigate expenses of developing the orphan product. More importantly, Orphan Drug designation provides seven years of market exclusivity if the product receives the first FDA approval for the disease or condition for which it was granted such designation and the indication for which approval is granted matches the indication for which Orphan Drug designation was granted. During the seven year exclusivity period, Orphan Drug exclusivity precludes FDA approval of a marketing application for the same product for the same indication. Orphan Drug exclusivity is limited and will not preclude the FDA from approving the same product for the same indication if the same product is shown to be clinically superior to the product previously granted exclusivity. For example, if the same product for the same indication is shown to have significantly fewer side effects, the FDA may approve the second product despite the Orphan Drug exclusivity granted to the first product. In addition, a product that is the same as the orphan product may receive approval for a different indication (whether orphan or not) during the exclusivity period of the orphan product. Also, Orphan Drug market exclusivity will not bar a different product intended to treat the same orphan disease or condition from obtaining its own Orphan Drug designation and Orphan Drug exclusivity. Orphan Drug status in the European Union has similar, but not identical, benefits, which includes a 10-year Orphan Drug exclusivity period.

        Fast Track Designation/Priority Review.     The FDA has authority under the U.S. Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, or the FD&C Act, to designate for "Fast Track" review new drugs and biologics that are intended to treat a serious or life-threatening condition and demonstrate the potential to meet an unmet medical need for the condition. Fast Track designation applies to the combination of the product and the specific indication for which it is being studied. A product candidate that receives Fast Track designation is eligible for some or all of the following: more frequent meetings with the FDA to discuss the development plan for the product candidate and ensure collection of appropriate data needed to support marketing approval; more frequent written correspondence from the FDA about the development of the product candidate; the ability, if agreed to by the FDA, to submit a NDA on a rolling basis; and, if certain criteria are met, eligibility for an FDA priority review designation, or Priority Review. These criteria for Priority Review include whether, if approved, the resulting product would provide significant improvements in the safety or effectiveness of the treatment, diagnosis, or prevention of serious conditions caused by a disease when compared to standard treatment, diagnosis, or prevention of those conditions. Under Priority Review of a NDA, assuming that there are no requests from the FDA for additional information, the FDA's goal is to take action on the NDA within six months (compared to 10 months under standard review) after it is accepted for review, with the review clock starting at the time of submission. Requests for Priority Review of a NDA for the applicable product candidate must be submitted to the FDA when the NDA is submitted.

20


Table of Contents

        505(b)(2) Applications.     Under Section 505(b)(2) of the FD&C Act, a person may submit a NDA for which one or more of the clinical studies relied upon by the applicant for approval were not conducted by or for the applicant and for which the applicant does not have a right of reference or use from the person by or for whom the clinical studies were conducted. Instead, a 505(b)(2) applicant may rely on published literature containing the specific information (e.g., clinical trials, animal studies) necessary to obtain approval of the application. The 505(b)(2) applicant may also rely on the FDA's finding of safety and/or effectiveness of a drug previously approved by the FDA when the applicant does not own or otherwise have the right to access the data in that previously approved application. The 505(b)(2) pathway to market thus allows an applicant to submit to the FDA a NDA without having to conduct its own studies to obtain data that are already documented in published reports or previously submitted NDAs. In addition to relying on safety data from our previously approved drug product, NutreStore, we intend to take advantage of the 505(b)(2) pathway to the extent published literature will further support our new drug marketing application.

        Hatch/Waxman Data Exclusivity.     Under the Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984, or the Hatch/Waxman Act, a three-year period of data exclusivity is granted for a drug product that contains an active moiety that has been previously approved, when the application contains reports of new clinical investigations (other than bioavailability studies) conducted or sponsored by the sponsor that were essential to approval of the application. When granted to a sponsor, data exclusivity under the Hatch/Waxman Act prevents any third parties, such as generic drug manufacturers, from relying on or using the sponsor's data from the sponsor's new clinical investigations in order to obtain marketing approval for the same active moiety and indication for which the sponsor's NDA was approved. The FDA defines "new clinical investigation" as a "clinical study in humans the results of which have not been relied upon by FDA to demonstrate substantial evidence of effectiveness of a previously approved drug product for any indication or of safety for a new patient population and do not duplicate the results of another investigation that was relied upon by the agency to demonstrate the effectiveness or safety in a new patient population of a previously approved drug product." Our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine drug product contains the same active moiety contained in our previously approved NutreStore drug product and we believe our Phase 3 clinical study meets the definition of a new clinical investigation for purposes of satisfying the requirements for Hatch/Waxman data exclusivity to be granted. Therefore, if approved, we anticipate receiving three years of data exclusivity under the Hatch/Waxman Act for our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD. These three years of data exclusivity would run concurrently with any other market exclusivity we may receive, as well as concurrently with any remaining patent term protection. However, the three-year exclusivity provided under the Hatch/Waxman Act would bar the approval of the same product for the same indication, even if the same product demonstrated clinical superiority. Thus, when running concurrently with Orphan Drug exclusivity, clinical superiority would not be sufficient to allow the FDA to approve a third party product during the first three years of Orphan Drug exclusivity. Similar to Orphan Drug exclusivity, the three-year exclusivity provided under Hatch/Waxman would not bar the FDA from approving another L-glutamine product for another indication, nor would it bar the FDA from approving a different active moiety to treat the same indication.

        Regulation by United States and foreign governmental authorities is a significant factor in the development, manufacture and expected marketing of our product candidates and in our ongoing research and development activities. The nature and extent to which such regulation will apply to us will vary depending on the nature of the product candidates we seek to develop.

        In particular, human therapeutic products, such as drugs, biologics and cell-based therapies, are subject to rigorous preclinical and clinical testing and other preapproval requirements of the FDA and similar regulatory authorities in other countries. Various federal and state statutes and regulations govern and influence pre- and post-approval requirements related to research, testing, manufacturing,

21


Table of Contents

labeling, packaging, storage, distribution and record-keeping of such products to ensure the safety and effectiveness for their intended uses. The process of obtaining marketing approval and ensuring post-approval compliance with the FD&C Act for drugs and biologics (and applicable provisions of the Public Health Service Act for biologics), and the regulations promulgated thereunder, and other applicable federal and state statutes and regulations, requires substantial time and financial resources. Any failure by us or our collaborators to obtain, or any delay in obtaining, marketing approval could adversely affect the marketing of any of our product candidates, our ability to receive product revenues, and our liquidity and capital resources.

        The manufacture of these products is subject to cGMP regulations. The FDA inspects manufacturing facilities for compliance with cGMP regulations before deciding whether to approve a product candidate for marketing. If the facility in which L-glutamine is manufactured is not ready for inspection at the time the FDA seeks to inspect it, or cGMP deficiencies are found upon such inspection, the FDA's approval of our NDA for our L-glutamine treatment for SCD could be delayed unless and until the facility is inspected and no deficiencies in need of correction prior to approval are identified or, if so identified, such deficiencies are corrected.

        The steps required by the FDA before a new product, such as a drug, biologic or cell-based therapy, may be marketed in the United States include:

    completion of preclinical studies (during this stage, the treatment is called a development candidate);

    the submission to the FDA of a proposal for the design of a clinical trial program for studying in humans the safety and effectiveness of the product candidate. This submission is referred to as an investigational new drug application, or IND. The FDA reviews the IND to ensure it adequately protects the safety and rights of trial participants and that the design of the studies are adequate to permit an evaluation of the product candidate's safety and effectiveness. The IND becomes effective within thirty days after the FDA receives the IND, unless the FDA notifies the sponsor that the investigations described in the IND are deficient and cannot begin;

    the conduct of adequate and well-controlled clinical trials, usually completed in three phases, to demonstrate the safety and effectiveness of the product candidate for its intended use;

    the submission to the FDA of a marketing application, a NDA, if the product candidate is a drug, that provides data and other information to demonstrate the product is safe and effective for its intended use, or a BLA, if the product candidate is a biologic that provides data and other information to demonstrate that the product candidate is safe, pure, and potent; and

    the review and approval of the NDA or BLA by the FDA before the product candidate may be distributed commercially as a product.

        In addition to obtaining FDA approval for each product candidate before we can market it as a product, the manufacturing establishment from which we obtain it must be registered and is subject to periodic FDA post-approval inspections to ensure continued compliance with cGMP requirements. If, as a result of these inspections, the FDA determines that any equipment, facilities, laboratories, procedures or processes do not comply with applicable FDA regulations and the conditions of the product approval, the FDA may seek civil, criminal, or administrative sanctions and/or remedies against us, including the suspension of the manufacturing operations, recalls, the withdrawal of approval and debarment. Manufacturers must expend substantial time, money and effort in the area of production, quality assurance and quality control to ensure compliance with these standards.

        Preclinical testing includes laboratory evaluation of the safety of a product candidate and characterization of its formulation. Preclinical testing is subject to Good Laboratory Practice, or GLP, regulations. Preclinical testing results are submitted to the FDA as a part of an IND which must

22


Table of Contents

become effective prior to commencement of clinical trials. Clinical trials are typically conducted in three sequential phases following submission of an IND. In Phase 1, the product candidate under investigation (and therefore often called an investigational product) is initially administered to a small group of humans, either patients or healthy volunteers, primarily to test for safety (e.g., to identify any adverse effects), dosage tolerance, absorption, distribution, metabolism, excretion and clinical pharmacology, and, if possible, to gain early evidence of effectiveness. In Phase 2, a slightly larger sample of patients who have the condition or disease for which the investigational product is being studied receive the investigational product to assess the effectiveness of the investigational product, to determine dose tolerance and the optimal dose range, and to gather additional information relating to safety and potential adverse effects. If the data show the investigational product may be effective and has an acceptable safety profile in the targeted patient population, Phase 3 studies, also referred to as pivotal studies or enabling studies, are initiated to further establish clinical safety and provide substantial evidence of the effectiveness of the investigational product in a broader sample of the general patient population, to determine the overall risk-benefit ratio of the investigational product, and provide an adequate basis for physician and patient labeling. During all clinical studies, Good Clinical Practice, or GCP, standards and applicable human subject protection requirements must be followed. The results of the research and product development, manufacturing, preclinical studies, clinical studies, and related information are submitted in a NDA or BLA to the FDA.

        The process of completing clinical testing and obtaining FDA approval for a new therapeutic product, such as a drug, biologic or cell-based product, is likely to take a number of years and require the expenditure of substantial resources. If a NDA or BLA is submitted, there can be no assurance that the FDA will file, review, and approve it. Even after initial FDA approval has been obtained, post-market studies could be required to provide additional data on safety or effectiveness. Additional pivotal studies would be required to support adding other indications to the labeling. Also, the FDA will require post-market reporting and could require specific surveillance or risk mitigation programs to monitor for known and unknown side effects of the product. Results of post-marketing programs could limit or expand the continued marketing of the product. Further, if there are any modifications to the product, including changes in indication, manufacturing process, labeling, or the location of the manufacturing facility, a NDA or BLA supplement would generally be required to be submitted to the FDA prior to or corresponding with that change, or for minor changes in the periodic safety update report that must be submitted annually to the FDA.

        The rate of completion of any clinical trial depends upon, among other factors, sufficient patient enrollment and retention. Patient enrollment is a function of many factors, including the size of the patient population, the nature of the trial, the number of clinical sites, the availability of alternative therapies, the proximity of patients to clinical sites, and the eligibility and exclusion criteria for the trial. Delays in planned patient enrollment might result in increased costs and delays. Patient retention could be affected by patient non-compliance, adverse events, or any change in circumstances making the patient no longer eligible to remain in the trial.

        Failure to adhere to regulatory requirements for the protection of human subjects, to ensure the integrity of data, other IND requirements, and GCP standards in conducting clinical trials could cause the FDA to place a "clinical hold" on one or more studies of a product candidate, which would stop the studies and delay or preclude further data collection necessary for product approval. Noncompliance with GCP standards would also have a negative impact on the FDA's evaluation of a NDA or BLA. If at any time the FDA finds that a serious question regarding data integrity has been raised due to the appearance of a wrongful act, such as fraud, bribery or gross negligence, the FDA may invoke its Application Integrity Policy, or AIP, under which it could immediately suspend review of any pending NDA or BLA or refuse to accept the submission of a NDA or BLA as filed, require the sponsor to validate data, require additional clinical studies, disapprove a pending NDA or BLA or withdraw approval of marketed products, as well as require corrective and preventive action to ensure

23


Table of Contents

data integrity in future submissions. Significant noncompliance with IND regulations could result in the FDA not only refusing to accept a NDA or BLA as filed but could also result in enforcement actions, including civil and administrative actions, civil money penalties, criminal prosecution, criminal fines and debarment. Whether or not FDA approval has been obtained, approval of a product by regulatory authorities in foreign countries must be obtained prior to the commencement of marketing the product in those countries.

        The requirements governing the conduct of clinical trials and product approvals vary widely from country to country, and the time required for approval might be longer or shorter than that required for FDA approval. Although there are some procedures for unified filings for some European countries, in general, each country at this time has its own procedures and requirements.

        In most cases, if the FDA has not approved a product candidate for sale in the United States, the unapproved product may be exported to any country in the world for clinical trial or sale if it meets U.S. export requirements and has marketing authorization in any listed country without submitting an export request to the FDA or receiving FDA approval to export the product, as long as the product meets the regulatory requirements of the country to which the product is being exported. Listed countries include each member nation in the European Union or the European Economic Area, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Japan, Israel, Switzerland and South Africa. If an unapproved product is not approved in one of the listed countries, the unapproved product may be exported directly to an unlisted country if the product meets the requirements of the regulatory authority of that country, and the FDA determines that the foreign country has statutory or regulatory requirements similar or equivalent to the United States.

        In addition to the regulatory framework for product approvals, we and our collaborative partners must comply with federal, state and local laws and regulations regarding occupational safety, laboratory practices, the use, handling and disposition of radioactive materials, environmental protection and hazardous substance control, and other local, state, federal and foreign regulation. All facilities and manufacturing processes used by third parties to produce our product candidates for clinical use in the United States and our products for commercialization must be in compliance with cGMP requirements and are subject to periodic regulatory inspections. The failure of third party manufacturers to comply with applicable regulations could extend, delay or cause the termination of clinical trials conducted for our product candidates or the withdrawal of our products from the market. The impact of government regulation upon us cannot be predicted and could be material and adverse. We cannot accurately predict the extent of government regulation that might result from future legislation or administrative action.

        With respect to our L-glutamine product candidate for the treatment of SCD, we have completed preclinical studies, submitted an IND to the FDA which has become effective and conducted Phase 1, Phase 2 and Phase 3 clinical trials. We expect to proceed with submitting a NDA to the FDA in 2016. If the FDA accepts the NDA for filing based on our single Phase 3 clinical trial, the review officially begins from the date the FDA received the original submission. The FDA can refuse to file an application for review if it is incomplete in the view of the FDA. Because our product has obtained Orphan Drug designation and Fast Track designation, we anticipate that the FDA will prioritize the review of our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD with the intent of rendering a decision within six months of the date that the NDA is treated as submitted to the FDA.

        After reviewing the NDA, the FDA will make a determination as to whether data and other information demonstrate the safety and provide substantial evidence of effectiveness of the product candidate for its intended use(s), which includes an analysis of whether its benefits outweigh its risks; whether its proposed labeling is adequate and complete; and whether the methods used in, and the facilities or controls used for, its manufacture, processing, packing and storage conform to and are operated or administered in conformity with cGMP regulations. Upon completion of the NDA review,

24


Table of Contents

the FDA will either approve or not approve the application, or issue a Complete Response Letter (a letter from the FDA indicating that it cannot approve the application in its present form and informing the applicant of changes that should be made before the application could be approved). If the FDA approves the NDA, we will be able to commercialize the product. If the FDA does not approve our NDA, we will not be able to commercialize our SCD product candidate, which may have a material adverse impact on our business and financial condition.

        If the FDA issues a Complete Response Letter, the FDA would be required to provide the basis for its decision and we would have an opportunity to meet with FDA officials to discuss any deficiencies noted in the letter. At that point, we could choose to request a hearing and appeal the agency's decision, or address deficiencies and, if necessary, submit additional data or information, or withdraw the application. Common problems which may delay or prevent the FDA from approving a NDA include, but are not limited to, unexpected safety issues, inadequate data analysis, or the failure, in the FDA's judgment, to provide substantial evidence of a product candidate's effectiveness. If we receive a Complete Response Letter, we may need to conduct additional studies, perhaps studies of more people or, different types of people, or conduct studies for a longer period of time. If we must conduct additional clinical studies in order to address any deficiencies identified in a Complete Response Letter, we may not have sufficient funding to conduct such additional trials or studies.

        Outside the United States, we sell AminoPure in Japan, Taiwan and South Korea. There are no regulatory requirements to sell AminoPure in Japan because it is classified as a nutritional supplement product. To sell AminoPure in Taiwan, we are required to obtain a Certificate of Free Sale from the FDA, which we provide to our distributor. The FDA issues a Certificate of Free Sale upon request for products that either meet the applicable requirements of the FD&C Act and may be legally marketed in the United States or may be legally exported under the FD&C Act although they may not be legally marketed in the United States. Once the Certificate of Free Sale is furnished to our distributor in Taiwan, it is the distributor's responsibility to comply with local regulations, including but not limited to, obtaining the proper import license. In South Korea, AminoPure is imported and sold as a dietary supplement, which does not require any regulatory approval but is subject to dietary supplement cGMP regulations. In Ghana, AminoPure is a registered product with the Food and Drug Board of the Ministry of Health.

Patents, Proprietary Rights and Know-How

        Our success will depend in part on our ability to obtain patents and otherwise preserve the intellectual property rights relating to the design, operation, sale and distribution of our products. We intend to seek patents on our products when we deem it commercially appropriate. The process of seeking patent protection can be lengthy and expensive, and there can be no assurance that patents will be issued for currently pending or future applications or that our existing patents or any new patents issued will be of sufficient scope or strength or provide meaningful protection or any commercial advantage to us. We may be subject to, or may initiate, litigation or patent office interference proceedings, which may require significant financial and management resources. The failure to obtain necessary licenses or other rights or the advent of litigation arising out of any such intellectual property claims could have a material adverse effect on our operations.

        We have relied to date on a combination of patent licenses, trademark and trade secret protection and other unpatented proprietary information to protect our intellectual property rights and to maintain and enhance our competitiveness in the pharmaceutical industry. While we do not currently own any issued patents, we have two patent licenses with third parties. We have also submitted patent applications which have yet to be published. If our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD is approved by the FDA, we will seek seven years of Orphan Drug market exclusivity based on the FDA's previous grant to us of Orphan Drug designation for this product candidate.

25


Table of Contents

        We also rely on unpatented technologies to protect the proprietary nature of our products. We require that our officers and key employees enter into confidentiality agreements that require these officers and employees to assign to us the rights to any inventions developed by them during the course of their employment with us. All of the confidentiality agreements include non-solicitation provisions that remain effective during the course of employment and for periods following termination of employment.

Licenses and Promotional Rights Agreements

        On March 1, 2001, Emmaus Medical became the exclusive worldwide licensee under U.S. Patent No. 5,693,671, entitled "L-glutamine Therapy for SCD and Thalassemia" issued on December 2, 1997 to Niihara et al., which we refer to as the SCD Patent, to develop a treatment approach for SCD and thalassemia using L-glutamine pursuant to a license agreement. Our Chief Executive Officer is one of the licensors of the SCD Patent. The license agreement is effective until the expiration of the SCD Patent in May 2016. Pursuant to the license agreement, we acquired the exclusive right to test, gain governmental approval of, make, have made, use, distribute and sell products designed for use in carrying out methods covered under the SCD Patent, which we refer to as the Licensed Methods, and/or incorporating technical information provided by the licensor or by any of certain doctors affiliated with the licensor, which we refer to as the Licensed Products. Pursuant to an addendum to the license agreement, we agreed to pay royalties to the licensor during the term of the agreement equal to 4.5% of net sales of Licensed Products in the United States until lifetime royalty payments made to the licensor total $100,000, at which time the royalty rate will decrease to 2.5% of net sales of the Licensed Products. No royalties will be paid to the licensor for Licensed Products sold or distributed, or Licensed Methods practiced, on a non-profit basis. Royalty payments are due within 45 days after the end of each fiscal quarter, with the last payment due 45 days after the termination of the agreement. Any payments not made when due accrue interest on and after the due date at a rate equal to the prime interest rate quoted by the Bank of America on the date the payment is due, with interest being compounded on the last day of each calendar quarter.

        Before any Licensed Products are commercially sold or Licensed Methods are practiced on humans, we are required to obtain comprehensive general liability insurance policies, including product liability insurance coverage in the minimum amount of $0.5 million. If we fail to obtain the required insurance policies, the licensor may terminate the agreement or obtain such insurance at our sole cost and expense. We currently have product liability insurance for NutreStore and also have clinical trial insurance for the SCD trial.

        The license agreement will terminate upon the expiration of the patent in 2016, or earlier upon a court's determination that the patent is invalid or unenforceable. If we fail to pay royalties when due and payable, the licensor may terminate the agreement upon 90 days' written notice, unless we pay all outstanding royalties and interest due, during such 90-day period. The licensor may also terminate the agreement upon our material breach of the agreement upon providing us with 90 days' written notice. The agreement will automatically terminate at the end of such 90-day period unless we cure the breach or default during such period. Since the SCD Patent will expire in May 2016 and the Licensed Products have yet to be commercialized, we do not anticipate that any amounts will be payable pursuant to this license agreement.

        In October 2007, under a sublicense granted by CATO Research Ltd., or CATO, Emmaus Medical became the exclusive sublicensee of US Patent No. 5,288,703, which we refer to as the SBS Patent, for the U.S. market, including the rights to distribute the L-glutamine treatment for SBS under the trademark NutreStore in the United States, which we refer to as the SBS License. CATO granted Emmaus Medical the SBS License under a sublicense that CATO held from Ares Trading S.A. We commercially launched NutreStore in June 2008. In February 2011, we entered into an assignment and transfer agreement with CATO. Under this agreement, CATO assigned and transferred to us ownership

26


Table of Contents

of the NutreStore NDA, Drug Master Files, or DMFs, No. 16633 and 16639, NutreStore-related trademarks, and the know-how represented by the NutreStore NDA and DMFs. The two DMFs contain the proprietary information relating to the manufacturing and packaging specifications of the NutreStore product. In consideration of this assignment and transfer, we agreed to pay to CATO royalties following the expiration of the SBS License on October 7, 2011, when the SBS Patent expired, in the following amounts: 10% of adjusted gross sales of NutreStore from 2012 through 2016; and 1% of gross sales of L-glutamine as a treatment for SCD and thalassemia for a period of five years from the date of first commercial sale of the treatment. We do not anticipate that the expiration of the SBS License will have a significant impact on us and we intend to sell NutreStore in accordance with the terms of the assignment and transfer agreement. We currently do not believe there should be significant competition in the marketplace for a generic version of NutreStore given the small population of SBS patients (<10,000 adults).

        In April 2011, we entered into the Research Agreement and the Individual Agreement with CellSeed and, in August 2011, entered into an addendum to the Research Agreement. Pursuant to the Individual Agreement, CellSeed granted us the exclusive right to manufacture, sell, market and distribute CAOMECS for the cornea in the United States and agreed to disclose to us its accumulated information package for the joint development of CAOMECS. In 2012, we paid CellSeed $1.5 million under the Individual Agreement. Under the Research Agreement, as supplemented by the addendum, we agreed to pay CellSeed $8.5 million within 30 days of the completion of all of the following: (i) the execution of the Research Agreement; (ii) the execution of the Individual Agreement; and (iii) CellSeed's delivery of the accumulated information package, as defined in the Research Agreement, to us and our providing written confirmation of its acceptance of the complete package, which has not yet been completed. On December 29, 2015, we and CellSeed terminated the Research Agreement and the Individual Agreement. Accordingly, we presently have no license with CellSeed for the development of CAOMECS technology. We are currently negotiating the terms of a new license agreement with CellSeed which has not been finalized as of this time. There can be no assurance that we will be able to negotiate new agreements and licenses with CellSeed, and if we are unable to do so, we may discontinue our efforts to research and commercialize CAOMECS for the treatment of corneal diseases.

Trademarks

        We currently own three federal U.S. trademark registrations, including for "Emmaus Medical," "NutreStore" and "AminoPure," a Japanese trademark for "AminoPure," a South Korean trademark for "AminoPure," a Taiwanese trademark for "AminoPure," and a Philippines trademark for "AminoPure." We are also pursuing trademark registrations for "AminoPure" in Ghana and Kenya. This Annual Report on Form 10-K also contains trademarks, service marks, trade names and copyrights of other companies, which are the property of their respective owners. Solely for convenience, trademarks and trade names referred to in this Annual Report on Form 10-K may appear without the® or TM symbols, but such references are not intended to indicate, in any way, that we will not assert, to the fullest extent under applicable law, our rights or the right of the applicable licensor to these trademarks and trade names.

Corporate Information

        Orphan Drugs International, LLC was organized on December 20, 2000 and its name was changed to Emmaus Medical, LLC in March 2002. In October 2003, Emmaus Medical, LLC undertook a reorganization and merged with Emmaus Medical, Inc., which was originally incorporated in September 2003. Through this merger of Emmaus Medical, LLC into Emmaus Medical, Emmaus Medical acquired the exclusive patent rights for a treatment for SCD.

27


Table of Contents

        AFH Acquisition IV, Inc. was incorporated in the state of Delaware on September 24, 2007 and was originally organized as a "blank check" shell company. On May 3, 2011, pursuant to an Agreement and Plan of Merger dated April 21, 2011, Emmaus Medical merged with and into AFH Merger Sub, Inc., a wholly-owned subsidiary of AFH Acquisition IV, with Emmaus Medical continuing as the surviving entity, which we refer to as the Merger. Upon the closing of the Merger, we (i) became the 100% parent of Emmaus Medical, (ii) assumed the operations of Emmaus Medical and its subsidiaries, and (iii) changed our name from "AFH Acquisition IV, Inc." to "Emmaus Holdings, Inc." On September 14, 2011, we changed our name from "Emmaus Holdings, Inc." to "Emmaus Life Sciences, Inc."

        In May 2006, we formed Newfield Nutrition Corporation, referred to as Newfield Nutrition, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Emmaus Medical that distributes L-glutamine as a nutritional supplement under the brand name AminoPure.

        In October 2010, we formed Emmaus Medical Japan, Inc., referred to as EM Japan, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Emmaus Medical that markets and sells AminoPure in Japan and other countries in Asia. EM Japan also manages our distributors in Japan and may also import other medical products and drugs in the future.

        In November 2011, we formed Emmaus Medical Europe, Ltd., referred to as EM Europe, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Emmaus Medical whose primary focus is expanding our business in Europe. L-glutamine for the treatment of SCD has received Orphan Drug designation from the EC.

        Our principal executive offices and corporate offices are located at 21250 Hawthorne Boulevard, Suite 800, Torrance, California and our telephone number at that address is (310) 214-0065. We maintain an Internet website at the following address: www.emmausmedical.com. The information on our website is not incorporated by reference in this Annual Report on Form 10-K or in any other filings we make with the Securities and Exchange Commission, or SEC.

ITEM 1A.    RISK FACTORS

         The following risk factors should be considered in conjunction with the other information included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. This report may include forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties. In addition to those risk factors discussed elsewhere in this report, we identify the following risk factors, which could affect our actual results and cause actual results to differ materially from those in the forward-looking statements.

RISKS RELATED TO OUR FINANCIAL CONDITION AND CAPITAL REQUIREMENTS

We have incurred losses since inception, have limited cash resources and anticipate that we will continue to incur substantial losses for the foreseeable future, and we may never become profitable.

        As of December 31, 2015, we had an accumulated deficit of $84.8 million since our inception in December 2000. Our net losses were $12.7 million and $21.8 million for the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively. These losses resulted principally from costs incurred in our research and development programs and from our general and administrative expenses. We have had limited revenue and have sustained significant operating losses since inception, and we are likely to sustain operating losses in the foreseeable future. Since inception, we have funded our operations through the private placement of equity securities and convertible notes and loans. We expect that we will continue to fund our operations primarily through the issuance of public or private equity or debt securities, or other sources, such as strategic partnerships. Such financings or other sources may not be available in amounts or on terms acceptable to us, if at all. Our failure to raise capital as and when needed would inhibit our ability to continue operations and implement our business strategy.

28


Table of Contents

        We expect to continue to incur significant and increasing negative cash flow and operating losses as we continue our research activities, conduct potential future clinical trials, seek regulatory approvals for our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD and prepare for commercialization of our SCD product. These losses, among other things, have had and will continue to have an adverse effect on our stockholders' equity, total assets and working capital. Because of the numerous risks and uncertainties associated with pharmaceutical development, we are unable to predict the extent of any future losses, whether or when we will be able to commercialize our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD, or when we will become profitable, if ever. Our strategy depends heavily on the success of our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD. If we are unable to commercialize our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD or any of our other product candidates, or if we experience significant delays in doing so, our business may fail. Even if we do achieve profitability, we may not be able to sustain or increase profitability on a quarterly or annual basis.

We will require substantial additional funding and may be unable to raise capital when needed, which could force us to delay, reduce or eliminate planned activities or result in our inability to continue as a going concern.

        We will require additional capital to pursue potential future clinical trials and regulatory approvals, as well as further research and development and marketing efforts for our products and potential products. We have no committed sources of additional capital and our access to capital funding is uncertain. If we are not able to secure financing, we may no longer be a going concern and may be forced to curtail operations, delay or stop ongoing clinical trials, or cease operations altogether, file for bankruptcy, or undertake any combination of the foregoing. In such event, our stockholders may lose their entire investment in our company. Our future capital requirements will depend on, and could increase significantly as a result of, many factors, including:

    the duration and results of the clinical trials for our various products going forward;

    unexpected delays or complications in seeking regulatory approvals;

    the time and cost in preparing, filing, prosecuting, maintaining and enforcing patent claims;

    adverse developments encountered in implementing our business development and commercialization strategies;

    our undertaking of collaborations with strategic partners and the outcome of those collaborations; and

    any need to engage in litigation relating to protecting our intellectual property rights or other commercial or regulatory matters and the outcome of any such litigation.

        We may attempt to raise additional funds through public or private financings, collaborations with other companies or financing from other sources. Additional funding may not be available in amounts or on terms which are acceptable to us, if at all. If adequate funding is not available to us, or on reasonable terms, we may need to delay, reduce or eliminate one or more of our product development programs or obtain funds on terms less favorable than we would otherwise accept.

        In addition, if we do not meet our payment obligations to third parties as they become due, we may be subject to litigation claims and our credit worthiness would be adversely affected. Even if we are successful in defending against these claims, litigation could result in substantial costs and would be a distraction to management, and may result in unfavorable results that could further adversely impact our financial condition.

29


Table of Contents

Restrictions under our secured loan agreement may prevent us from taking actions that we believe would be in the best interest of our business, and defaults under the secured loan agreement may result in the lender talking possession and disposing of any collateral.

        In April 2016, we entered into a secured loan agreement pursuant to which we borrowed $1,295,000 at a fixed interest rate of 10% per annum. This loan will mature on the earlier of the closing of a new debt financing (subject to certain exceptions, including refinancings of our outstanding convertible notes) or May 1, 2017. This loan is secured by all of our personal property. The loan agreement contains certain negative covenants that may hinder our ability to raise additional capital or might otherwise affect our liquidity, including restrictions on our ability to:

    acquire material assets outside of the ordinary course of business;

    sell, lease, license transfer or dispose of our personal property outside of the ordinary course of business;

    pay or declare dividends;

    make investments in or loans to other persons;

    redeem or repurchase our stock;

    make deposits or investments unless they are subject to a deposit control account;

    incur additional indebtedness other than permitted debt;

    make payments on subordinated obligations;

    undergo a merger, change in control or sale of a substantial portion of our assets; or

    use loan proceeds to make payments to our affiliates.

        These restrictions may prevent us from taking actions that we believe would be in the best interest of our business. If we suffer an event of default under the loan agreement, payment of the indebtedness could be accelerated, and we may not be able to repay that indebtedness or borrow sufficient funds to refinance it. If we default on our obligations under the loan agreement, among other remedies, the lender could take possession and dispose of any collateral under the loan agreement and related documents, which would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, liquidity and operations. Even if we are able to obtain new financing upon a default under the loan agreement, it may not be on commercially reasonable terms or on terms that are acceptable to us. In addition, complying with these covenants may also cause us to take actions that are not favorable to holders of our common stock and may make it more difficult for us to successfully execute our business strategy and compete against companies that are not subject to such restrictions.

Raising additional capital may cause dilution to our stockholders, restrict our operations or require us to relinquish rights.

        We may seek additional capital through a combination of private and public equity offerings, debt financings and collaborations and strategic and licensing arrangements. To the extent that additional capital is raised through the sale of equity securities or securities convertible into or exchangeable for equity securities, the issuance of those securities could result in dilution to our stockholders. The terms of such securities may include liquidation or other preferences that could adversely affect the rights of our existing stockholders. Moreover, the incurrence of debt financing could result in a substantial portion of our future operating cash flow, if any, being dedicated to the payment of principal and interest on such indebtedness and could impose restrictions on our operations. This could render us more vulnerable to competitive pressures and economic downturns.

30


Table of Contents

        Debt financing, if available, would result in increased fixed payment obligations and may involve agreements that include grants of security interests or covenants limiting or restricting our ability to take specific actions such as incurring debt, making capital expenditures or declaring dividends. If we raise additional funds through collaboration, strategic alliance and licensing arrangements with third parties, we may have to relinquish valuable rights to our technologies, future revenue streams or product candidates, or grant licenses on terms that are not favorable to us.

Our recurring operating losses and significant short-term indebtedness have raised substantial doubt regarding our ability to continue as a going concern.

        We have incurred recurring operating losses. In addition, we have a significant amount of notes payable and other obligations due within the next year and are projecting that our operating losses and expected capital needs will exceed our existing cash balances and cash expected to be generated from operations for the foreseeable future, including the expected costs relating to seeking FDA approval for, and the commercialization of, our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD. These factors raise substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern. As a result, our independent registered public accounting firm included an explanatory paragraph in its report on our financial statements as of and for the year ended December 31, 2015 with respect to this uncertainty. The continuation and expansion of our business is dependent upon obtaining further financing, successful and sufficient market acceptance of our products, and, finally, achieving a profitable level of operations. The perception of our ability to continue as a going concern may make it more difficult for us to obtain financing for the continuation of our operations and could result in the loss of confidence by investors, suppliers and employees.

We have adopted an equity incentive plan under which we may grant securities to compensate employees and other services providers, which could result in increased share-based compensation expenses and, therefore, reduced net income.

        Under current accounting rules, we are required to recognize share-based compensation as compensation expense in our statement of comprehensive loss, based on the fair value of equity awards on the date of the grant, and recognize the compensation expense over the period in which the recipient is required to provide service in exchange for the equity award. We made grants of equity awards in 2014, and accordingly our results of operations for the years ended December 31, 2014 and 2015 contain share-based compensation charges. Additional expenses associated with share-based compensation may reduce the attractiveness of issuing stock options under our existing equity incentive plan or any equity incentive plan that we may adopt in the future. If we grant equity compensation to attract and retain key personnel, the expenses associated with share-based compensation may adversely affect our net income. However, if we do not grant equity compensation, we may not be able to attract and retain key personnel or be forced to expend cash or other compensation instead. Furthermore, the issuance of equity awards would dilute existing stockholders' ownership interests in our company. In July 2014, our board of directors amended our equity incentive plan to increase the number of shares of our common stock that may be subject to awards granted under the plan from 6 million shares to 9 million shares.

We have issued and may continue to issue debt instruments that are convertible and/or may include warrant features, which could result in the calculation of discounts on the debt issued and increased amortization of discount expenses and, therefore, reduced net income.

        Under current accounting rules, we are required to recognize discounts on debt issued with stock conversion features or with attached or accompanying warrants which can result in amortization of the discount as an expense in our statement of consolidated comprehensive loss, based on the fair value of conversion feature or warrant on the date of issue. If we grant stock conversion features or warrants

31


Table of Contents

with debt instruments to attract capital, the expenses associated with amortization of the calculated discount may adversely affect our net income. However, if we do not grant stock conversion features or warrants with debt instruments, we may not be able to attract debt capital.

RISKS RELATED TO DEVELOPMENT OF OUR PRODUCT CANDIDATES

We may not be able to receive regulatory approval for our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD, or, even if approved, we may not be able to successfully commercialize our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD or any other product candidates, which would adversely affect our financial and operating condition.

        Our current efforts are, and a substantial portion of our efforts for the foreseeable future will be, focused primarily on our lead product candidate, our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD, for which we have recently completed a single Phase 3 clinical trial. All of our other product candidates are still in preclinical development. Regulatory approval is required to market our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD, or other product candidates we may develop. There are many reasons that we may fail in our efforts to commercialize our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD or that such efforts will be delayed, including:

    the chance that the FDA will conclude that our clinical trial does not demonstrate substantial evidence that our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD is effective and safe when used under the prescribed or recommended conditions of use;

    the chance that the FDA will not accept for filing the NDA that we intend to submit based on the results of only one Phase 3 clinical trial, instead of two such studies, to demonstrate substantial evidence of effectiveness of our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD;

    the failure of our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD to receive necessary regulatory approvals from the FDA or foreign regulatory authorities in a timely manner, or at all;

    the failure of our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD, once approved, to be produced in commercial quantities or at reasonable costs;

    physicians' reluctance to switch to our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD from existing SCD treatment methods, including traditional therapy agents;

    the failure of our L-glutamine product candidate, once approved, to achieve commercial acceptance for the treatment of SCD;

    the introduction of products by our competitors that are or are perceived to be more effective or have or are perceived to have a better safety profile than our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD;

    the application of restrictions to our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD by regulatory or governmental authorities;

    the possibility that we may not be able to maintain Orphan Drug designation prior to or after our submission to the FDA of a NDA for our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD, as well as the possibility that we may not be able to obtain and maintain Orphan Drug market exclusivity for our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD even if the FDA approves that NDA because the approved indication differs from the indication for which the FDA granted us Orphan Drug designation;

    the possibility, even if we obtain regulatory approval and Orphan Drug market exclusivity for our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD, that another company with the same

32


Table of Contents

      drug for the same indication could demonstrate clinical superiority over our product, thus making that third party drug eligible for Orphan Drug designation and, if approved, Orphan Drug market exclusivity despite our market exclusivity;

    the possibility that another product, different from L-glutamine, receives Orphan Drug designation and is approved for the treatment of SCD, which our Orphan Drug exclusivity, should we receive it, would not bar;

    the possibility, if we obtain Orphan Drug market exclusivity for our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD, that we are unable to ensure an adequate supply of it, thus allowing the FDA to approve another L-glutamine product for Orphan Drug exclusivity; and

    the possibility that our Fast Track designation for our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD may be rescinded or may not actually lead to a faster regulatory review and approval of the NDA that we intend to submit in 2016.

        Even if the FDA and other regulatory authorities approve our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD, or any of our other product candidates, the manufacture, packaging, labeling, distribution, marketing and sale of such products will be subject to strict and ongoing post-approval regulations. Compliance with such regulations will be expensive and consume substantial financial and management resources.

        The FDA has the authority to regulate the claims we make in marketing our prescription products to ensure that such claims are true, not misleading, supported by scientific evidence, and consistent with the approved labeling of those products. The FDA and the Federal Trade Commission, or FTC, also have the authority to regulate the claims we make in marketing our dietary supplement AminoPure. Failure to comply with FDA or FTC requirements in this regard could result in, among other things, warning letters, withdrawal of approvals, seizures, recalls, injunctions prohibiting a product's manufacture and distribution, restricting promotional activities, requiring corrective actions regarding sales and marketing activities, other operating restrictions, civil money penalties, disgorgement, and criminal prosecution. In addition, if we make any marketing claims that are related to a health care provider's unlawful submission for reimbursement from government programs, we could be subject to potential liability for violations of the False Claims Act, which may lead to disqualification from government programs or criminal prosecution, or both. Any of these government enforcement actions, if taken against us, could negatively impact our product sales and profitability.

        Additionally, regulatory approval of any of our prescription products may be conditioned on our agreement to conduct costly post-marketing follow-up studies to monitor the safety or effectiveness of such products or to implement specific risk mitigation strategies. In addition, as clinical experience with any of our products following such approval, if any, expands after approval because the product is used by a greater number and more diverse group of patients than during clinical trials, unknown side effects or other problems may be observed that were not observed or anticipated during pre-approval clinical trials. In any such case, one or more regulatory authorities could require additional risk information be added to the labeling of the product, restrict the indications for which the product may be sold, restrict the distribution channels, or revoke the product's regulatory approval, which could hinder our ability to generate revenues from that product. If we fail to develop and commercialize our product candidates as planned, our financial results and financial condition will be adversely affected, we will have to delay or terminate some or all of our research product development programs, and we may be forced to cease operations.

33


Table of Contents

If the FDA does not accept for filing a NDA with only one Phase 3 clinical trial, instead of two such studies, to demonstrate substantial evidence of effectiveness of our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD, we may be forced to incur the time, expense and risk of undertaking a confirmatory study or an additional Phase 3 clinical trial prior to obtaining marketing approval of such product, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and operating results.

        Historically, the FDA has generally required applicants to submit as part of a NDA in respect of a drug two adequate and well-controlled clinical trials to demonstrate substantial evidence of effectiveness of that drug. The Modernization Act, however, makes clear that the FDA may consider data from only one adequate and well-controlled clinical investigation and confirmatory evidence (obtained prior to or after such investigation) if the FDA determines that such evidence is sufficient to establish effectiveness. In a guidance document titled "Providing Clinical Evidence of Effectiveness for Human Drug and Biological Products" (May 1998), the FDA stated that reliance on a single study is generally limited to situations in which a trial has demonstrated a clinically meaningful effect on mortality, irreversible morbidity, or prevention of a disease with a potential serious outcome, and where confirmation of the result in a second trial would be impractical or unethical. The factors the FDA considers for accepting a single study include, but are not limited to, having large multi-centered studies, consistent data across subgroups, multiple endpoints, and statistically very persuasive findings. Our single Phase 3 clinical trial was multi-centered with multiple endpoints. However, there can be no assurance that the FDA will accept this single study to be sufficient to demonstrate substantial evidence of effectiveness.

        On June 11, 2014, we met with the FDA to discuss the preliminary data from our Phase 3 clinical trial and our plans to submit to the FDA a NDA, based on our single Phase 3 clinical trial. In minutes of the meeting that the FDA has provided to us, based on its review of preliminary data from our Phase 3 clinical trial, the FDA expressed concern that the primary endpoint of painful sickle cell crisis (controlling for both region and hydroxyurea use) did not reach the pre-specified p-value significance level of 0.045.

        The FDA commented that the primary efficacy results were inconsistent among regions, as shown by the large difference in results observed based on the stratified analyses adjusted for both region and hydroxyurea use and the stratified analysis adjusted for hydroxyurea use only. The FDA also commented that a reduction in the median number of painful sickle cell crises by one (from four to three) is not clinically meaningful and is not consistent across regions. The FDA asked us to provide explanations for the differences in results observed based on the stratified analysis adjusted for region and hydroxyurea.

        The FDA also commented on the number of patients who discontinued the study, which was greater in the L-glutamine group, and the FDA would need to understand what impact the imputation of such data, which is a method of accounting for missing information, would have on the interpretation of the results.

        Based on preliminary data, the FDA recommended a second Phase 3 study be conducted to support the indication for SCD and suggested enrolling patients with a higher baseline level of sickle cell crises to help demonstrate a larger difference in the mean results.

        Based on other questions we submitted to the FDA regarding the previous pre-clinical work and evidence gathered for the L-glutamine treatment related to pharmacology, toxicology, and clinical pharmacology, the FDA noted that the information provided appeared to be acceptable; however, final affirmations regarding such matters would be made during the FDA's review of a NDA. The FDA also made certain recommendations to the chemistry, manufacturing and controls of our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD which we intend to incorporate or address.

34


Table of Contents

        In September 2014 we submitted to the FDA the Clinical Study Report for our Phase 3 clinical trial, supplemental analyses and a new meeting request. Consequently, we met again with the FDA on October 15, 2014. In the minutes of the October 15 meeting, the FDA noted that it continued to be concerned that the primary endpoint did not meet the pre-specified p-value and observed that our efficacy finding would be more persuasive if supported by an additional, confirmatory study. We communicated to the FDA that over-stratification in our statistical analysis plan led to the pre-specified p-value not being met. We also provided sensitivity analyses and results to address the over-stratification which demonstrated a statistically significant p-value for the primary endpoint.

        At the October 15 meeting, in response to a question raised by the FDA at the June 11 meeting, we provided evidence of the clinical meaningfulness of a reduction in the median number of painful sickle cell crises by one (from four to three). In the October 15 minutes the FDA expressed the view that the reduction of one sickle cell crises may not be clinically significant and advised us to provide all information and data to support this clinical meaningfulness and the FDA stated they will evaluate the overall clinical benefit and risk of L-glutamine based on results from our Phase 3 trial and all available safety data.

        In the October 15 minutes the FDA reiterated certain concerns outlined in the June 11 minutes. Other questions that we posed for discussion at the October 15 meeting related to the safety of L-glutamine use, the benefit-risk margin for L-glutamine use, the sufficiency of our Phase 2 and 3 trials to support a NDA submission and whether a confirmatory study could be conducted as a post-marketing commitment. The FDA noted that its decisions regarding these questions would be made after the submission of a NDA.

        While we believe the methodology used to determine statistical significance in respect of the June 11 and October 15 meetings was inconsistent with the plan submitted to the FDA and that using methodology consistent with that plan would produce results that are highly statistically significant, there can be no assurance that the FDA would accept this revised methodology or agree with our conclusions. Failure to show a high level of statistical significance increases the changes that we may need to run potentially costly confirmatory studies or an additional Phase 3 trial before we can obtain FDA approval for our L-glutamine treatment of SCD.

        In addition to planning a confirmatory study, we plan to submit a NDA for our L-glutamine treatment for SCD during 2015 containing all efficacy and safety data through our completed Phase 3 trial and additional analyses and information in accord with the feedback the FDA provided in the context of the June 11 and October 15 meetings. We presently intend to request that our planned confirmatory study be accepted by the FDA as a study to be completed after approval of the NDA. There can be no assurance that the FDA will accept our submission for filing before the initiation and completion of a confirmatory study or that the information and data in the NDA will satisfy concerns identified by the FDA.

        Regarding the submission of NDAs that include only one Phase 3 clinical trial, the FDA has in some cases accepted evidence from one clinical trial to support a finding of substantial evidence of effectiveness. A change in the law under the Modernization Act made clear that the FDA may consider data from only one adequate and well controlled clinical investigation and confirmatory evidence if the FDA determines that such evidence is sufficient to establish effectiveness of the medicine under study.

        In a guidance document titled "Providing Clinical Evidence of Effectiveness for Human Drug and Biological Products" (May 1998), the FDA stated that reliance on a single clinical trial is generally limited to situations in which a trial has demonstrated a clinically meaningful effect on mortality, irreversible morbidity or prevention of a disease with a potential serious outcome, and where confirmation of the result in a second trial would be impractical or unethical. The factors the FDA considers for accepting a single clinical trial include, but are not limited to, having large multi centered studies, consistent data across subgroups, multiple endpoints and statistically very persuasive findings.

35


Table of Contents

The development process to obtain FDA approval for new drugs, biologics and cell-based therapies is very costly and time consuming and if we cannot complete our clinical trials in a cost-effective manner, our operations may be adversely affected.

        Before obtaining marketing approval from regulatory authorities for the sale of any product candidate, we or a collaborator must complete preclinical development and then complete one or more extensive clinical trials to demonstrate the safety and effectiveness of the product candidate in humans. Clinical testing is expensive, difficult to design and implement, can take many years to complete and is uncertain as to outcome. Costs of clinical trials may vary significantly over the life of a development project owing, but not limited to, the following:

    the number of patients that participate in the trials;

    the per patient trial costs;

    the number of sites and clinical investigators involved in the trials;

    the number and types of trials and studies that may need to be performed;

    the length of time required to recruit, screen, and enroll eligible patients;

    the duration of the clinical trials;

    the countries in which the trials are conducted;

    the number of doses that patients receive;

    adverse events experienced by trial participants;

    the drop-out or discontinuation rates of patients;

    potential additional safety monitoring or other studies requested by regulatory agencies;

    the extent and duration of patient follow-up;

    difficulties that could arise in analyzing and reporting to regulators the results of clinical trials; and

    the efficacy and safety profile of the product candidate.

        If we are unable to control the timing and costs of our clinical trials and conduct our trials and apply for regulatory approvals in a timely and cost-effective manner, our operations may be adversely affected.

        Our product development costs will also increase if any regulatory agencies impose a clinical hold on any of our clinical studies or we experience delays in obtaining marketing approvals, particularly if we are required to conduct additional clinical studies beyond those that we submit in any NDA. We do not know whether any of our preclinical studies or clinical trials will begin as planned, will need to be restructured or will be completed on schedule, or at all. Significant preclinical study or clinical trial delays also could shorten any periods during which we may have the exclusive right to commercialize our approved product candidates or allow our competitors to bring products to market before we do, and thereby impair our ability to successfully commercialize our product candidates.

We may not be able to complete clinical trial programs for any of our product candidates successfully within any specific time period or at all, and if such clinical trials take longer to complete than we project, our ability to execute our current business strategy will be adversely affected.

        Clinical testing is expensive, difficult to design and implement, can take many years to complete, and is uncertain as to outcome. A failure of one or more clinical trials can occur at any stage of development. The outcome of preclinical testing and early clinical trials may not be predictive of the

36


Table of Contents

success of later clinical trials, and interim results of a clinical trial do not necessarily predict final results. Moreover, clinical data are often susceptible to varying interpretations and analyses, and many companies that have believed their product candidates performed satisfactorily in preclinical studies and clinical trials have nonetheless failed to obtain marketing approval of them.

        Generally speaking, whether we complete our clinical trials in a timely manner, or at all, for any product candidate is dependent in part upon: (i) the date the applicable investigational new drug application, or IND, becomes effective enabling us to commence the applicable clinical studies (which, under U.S. law, occurs no more than thirty days after the FDA receives the IND, unless the FDA places the IND on clinical hold, in which case the FDA may request us to provide additional data from completed preclinical studies or undertake additional preclinical studies, the latter of which could materially delay the clinical and regulatory development of the applicable product candidate); (ii) the engagement of clinical trial sites and clinical investigators; (iii) reaching an agreement with clinical investigators on acceptable clinical trial agreement terms, clinical trial protocols or informed consent forms; (iv) obtaining approval from the institutional review boards used by the clinical trial sites we seek to engage; (v) the rate of patient enrollment and retention; and (vi) the rate to collect, clean, lock and analyze the clinical trial database.

        Patient enrollment in trials is a function of many factors, including the design of the protocol, the size of the patient population, the proximity of patients to and availability of clinical sites, the eligibility criteria for the trial, the perceived risks and benefits of the product candidate under trial and of the control product, if any, the clinical investigator's efforts to facilitate timely enrollment in clinical trials, the patient referral practices of local physicians, the existence of competitive clinical trials, and whether other investigational or new therapies are available for the indication. If we experience delays in identifying and contracting with appropriate clinical investigators and sites, in obtaining approval of the applicable institutional review boards, in enrolling and retaining patients and/or in completing our clinical trial programs, we may incur additional costs and delays in our development programs, and may not be able to complete our clinical trials on a cost-effective or timely basis, if at all. If we or any third party have difficulty obtaining sufficient clinical drug materials or enrolling a sufficient number of patients in a timely or cost-effective manner to conduct clinical trials as planned, or if enrolled patients do not complete the trial as planned, we or a third party may need to delay or terminate ongoing clinical trials, which could negatively affect our business.

        Clinical trials required for demonstration of substantial evidence of effectiveness and safety often require the enrollment of large numbers of patients, and suitable patients may be difficult to identify and recruit. Our ability to enroll sufficient numbers of patients in our clinical trials, especially when the disease or condition being studied is rare, depends on many factors, including the size of the relevant patient population, the nature and design of the protocol, the proximity of patients to clinical sites, the eligibility and exclusion criteria applicable for the trial, existence of competing clinical trials and the availability of already approved therapeutics for the indications being studied (whether or not such therapeutics are less safe or less effective than our product candidate under trial). In addition, patients may withdraw from a clinical trial or be unwilling to follow our clinical trial protocols for a variety of reasons, such as adverse events or noncompliance with trial requirements. If we fail to enroll and maintain the number of patients for which the clinical trial was designed, the statistical significance and/or statistical power of that clinical trial may be reduced which would make it harder to demonstrate that the product candidate being tested in such clinical trial is safe and effective for its intended use.

37


Table of Contents

We may be required to suspend, repeat or terminate our clinical trials if they do not meet regulatory requirements, the results are negative or inconclusive, human subject protections are inadequate, the trials are not well designed, or clinical investigators fail to comply with all requirements for the conduct of trials under the applicable IND, any of which may result in significant negative repercussions on our business and financial condition.

        Our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD, which is currently our only product candidate in clinical development, has not yet received marketing approval in any jurisdiction. We cannot market a pharmaceutical product in any jurisdiction until we have completed rigorous preclinical testing and clinical trials for that product, demonstrated the product's safety and substantial evidence of effectiveness for its intended use, obtained the approval of the applicable regulatory authority for our proposed labeling of the product, and met the other requirements of such jurisdiction's extensive regulatory approval process. Preclinical testing and the conduct of clinical trials are long and expensive. Data obtained from preclinical and clinical tests can be interpreted in different ways and could ultimately be deemed by regulatory authorities to be insufficient with respect to providing substantial evidence of effectiveness and safety required for regulatory approval, which could delay, limit or prevent regulatory approval. It may take us many years to complete the required testing of our product candidates to support an application for marketing approval and failure can occur at any stage during this process.

        We cannot provide assurance that our preclinical testing and clinical trials will be completed successfully within any time period specified by us, or without significant additional resources or expertise provided by third parties to conduct such testing. We cannot provide assurance that any such testing will demonstrate that our product candidates meet regulatory approval requirements for safety and effectiveness or that any such product will be approved for a specific indication. Results from early clinical trials may not be indicative of the results that will be obtained in later-stage clinical trials or in the population of patients for whom the applicable product is prescribed following any approval. In addition, negative or inconclusive results from the clinical trials we conduct or adverse events experienced by the patients in such clinical trials could cause us to have to suspend, repeat or terminate the clinical trials. Clinical trials are subject to continuing oversight by governmental regulatory authorities and institutional review boards and must meet the requirements of these authorities including but not limited to requirements for informed consent, human subject protection and good clinical practices; and we cannot guarantee that we will be able to comply, or that a regulatory authority will agree that we have complied, with such requirements. We rely on third parties, such as contract research organizations and/or contract laboratories, regulatory consultants and data management companies to assist us in overseeing and monitoring clinical trials as well as to process the clinical data and manage test requests, which may result in delays or failure to complete trials, if the third parties fail to perform or meet applicable regulatory requirements and standards. A failure by us or any such third parties to comply with the terms and conditions of the protocol for any clinical study or the regulatory requirements for any particular product candidate or to complete the clinical trials for a product candidate in the projected time frame could have a significant negative effect on our business and financial condition.

        There are significant requirements imposed on us and on clinical investigators who conduct clinical trials under an IND. Although we are responsible for selecting qualified clinical investigators, providing them with the information they need to conduct an investigation properly, ensuring proper monitoring of the investigation(s), and ensuring that the investigation(s) is conducted in accordance with the general investigational plan and protocols contained in the IND, we cannot ensure the clinical investigators will maintain compliance with all regulatory requirements at all times. The pharmaceutical industry has experienced cases where clinical investigators have been found to incorrectly record data, omit data, or even falsify data. We cannot ensure that the clinical investigators in our trials will not make mistakes or otherwise compromise the integrity or validity of data, any of which would have a

38


Table of Contents

significant negative effect on our ability to obtain marketing approval, our business, and our financial condition.

Changes in regulatory requirements and guidance or unanticipated events during our clinical trials may occur, which may result in necessary changes to clinical trial protocols, informed consents and clinical trial budgets, any of which changes could result in increased costs to us, delay our development timeline or reduce the likelihood of successful completion of the clinical trial.

        Changes in regulatory requirements or the FDA's interpretation of those requirements, which may be provided through guidance documents, or the occurrence of unanticipated events during our clinical trials could require us to amend clinical trial protocols, informed consent forms and trial budgets. If we experience delays in initiation, conduct or completion of any of our clinical trials, or if we terminate any of our clinical trials due to changes in regulatory requirements or guidance documents, unexpected and serious adverse events, or other unanticipated events, we may incur additional costs and have difficulty enrolling subjects or achieving clinical investigator or institutional review board acceptance of the changes and successfully completing the trial. Any such additional costs and difficulties could potentially materially harm the commercial prospects for our product candidates and delay our ability to generate product revenue.

There are various uncertainties related to the research, development and commercialization of the cell sheet engineering regenerative medicine products we are developing in collaboration with a strategic partner which could negatively affect our ability to commercialize such products.

        We have historically focused on the research and development of our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD and have limited experience in the research, development or commercialization of cell sheet regenerative medicine products or any other biological product. No clinical trials of cell sheet regenerative products have been conducted in the United States and no biological products based on cell sheet engineering have been approved by regulatory authorities in any jurisdiction. Such products must be manufactured in conformance with current Good Manufacturing Practices, or cGMP, requirements as well as Good Tissue Practice, or GTP, requirements and demonstrate that they are safe, pure and potent to be effective for their intended uses to obtain FDA approval. The GTP requirements, which are specifically applicable to all cellular-based products, are intended to prevent communicable disease transmission. It is uncertain what type and quantity of scientific data would be required to support initiation of clinical studies or to sufficiently demonstrate the safety, purity and potency of cell sheet regenerative medicine products for their intended uses. Such uncertainties could delay our ability to obtain FDA approval for and to commercialize such products. In addition, the research and commercialization of cell sheet regenerative medicine products could be hindered if third party manufacturers of such products are not compliant with cGMP, GTP, and any other applicable regulations. Any delay in the development of, obtaining FDA approval for, or the occurrence of any problems with third party manufacturers of cell sheet regenerative medicine products would negatively affect our ability to commercialize such products.

The use of any of our product candidates in clinical trials and in the market may expose us to liability claims.

        The nature of our business exposes us to potential liability risks inherent in the testing, manufacturing and marketing of our product candidates. While we are in clinical stage testing, our product candidates could potentially harm people or allegedly harm people and we may be subject to costly and damaging product liability claims. Some of the patients who participate in clinical trials are already critically ill when they enter a trial. Informed consent and contractual limitations on payments for subject injury or waivers we obtain may not be enforceable and may not protect us from liability or the costs of product liability litigation. Although we currently carry a $5 million clinical product liability

39


Table of Contents

insurance policy, it may not be sufficient to cover future claims. In addition, in some cases the contractors on which we rely for manufacturing our product candidates may indemnify us for third party claims brought against us arising from matters for which these contractors are responsible. We could be materially and adversely affected if we were required to pay damages or incur defense costs in connection with a claim outside the scope of indemnity or insurance coverage, if the indemnity is not performed or enforced in accordance with its terms, or if our liability exceeds the amount of applicable insurance or indemnity. In addition, there can be no assurance that insurance will continue to be available on terms acceptable to us, if at all, or that if obtained, the insurance coverage will be sufficient to cover any potential claims or liabilities. Similar risks would exist upon the commercialization or marketing of any products by us or our partners. We currently do not have any clinical or product liability claims or threats of claims filed against us.

We currently have no active license for CAOMECS technology with CellSeed, and may not be able to develop or commercialize corneal stem cell treatments.

        In December 2015, we and CellSeed terminated the Research Agreement and the Individual Agreement. Accordingly, we presently do not have a license with CellSeed for the development of CAOMECS technologies for the treatment of corneal diseases. While we are currently negotiating new agreements with CellSeed, there can be no assurance that we will be able to enter into new agreements with CellSeed for the licensing or commercialization of CAOMECS technologies on commercially acceptable terms, or at all. If we are unable to enter into new licenses, we may be forced to terminate our research and development efforts with respect to these CAOMECS technologies. Furthermore, we continue to perform research and development activities on CAOMECS technologies even following the termination of the Research Agreement and the Individual Agreement. If CellSeed determines to enforce its intellectual property rights, we could be subjected to litigation. We could be materially and adversely affected if we were required to pay damages or incur defense costs in connection with such a litigation.

We may expend our limited resources to pursue a particular product candidate or indication and fail to capitalize on product candidates or indications that may be more profitable or for which there is a greater likelihood of success.

        Because we have limited financial and management resources, we focus on a limited number of research programs and product candidates. As a result, we may forego or delay pursuit of opportunities with other product candidates or for other indications that later prove to have greater commercial potential. Our resource allocation decisions may cause us to fail to capitalize on viable product candidates or profitable market opportunities. Our spending on current and future research and development programs and product candidates for the specific indications we have selected may not yield any commercially viable products. If we do not accurately evaluate the commercial potential or target market for a particular product candidate, we may relinquish valuable rights to that product candidate through collaboration, licensing or other arrangements in cases in which it would have been more advantageous for us to retain sole development and commercialization rights.

40


Table of Contents

RISKS RELATED TO COMMERCIALIZATION OF OUR PRODUCT CANDIDATES

The failure of our products to gain market acceptance will hinder our ability to generate revenues from the sale of our products.

        Even if our product candidates are approved for commercialization, they may be too expensive to manufacture or market or they may not otherwise be successful in the marketplace. Market acceptance of any of our product candidates, if approved for commercial sale, will depend on a number of factors including, but not limited to:

    demonstration of significant clinical effectiveness and safety of our product;

    the prevalence and severity of any adverse side effects experienced by patients to whom our product is administered;

    limitations or warnings contained in the approved labeling or package insert for our product;

    the availability of alternative treatments for the indications approved for our product;

    the availability of acceptable pricing and adequate third-party reimbursement for our product;

    the effectiveness of marketing and distribution methods for our product; and

    comparison of the above factors to those associated with treatments with which our product competes.

        If our products do not gain market acceptance among physicians, patients, treatment centers, healthcare payors and others in the health care community, any of which may not accept or utilize our products, our ability to generate significant revenues from our products would be limited and our financial condition will be materially adversely affected. In addition, if we fail to successfully penetrate our core markets and successfully expand our business into new markets, the growth in sales of our products, along with our business's operating results, could be negatively impacted.

        Our ability to penetrate the SCD treatment market and other markets in which we compete, or to expand our business into additional countries in Africa, Europe, Asia and the Americas, is subject to numerous factors, many of which are beyond our control. Our products, if successfully developed, may compete with a number of therapeutic products currently manufactured and marketed by major pharmaceutical companies. Our products may also compete with new products currently under development by others or with products which may be less expensive than our products. There is no assurance that our efforts to increase market penetration in our core markets and existing geographic markets will be successful. Our failure to do so could have an adverse effect on our operating results.

We may need to meet some or all of our commercialization needs through strategic partnerships and alliances which may not yield anticipated benefits and may adversely affect our operating results, financial condition and existing business.

        We may seek to meet some or all of our commercialization needs through strategic partnerships and alliances. The success of this approach will depend on, among other things:

    the availability of suitable strategic partners and alliance candidates;

    competition from other companies for strategic partners or forming alliances with available strategic partner and alliance candidates;

    our ability to value any potential strategic partnerships or alliances accurately and negotiate favorable terms for any strategic partnerships or alliances;

    the ability to establish new informational, operational and financial systems to meet the needs of such strategic partnerships or alliances;

41


Table of Contents

    the ability to achieve anticipated synergies with such strategic partnerships or alliances; and

    the availability of management resources to oversee the integration and operation of such strategic partnerships or alliances.

        If we are not successful in finding, negotiating and operating with such strategic partnerships or alliances in the future, we may be required to reevaluate our strategic partnerships and alliance strategy. We also may incur substantial expenses and devote significant management time and resources in seeking to complete such strategic partnerships and alliances. Strategic partnerships and alliances may fail to meet our performance expectations. If we do not achieve the anticipated benefits of such strategic partnerships and alliances as rapidly as expected, or at all, investors or analysts may not perceive the same benefits of the acquisition or alliance as we do. If these risks materialize, our operating results, financial condition and existing business could be materially adversely affected.

We lack experience in commercializing products, and we may not be able to establish the sales and marketing infrastructure necessary to support the commercialization of our product candidates if and when they are approved.

        With the conclusion of our Phase 3 clinical trial with respect to our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD, we are transitioning from a company with a development focus to a company capable of supporting commercial activities. We may not be successful in such a transition. We have not yet demonstrated an ability to obtain marketing approval for product candidates and have limited experience in commercializing products. As a result, we may not be as successful as companies that have previously obtained marketing approval for product candidates and have more experience commercially launching them as products.

        To achieve commercial success for any of our product candidates for which we may obtain marketing approval, including our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD, we will need to establish a sales and marketing infrastructure to market them as products. This will require us to attract and retain key personnel with commercial experience to lead the commercialization of our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD if approved by the FDA and other product candidates that we may develop. We have not yet identified or retained these key personnel and have no assurance that we will be able to do so on commercially acceptable terms, or at all. There are risks involved with establishing our own sales, marketing and distribution capabilities. For example, recruiting and training a sales force is expensive and time consuming and could delay any product launch. If the commercial launch of a product for which we recruit a sales force and establish marketing capabilities is delayed or does not occur for any reason, we would have prematurely or unnecessarily incurred these commercialization expenses. This may be costly, and our investment would be lost if we cannot retain or reposition our sales and marketing personnel.

        Factors that may inhibit our efforts to commercialize our products on our own include:

    our inability to recruit, train and retain adequate numbers of effective sales and marketing personnel;

    the inability of sales personnel to obtain access to physicians or persuade adequate numbers of physicians to prescribe any of our products;

    the lack of complementary or sample products to be offered by sales personnel, which may put us at a competitive disadvantage relative to companies with more products;

    our anticipated sales force being materially smaller than the actual number of sales representatives required to successfully commercialize our products;

    unforeseen costs and expenses associated with creating an independent sales and marketing organization; and

42


Table of Contents

    the inability of sales and marketing personnel to maintain compliance with federal and state regulations and our inability to adequately monitor and ensure such compliance.

        If we are unable to establish our own sales, marketing and distribution capabilities and instead enter into arrangements with third parties to perform these services, our revenue and our profitability, if any, are likely to be lower than if we were to sell, market and distribute any products that we develop ourselves. If our anticipated sales force is not sufficient to commercialize our products, we may be required to hire substantially more sales representatives to adequately support the commercialization of our products, which could increase our expenses and cost of sales. In addition, we may not be successful in entering into arrangements with third parties to sell, market and distribute our product candidates or may be unable to do so on terms that are favorable to us. We likely will have little control over such third parties, and any of them may fail to devote the necessary resources and attention to sell and market our products effectively or in compliance with applicable government requirements for the marketing of a pharmaceutical product. If we do not establish sales, marketing and distribution capabilities successfully, either on our own or in collaboration with third parties, we will not be successful in commercializing any of our product candidates for which we obtain marketing approval.

Failure to obtain acceptable prices or adequate reimbursement for our products may cause an adverse impact on our results of operations.

        Our ability to successfully commercialize our products will depend significantly on our ability to obtain acceptable prices and the availability of reimbursement to the patient from third-party payors, such as governmental and private insurance plans. Our products may not be considered medically necessary or cost-effective, may not compare favorably on price with other L-glutamine products, and reimbursement to the patient may not be available or sufficient to allow us or our partners to sell our products on a competitive basis. It may not be possible to negotiate favorable reimbursement rates for our products. We cannot be sure that coverage and reimbursement will be available for our products or will continue to be available for our products and, if reimbursement is available, what the level of reimbursement will be.

        Significant uncertainty exists as to the reimbursement status of newly approved healthcare products. Third-party payors frequently require companies to provide predetermined discounts from list prices, and they are increasingly challenging the prices charged for pharmaceuticals and other medical products. In addition, the continuing efforts of third-party payors to contain or reduce the costs of healthcare through various means may limit our commercial opportunity and reduce any associated revenue and profits. For example, in some foreign markets, the pricing or profitability of healthcare products is subject to government control. In other foreign markets, including Africa where the largest population of patients with SCD exists, there is a limited number of third-party payors from which reimbursement can be sought. In the United States, there have been, and we expect there will continue to be, a number of federal and state proposals to implement similar government control, as evidenced by the passing of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and its amendment, the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act. Such government-adopted reform measures may adversely impact the pricing of healthcare products and services in the United States or internationally and the amount of reimbursement available from governmental agencies or other third-party payors. In addition, increasing emphasis on managed care will continue to put pressure on the pricing of pharmaceutical products. Cost control initiatives could decrease the price that we or any current or potential collaborators could receive for any of our products and could adversely affect our profitability. If we fail to obtain acceptable prices or an adequate level of reimbursement for our products, the sales of our products would be adversely affected or there may be no commercially viable market for our products.

43


Table of Contents

If the market opportunities for our product candidates are smaller than we believe they are, our revenues may be adversely affected and our business may suffer. Because the target patient populations of our product candidates are small, we must be able to successfully identify patients and achieve a significant market share to maintain profitability and growth.

        We focus our research and product development on treatments for rare diseases and conditions. Our projections of both the number of people who have these diseases or conditions, as well as the subset of people with these diseases or conditions who have the potential to benefit from treatment with our product candidates, are based on estimates. These estimates may prove to be incorrect and new studies may change the estimated incidence or prevalence of these diseases or conditions. The number of patients in the United States, Europe and elsewhere may turn out to be lower than expected, may not be otherwise amenable to treatment with our product candidates (if approved), or new patients may become increasingly difficult to identify or gain access to, all of which would adversely affect our results of operations and our business.

The intellectual property that we have licensed relating to our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD is limited, which could adversely affect our ability to compete in the market and adversely affect the value of our product candidate.

        The patent and exclusivity protections that we expect to protect our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine product for treatment of SCD from competition is a combination of (i) rights under a license of the SCD Patent, and (ii) Orphan Drug market exclusivity under FDA, European Union and similar foreign regulations. These protections are limited in ways that may affect our ability to effectively exclude third parties from competing against us if we obtain regulatory approval to market our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD. In particular:

    each of the protections run concurrently, resulting in protection from competition that will diminish over time as the protections expire;

    protection under the SCD Patent is scheduled to expire in May 2016, which may allow competitors with more resources than us to concurrently develop similar products;

    the FDA may not agree that our product is entitled to data exclusivity under the Hatch/Waxman Act and, if granted, data exclusivity protection under the Hatch/Waxman Act will expire three years after our product is approved;

    Orphan Drug market exclusivity in the United States will only be granted if our product receives the first FDA approval for an L-glutamine treatment for SCD and, if granted, Orphan Drug market exclusivity protection will expire seven years after our product is approved. To be eligible for Orphan Drug market exclusivity in the United States requires that the indication approved by the FDA for our product (if it is approved) matches the indication for which the FDA originally granted us Orphan Drug designation. Orphan Drug designation will not preclude the FDA from granting Orphan Drug designation to another sponsor developing the same drug for the same indication, approving such other drug before our drug would receive FDA approval, granting Orphan Drug designation and approving such other drug after we would receive approval if such drug is considered clinically superior to our product, approving a product that is the same as our product for a different indication, or approving a different product intended to treat SCD;

    Orphan Drug status in the European Union is subject to exclusions similar to those in the United States; and

    there are many countries, including some key markets for our product, in which we do not have intellectual property coverage and where neither orphan drug nor data exclusivity is available.

44


Table of Contents

        If we obtain marketing approval for our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD, these limitations and any reductions in our expected protection resulting from any failure to obtain market exclusivity under the Orphan Drug Act or the Hatch/Waxman Act, or the approval of competing products, including other products that could be approved by FDA under the Orphan Drug Act, may subject our product to greater competition than we expect and reduce our ability to generate revenue from our product candidate, possibly materially. These circumstances may also impair our ability to obtain license partners or other international commercialization opportunities on terms acceptable to us, if at all.

        On May 1, 2016, the SCD Patent expired and subsequently, the license agreement has terminated. Since the SCD Patent is expired, competitors with more resources than us may develop similar products which may subject our product to greater competition than we expect and materially reduce our ability to generate revenue from our product candidate. These circumstances may also impair our ability to obtain license partners or other international commercialization opportunities on terms acceptable to us, if at all.

If our competitors succeed in developing products and technologies that are more effective than our own, or if scientific developments change our understanding of the potential scope and utility of our product candidates and products, then our technologies and future product candidates and products may be rendered less competitive.

        We face significant competition from industry participants, both pharmaceutical and nutritional, that are pursuing similar technologies to those we are pursuing and are developing pharmaceutical products that are competitive with our product candidates and any resulting products. Nearly all of our industry competitors have greater capital resources, larger research and development staffs and facilities, and a longer history in drug discovery and development, obtaining regulatory approval and pharmaceutical product manufacturing and marketing than we do. With these additional resources and experience, our competitors may be able to respond to the rapid and significant technological changes in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries faster than we can. Our future success will depend in large part on our ability to maintain a competitive position with respect to these technologies and to respond effectively and timely to competition. We may not be able to do this successfully. Rapid technological development, as well as new scientific developments, may result in our lead compounds, development compounds, product candidates or products becoming obsolete or less effective or otherwise clinically inferior for some or all patients before we can recover any of the expenses incurred to develop them. For example, changes in our understanding of the appropriate population of patients who should be treated with a targeted therapy of the type that we are developing may limit the market potential of our treatment if it is subsequently demonstrated that only certain subsets of the overall patient population should be treated with our treatment. If a competitor develops the same product candidate as ours for the same indication but is able to demonstrate that its product candidate is clinically superior to ours, or if the same product candidate is intended for a different indication, or if we are unable to ensure adequate supplies of our product candidate following any approval by the FDA, the FDA may approve our competitor's marketing application regardless of any marketing exclusivity we may obtain. Any of these circumstances could have a material adverse effect on our ability to successfully commercialize our product candidate if it is approved and thus on our business and financial condition.

We may face potential competition for our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD from manufacturers and resellers of L-glutamine that may or may not be manufactured with the same purity and quality as our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine.

        The amino acid L-glutamine is manufactured in large quantities, primarily by a few large chemical companies, and processed and sold as nutritional supplements. These quantities may not evidence the

45


Table of Contents

same level of quality and purity as our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine. The sale of either pharmaceutical grade or non-pharmaceutical grade supplies of L-glutamine at prices lower than the minimum that we must charge to become and remain profitable could have a material adverse effect on our results.

There are known adverse side effects to our NutreStore product.

        We market and sell NutreStore L-glutamine powder for oral solution, a prescription pharmaceutical product that has received FDA approval for the treatment of SBS when used in combination with a recombinant human growth hormone approved for SBS, and a specialized nutritional support. Patients with SBS receiving intravenous parenteral nutrition, or IPN, and NutreStore should be routinely monitored for kidney and liver function, particularly patients with kidney or liver impairment. Common reported side effects of NutreStore for patients with SBS include, but are not limited to, nausea or vomiting, feeling the need or urge to empty bowels, gas, abdominal pain, hemorrhoids, constipation, and aggravation of Crohn's disease, gastric ulcer or gastric fistula. The approved indication of the product in combination with recombinant human growth hormone and specialized diets, and any of these known side effects or any associated warning statements or labeling requirements may limit the commercial profile of this product and prevent us from achieving or maintaining market acceptance of such product.

RISKS RELATED TO OUR RELIANCE ON THIRD PARTIES

If the L-glutamine manufacturers upon which we rely fail to produce in the volumes and quality that we require on a timely basis, or fail to comply with stringent regulations applicable to pharmaceutical manufacturers, we may face delays in the development and commercialization of, or be unable to meet demand for, our L-glutamine-based products, if any, and may lose any marketing exclusivity and potential revenues.

        We do not currently have our own manufacturing capabilities. We therefore depend heavily upon third party manufacturers for supplies of both our product candidates under development and the products we sell. The manufacture of pharmaceutical products requires significant expertise and capital investment, including the development of advanced manufacturing techniques and process controls. Our third party manufacturers and key suppliers may experience manufacturing difficulties due to resource constraints or as a result of labor disputes, unstable political environments at foreign facilities, financial difficulties or other problems beyond their control and may not be able to expand their capacity or to produce additional product requirements for us in the event that demand for our products increases. If these manufacturers or key suppliers were to encounter any of these difficulties, or otherwise fail to comply with their regulatory and contractual obligations, our ability to timely launch any potential product candidate, if approved, would be jeopardized. If we are unable to ensure adequate supply of an orphan drug for which we have obtained marketing exclusivity, the FDA may approve another drug for marketing, which could have a material adverse effect on our business and financial condition.

        We currently obtain our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine from two Japanese companies, which together produce the vast majority of pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine approved for sale in the United States, and obtain all of our L-glutamine for our NutreStore product from one of these companies. We intend to continue to rely on these manufacturers to produce our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine, but we have not entered into, and may not be able to establish, long-term supply agreements with these key suppliers on acceptable terms. Furthermore, pursuant to a letter of intent between us and Ajinomoto, we have agreed to purchase or cause relevant third party purchasers to purchase from Ajinomoto all of the L-glutamine that we will need for our commercial products, subject to an exception that we may purchase up to 10% of our source pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine from third-party suppliers on a backup basis. If these suppliers were to experience any manufacturing or production difficulties producing pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine, or we were unable to purchase

46


Table of Contents

sufficient quantities of pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine on acceptable terms, our ability to conduct additional clinical trials, to commercialize pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine for the treatment of SCD, to maintain marketing exclusivity if granted, and to continue to sell NutreStore would be harmed.

        In addition, all manufacturers, packers, distributors and suppliers of pharmaceutical products must comply with applicable cGMP regulations for the manufacture of pharmaceutical products, which are enforced by the FDA through its facilities inspection program. The FDA is likely to conduct inspections of our third party manufacturer and key supplier facilities as part of the FDA's pre-approval review of any of our NDAs and post-approval, ongoing compliance programs. If our third party manufacturers and key suppliers are not in compliance with cGMP requirements, it may result in a delay of approval for products undergoing regulatory review or the inability to meet market demands for any approved products, particularly if these sites are supplying single source ingredients required for the manufacture of any potential product. These cGMP requirements include quality control, quality assurance and the maintenance of records and documentation, among other items. Furthermore, each manufacturing facility used to manufacture drug or biological products is subject to FDA inspection and must meet cGMP requirements. As a result, if one of the manufacturers that we rely on shifts production from one facility to another, the new facility must undergo a preapproval inspection and, for biological products, must be licensed by regulatory authorities prior to being used for commercial supply. Our manufacturers may be unable or fail to comply with these cGMP requirements and with other FDA, state and foreign regulatory requirements. A failure to comply with any applicable manufacturing requirements may result in warning or untitled letters, fines, product recalls, seizures, corrective actions involving public notifications, injunctions, total or partial suspension of production, civil money penalties, suspension or withdrawals of previously granted regulatory approvals, refusal to approve new applications or supplements to applications for marketing of new products, import or export bans or restrictions, disgorgement of profits, debarment and criminal prosecution and criminal penalties. Any of these penalties could delay or prevent the promotion, marketing or sale of our products. If the safety of any quantities supplied is compromised due to a third party manufacturer's failure to comply with or adhere to applicable laws or for other reasons, we may be liable for injuries suffered by patients who have taken such products and we may not be able to obtain regulatory approval for or successfully commercialize our products.

We expect to rely on third parties to conduct future clinical trials of our product candidates and those third parties may not perform satisfactorily, including failing to meet deadlines for the conduct of such trials.

        We engaged a third-party contract research organization, or CRO, to conduct our clinical trials for our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD and expect to engage a CRO to conduct any further required clinical trials with respect to such product and any clinical trials with respect to any of our other product candidates that may progress to clinical development. We expect to continue to rely on third parties, such as CROs, clinical data management organizations, medical institutions and clinical investigators, to conduct those clinical trials. Agreements with such third parties might terminate for a variety of reasons, including a failure to perform by the third parties. If we need to enter into alternative arrangements, that would delay our product development activities.

        Our reliance on these third parties for research and development activities will reduce our control over these activities, but will not relieve us of our responsibilities. For example, we will remain 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, or GCPs, for conducting, recording and reporting the results of clinical trials to ensure that data and reported results are credible and accurate and that the rights, integrity and confidentiality of trial participants are protected. We also are required to register ongoing clinical trials and post the results of completed clinical trials on a government-sponsored database, www.ClinicalTrials.gov, within specified timeframes. Failure to do so can result in

47


Table of Contents

the FDA refusing to accept a NDA for the product candidate under study, fines, adverse publicity and civil and criminal sanctions.

        Furthermore, these third parties may also have relationships with other entities, some of which may be our competitors. If these third parties do not successfully carry out their contractual duties, meet expected deadlines or conduct our clinical trials in accordance with regulatory requirements and our stated protocols, we will not be able to obtain, or may be delayed in obtaining, marketing approvals for our product candidates and will not be able to, or may be delayed in our efforts to, successfully commercialize them as products.

        We also expect to rely on other third parties to store and distribute supplies of our product candidates for clinical trials of them. Any performance failure on the part of our distributors could delay clinical development or marketing approval of our product candidates or commercialization of them as products, producing additional losses and depriving us of potential revenue.

If we do not obtain the support of new, and maintain the support of existing, key scientific collaborators, it may be difficult to research medical indications for L-glutamine other than SCD and to expand our product offerings, which may limit our revenue growth and profitability and could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and operating results.

        We will need to establish relationships with additional leading scientists and research institutions in order to develop new products and expand our product offerings and to explore other medical indications for L-glutamine-based products. Although we have established research collaborations, we cannot assure you that our relationships with our research collaborators will continue or that we will be able to attract additional research partners. If we are not able to maintain existing or establish new scientific relationships to assist in our research and development, we may not be able to successfully develop our product candidates or expand our product offerings.

RISKS RELATED TO OUR INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY

We depend on licenses and sublicenses of certain patents for our existing L-glutamine products and our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD product candidate. If any of these licenses, sublicenses, or the licenses under which we have been sublicensed terminates, or if any of the patents that have been licensed or sublicensed to us are challenged and we are limited in our ability to utilize any of those patents, we may be unable to develop, out-license, market and sell our products, which would cause a material adverse effect on our business, prospects, financial condition, and operating results.

        Our ability to develop products depends on licenses and sublicenses we have obtained to patents that claim the use of L-glutamine to treat SCD and the use of CAOMECS for the treatment of corneal impairments.

        We face the risk that any of these licenses and sublicenses could be terminated if we fail to satisfy our obligations under them. In addition, even if we satisfy our obligations as sublicensee under any sublicense, if the license under which we have been sublicensed terminates, our sublicense could also terminate. In the event any claims in the patents that we have been licensed or sublicensed are challenged, the court or patent authority to which such challenge is presented could determine that such patent claims are invalid or unenforceable or not sufficiently broad in scope to protect our proprietary rights. In addition, as the licensee or sublicensee of such patents, our ability to participate in the defense or enforcement of such patents could be limited.

        In particular, the SCD Patent will expire in May 2016, and along with that, our license to the SCD Patent will expire. While this means we would have no further obligations to pay royalties under the SCD License, this also means that our competitors would be able to utilize processes, technologies and methods that were previously protected by the SCD Patent to potentially develop competing products.

48


Table of Contents

Since our competitors generally have greater resources than we do, our competitors may be able to develop competing products more quickly than we can. While we have an Orphan Drug designation for the use of L-glutamine for the treatment of SCD, Orphan Drug exclusivity may be lost if another L-glutamine product for the same indication demonstrates clinical superiority. If our competitors are able to develop alternative L-glutamine products, it may have a material and adverse effect on our operations and our ability to commercialize our products, since it may either eliminate our exclusivity before we are able to take a product to market, or may significantly shorten the period for which we have such exclusivity, making it more difficult for us to recoup the expenses we incurred in researching and developing our products.

If we are unable to protect proprietary technology that we invent and develop, we may not be able to compete effectively and our business and financial prospects may be harmed.

        Where appropriate, we seek patent protection for inventions we conceive and reduce to practice. Patent protection, however, is not available for all of these inventions and for some of these patent protection may be limited. In addition, in developing some of our inventions, we may have to design around patents held by others. If we must spend significant time and money protecting our patents, designing around patents held by others or in-licensing patent or other proprietary rights held by others, potentially for large fees, our business and financial prospects may be harmed.

        The patent prosecution process is expensive and time consuming, and we may not be able to file and prosecute all necessary or desirable patent applications at a reasonable cost or in a timely manner. It is also possible that we will fail to identify patentable aspects of our research and development output before it is too late to obtain patent protection. We also may have to relinquish to strategic partners or other third parties to whom we license our technology the right to control the preparation, filing and prosecution of patent applications claiming our inventions and to maintain any resulting patents. Therefore, patent applications and patents claiming our inventions may not be prosecuted and enforced in a manner consistent with the best interests of our business.

        The patent position of biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies generally is highly uncertain, involves complex legal and factual questions and has in recent years been the subject of much litigation. In addition, the laws of foreign countries may not protect our rights to the same extent as the laws of the United States, or vice versa. For example, European patent law restricts the patentability of methods of treatment of the human body more than U.S. law does. Publications of discoveries in the scientific literature often lag behind the actual discoveries, and patent applications in the United States and other jurisdictions are typically not published until 18 months after filing or, in some cases, not at all. Therefore, we cannot know with certainty whether we were the first to make the inventions claimed in our patents or pending patent applications, or that we were the first to file for patent protection of such inventions. As a result, the issuance, scope, validity, enforceability and commercial value of our patent rights are highly uncertain. Our pending and future patent applications may not result in patents being issued that protect our product candidates, in whole or in part, or which effectively prevent others from commercializing competitive product candidates. Changes in either the patent laws or interpretation of the patent laws in the United States and other countries may diminish the value of our patents or narrow the scope of our patent protection.

        Recent patent reform legislation could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of our patent applications and the enforcement or defense of our issued patents. On September 16, 2011, the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act, or the Leahy-Smith Act, was signed into law. The Leahy-Smith Act includes a number of significant changes to U.S. patent law. These include provisions that affect the way patent applications are prosecuted and may also affect patent litigation. The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office recently developed new regulations and procedures to govern administration of the Leahy-Smith Act, and many of the substantive changes to patent law associated with the Leahy-Smith Act, and in particular, the first to file provisions, only became effective on

49


Table of Contents

March 16, 2013. Accordingly, it is not clear what, if any, impact the Leahy-Smith Act will have on the operation of our business. However, the Leahy-Smith Act and its implementation could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of our patent applications and the enforcement or defense of our licensed patents, all of which could have a material adverse effect on our business and financial condition.

        Even if our patent applications issue as patents, they may not issue in a form that will provide us with any meaningful protection, prevent competitors from competing with us or otherwise provide us with any competitive advantage. Our competitors may be able to circumvent our patents by developing similar or alternative treatments in a non-infringing manner.

        In addition, the issuance of a patent is not conclusive as to its inventorship, scope, validity or enforceability, and our patents may be challenged in the courts or patent offices in the United States and abroad. Such challenges may result in loss of exclusivity or freedom to operate or in patent claims being narrowed, invalidated or held unenforceable, in whole or in part, which could limit our ability to stop others from using or commercializing products similar or identical to our product candidates or products, or limit the duration of the patent protection of our product candidates or products. Given the amount of time required for the development, testing and regulatory review of new therapeutics, patents protecting our product candidates might expire before or shortly after such candidates are commercialized as products. Patent protection for our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD expires in May 2016. As a result, our patent portfolio may not provide us with sufficient rights to exclude others from commercializing products similar or identical to ours.

        We will incur significant ongoing expenses in maintaining our patent portfolio. Should we lack the funds to maintain our patent portfolio or to enforce our rights against infringers, we could be adversely impacted.

Third parties may initiate legal proceedings alleging that we are infringing their intellectual property rights, the outcome of which would be uncertain and could have a material adverse effect on the success of our business.

        Our commercial success depends upon our ability, and the ability of our collaborators, to develop, manufacture, market and sell our products without infringing the proprietary rights of third parties. There is considerable intellectual property litigation in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries. We may become party to, or threatened with, future adversarial proceedings or litigation regarding intellectual property rights with respect to our product candidates and products. In these proceedings or litigation, third parties may assert infringement claims against us based on existing patents or patents that may be granted in the future. The party making such claims could secure a judgment awarding substantial damages, as well as injunctive or other equitable relief. Such relief could effectively block our ability to make, use, sell, distribute or market our products in such jurisdiction. Even if claims of infringement are without merit, any such action could divert the time and attention of management and impair our ability to access additional capital and/or cost us significant funds to defend.

        If we are found to infringe a third party's intellectual property rights, we could be required to obtain a license from such third party to continue developing our product candidates and manufacturing and marketing any of our products. However, we may not be able to obtain any required license on commercially reasonable terms or at all. Even if we were able to obtain a license, it could be non-exclusive, thereby giving our competitors access to the same technologies licensed to us. Alternatively, we could be ordered to cease commercializing any of our products that is found to infringe a third party's intellectual property rights. In addition to being forced to cease commercialization of such a product, we could be found liable for monetary damages, including treble damages and attorneys' fees if we are found to have willfully infringed a third party's patent. A finding of infringement could prevent us from developing our product candidates and commercializing our

50


Table of Contents

products or force us to cease some of our business operations. Claims that we have misappropriated the confidential information or trade secrets of third parties could have a similar negative impact on our business.

We may be subject to claims by third parties asserting that we or our employees have misappropriated their intellectual property, or claiming ownership of what we regard as our own intellectual property.

        Although we try to ensure that our employees do not use the proprietary information or know-how of others in their work for us, we may be subject to claims that these employees or we have used or disclosed intellectual property, including trade secrets or other proprietary information, of any such employee's former employer. Litigation may be necessary to defend against these claims.

        Moreover, we may be subject to a third-party preissuance submission of prior art to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, or become involved in opposition, derivation, reexamination, inter partes review, post-grant review or interference proceedings challenging our patent rights or the patent rights of others. An adverse determination in any such submission, proceeding or litigation could reduce the scope of or invalidate our patent rights, allow third parties to commercialize products similar or identical to our product candidates or products and compete directly with us, without payment to us, or result in our inability to manufacture or commercialize products without infringing third-party patent rights. In addition, if the breadth or strength of protection provided by our patents and patent applications is threatened, it could dissuade companies from collaborating with us to license, develop or commercialize current or future product candidates.

We may become involved in lawsuits to protect or enforce our patents or other intellectual property, which could be expensive, time consuming and unsuccessful.

        Competitors may infringe our issued patents, trade secrets, know-how or other intellectual property. To counter infringement or unauthorized use or to determine the scope and validity of our intellectual property rights, we may be required to file infringement claims or pursue other proceedings, which can be expensive and time consuming. Any claims we assert against perceived infringers could provoke these parties to assert counterclaims against us alleging that we infringe their patents. In addition, in a patent infringement proceeding, a court may decide that a patent of ours is invalid or unenforceable, in whole or in part, construe the patent's claims narrowly or refuse to stop the other party from using the technology at issue on the grounds that our patents do not cover the technology. An adverse result in any litigation or other proceeding could put one or more of our patents at risk of being invalidated or interpreted narrowly, subject us to significant liabilities, require us to cease using the subject technology or require us to license the subject technology from the third party, any or all of which could have a material adverse effect on our business.

Intellectual property litigation could cause us to spend substantial resources and distract our personnel from their normal responsibilities.

        Even if resolved in our favor, litigation or other legal proceedings relating to intellectual property claims may cause us to incur significant expenses, and could distract our technical and management personnel from their normal responsibilities. In addition, there could be public announcements of the results of hearings, motions or other interim proceedings or developments, and if securities analysts or investors perceive these results to be negative it could have a substantial adverse effect on the price of our common stock. Such litigation or proceedings could substantially increase our operating losses and reduce the resources available for development activities or any future sales, marketing or distribution activities. We may not have sufficient financial or other resources to conduct such litigation or proceedings adequately. Some of our competitors may be able to sustain the costs of such litigation or proceedings more effectively than we can because of their greater financial resources. Uncertainties

51


Table of Contents

resulting from the initiation and continuation of patent litigation or other proceedings could compromise our ability to compete in the marketplace.

If we are unable to protect the confidentiality of our trade secrets, our business and competitive position would be harmed.

        In addition to licensing patent rights and seeking patents for our intellectual property, we also rely on trade secrets, including unpatented know-how, technology and other proprietary information, to maintain our competitive position. Our competitors may use our methods, or acquire similar expertise, in order to develop L-glutamine-based treatments and progress these through clinical development and commercialization, which could impair our ability to successfully develop our product candidates and commercialize them as products.

        We seek to protect our trade secrets, in part, by entering into non-disclosure and confidentiality agreements with parties who have access to them, such as our employees, corporate collaborators, outside scientific collaborators, contract manufacturers, consultants, advisors and other third parties. Despite these efforts, any of these parties may breach the agreements and disclose our proprietary information, including our trade secrets, and we may not be able to obtain adequate remedies for such breaches. Enforcing a claim that a party illegally disclosed or misappropriated a trade secret is difficult, expensive and time consuming, and the outcome is unpredictable. In addition, some courts inside and outside the United States are less willing or unwilling to protect trade secrets. If any of our trade secrets were to be lawfully obtained or independently developed by a competitor, we would have no right to prevent them, or those to whom they communicate it, from using that technology or information to compete with us. If any of our trade secrets were to be disclosed to or independently developed by a competitor, our competitive position would be harmed.

We may not be able to protect our intellectual property rights throughout the world.

        Filing, prosecuting and defending patents in all countries throughout the world would be prohibitively expensive, and our intellectual property rights in some countries outside the United States can be less extensive than those in the United States. In addition, the laws of some foreign countries do not protect intellectual property rights to the same extent as federal and state laws in the United States. Consequently, we may not be able to prevent third parties from practicing our inventions in all countries outside the United States, or from selling or importing products made using our inventions in and into the United States or other jurisdictions. Competitors may use our technologies in jurisdictions where we have not obtained patent protection to develop their own products and further, may export otherwise infringing products to territories where we have patent protection, but enforcement is not as strong as that in the United States. These products may compete with our products and our patents or other intellectual property rights may not be effective or sufficient to prevent them from competing.

        Many companies have encountered significant problems in protecting and defending intellectual property rights in foreign jurisdictions. The legal systems of certain countries, particularly certain developing countries, do not favor the enforcement of patents, trade secrets and other intellectual property protection, particularly those relating to biotechnology products, which could make it difficult for us to stop the infringement of our patents or marketing of competing products in violation of our proprietary rights generally. Proceedings to enforce our patent rights in foreign jurisdictions could result in substantial costs and divert our efforts and attention from other aspects of our business, could put our patents at risk of being invalidated or interpreted narrowly and our patent applications at risk of not issuing and could provoke third parties to assert claims against us. We may not prevail in any lawsuits that we initiate and the damages or other remedies awarded, if any, may not be commercially meaningful. Accordingly, our efforts to enforce our intellectual property rights around the world may be inadequate to obtain a significant commercial advantage from the intellectual property that we develop or license.

52


Table of Contents

Companies and universities that have licensed product candidates to us for research, clinical development and marketing are sophisticated competitors that could develop similar products to compete with our products, which could reduce our future revenues.

        Licensing our product candidates from other companies, universities or individuals does not always prevent them from developing non-identical but competitive products for their own commercial purposes, nor from pursuing patent protection in areas that are competitive with us. While we seek patent protection for all of our owned and in-licensed product candidates, the entities and individuals who have assigned or licensed to us these product candidates employ or are, as applicable, experienced scientists who may continue to do research and development relevant to our product candidates, and any of them may seek patent protection in the same areas that led to the discovery of the product candidates that they have assigned or licensed to us. By virtue of the previous research that led to the discovery of the inventions that they licensed or assigned to us, these companies, universities, and individuals may be able to develop and market competitive products in less time than might be required to develop a product with which they have no prior experience and may reduce our future revenues from products resulting from successful development and approval of our product candidates.

RISKS RELATED TO REGULATORY APPROVAL OF OUR PRODUCT CANDIDATES AND OTHER LEGAL COMPLIANCE MATTERS

Our business is subject to extensive government regulation, which could cause delays in the development of our product candidates and commercialization of any resulting products, impose significant costs on us or provide advantages to our larger competitors.

        The FDA and similar regulatory authorities in foreign countries impose substantial requirements upon the development, manufacture and marketing of therapeutic products, such as drugs, biologics, and cell-based therapies. Failure to obtain marketing approval for any of our product candidates in any jurisdiction will prevent us from commercializing it as a product in that jurisdiction. The FDA and most other regulatory authorities impose requirements for laboratory and clinical testing, manufacturing, labeling, registration, marketing, storage, distribution, recordkeeping, reporting, and advertising and promotion, and other costly and time-consuming processes and procedures applicable to therapeutic products. In some cases, as a condition for approval to market any of our product candidates, the FDA or other regulatory authorities may impose commitments that we must satisfy following any such approval. These post-approval commitments could vary substantially from country to country depending upon the type, complexity and novelty of the applicable therapeutic product. Satisfaction of any such post-approval commitments (including the requirement to conduct additional clinical studies), if imposed by the FDA or other regulatory authorities, could take several years or more. In addition, post-approval requirements regarding safety surveillance, cGMP compliance, advertising and promotion, adverse event reporting, and recordkeeping must be satisfied at all times.

        The effect of government regulation may be to delay marketing approval of our product candidates for a considerable or indefinite period of time, to impose costly processes and procedures upon our activities and to furnish a competitive advantage to companies that compete with us. There can be no assurance that marketing approval for any of our product candidates would be granted by the FDA or other regulatory authority on a timely basis, if at all, or, once granted, that the marketing authorization would not be withdrawn or other regulatory actions taken which might limit our ability to market our proposed products. Any such delay in obtaining or failing to obtain such approvals or imposition of regulatory actions would adversely affect us, the manufacturing and marketing of the products resulting from marketing approval of any of our product candidates, and our ability to generate product revenue.

53


Table of Contents

Even though we have obtained Orphan Drug designation for our most advanced product candidate, our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD, we may not be able to obtain or maintain Orphan Drug marketing exclusivity for this product candidate or any of our other product candidates.

        Regulatory authorities in some jurisdictions, including the United States and the European Union, or EU, may designate therapeutic products under development for relatively small patient populations as "orphan drugs". Under the Orphan Drug Act, the FDA may designate a therapeutic product as an Orphan Drug if it is intended to treat a rare disease or condition, which is generally defined as a patient population of fewer than 200,000 individuals in the United States. We have obtained Orphan Drug designation from the FDA and European Commission, or EC, for L-glutamine treatment for SCD, and we may seek Orphan Drug designation for our other product candidates. Generally, if a product candidate with an Orphan Drug designation subsequently receives the first marketing approval for the indication for which it has been granted such designation, the drug is entitled to a period of marketing exclusivity, which precludes the FDA or European Medicines Agency, or EMA, as applicable, from approving another marketing application for the same product candidate prior to the expiration of that time period. The applicable period is seven years in the United States and 10 years in the European Union. The exclusivity period in the European Union can be reduced to six years if the product no longer meets the criteria for Orphan Drug designation or if its commercialization is sufficiently profitable so that market exclusivity is no longer justified. Orphan Drug exclusivity may be lost if the FDA or EMA determines that the request for designation was materially defective or if the manufacturer is unable to ensure sufficient quantity of the product to meet the needs of patients with the rare disease or condition. In the United States, Orphan Drug exclusivity may be lost if another L-glutamine product for the same indication demonstrates clinical superiority, such as a better safety or efficacy profile, in which case the FDA would be permitted to approve the third party product. Orphan Drug exclusivity does not bar the FDA from approving another L-glutamine product for any other indication. Nor does Orphan Drug designation bar the FDA from granting Orphan Drug designation and approving another product for the same orphan disease or condition.

The FDA Fast Track designation for our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD may not actually lead to a faster development or regulatory review or approval process.

        If a product candidate is intended for the treatment of a serious or life-threatening disease or condition and it demonstrates the potential to address unmet medical needs for this disease or condition, its sponsor may apply for FDA Fast Track designation. If Fast Track designation is obtained, the FDA may initiate review of completed individual sections of a NDA before all sections of the application are complete and the application can be submitted for filing by the FDA. This "rolling review" is available if the applicant provides, and the FDA approves, a schedule for submission of the individual sections of the application.

        Although we have obtained a Fast Track designation from the FDA for our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD, we may not experience a faster development process, review or approval compared to conventional FDA procedures. Our Fast Track designation may be withdrawn by the FDA if it believes that the designation is no longer supported by data from our clinical development program. Our Fast Track designation does not guarantee that we will qualify for or be able to take advantage of the expedited review procedures or that we will ultimately obtain regulatory approval of our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD.

        A product candidate that receives Fast Track designation is also eligible for, among other benefits, Priority Review, if certain criteria are met. These criteria for Priority Review include whether, if approved, the resulting product would provide significant improvements in the safety or effectiveness of the treatment, diagnosis, or prevention of serious conditions caused by a disease when compared to standard treatment, diagnosis, or prevention of those conditions. Under Priority Review of a NDA, assuming that there are no requests for additional information, the FDA's goal is to take action on the

54


Table of Contents

NDA within six months (compared to 10 months under standard review) after it is accepted as filed. Requests for Priority Review of a NDA must be submitted to the FDA when the NDA is submitted. Our current plan is to request Priority Review for the NDA for our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD that we plan to file this year. We cannot predict whether the FDA will grant our request for Priority Review for any such NDA or, if the request is granted, that the Priority Review status will be maintained and the NDA approved in a timely manner.

Any product candidate for which we obtain marketing approval would be subject to post-marketing regulatory requirements and limitations and could be subject to recall or withdrawal from the market, and we may be subject to penalties if we fail to comply with such regulatory requirements or if we experience unanticipated problems in commercializing any of our product candidates, when and if any of them are approved by regulators.

        Any product candidate for which we obtain marketing approval, along with the collection and reporting of post-approval clinical data, manufacturing processes, labeling, advertising and promotional activities for the resulting product, will be subject to continual requirements of and review by the FDA and other regulatory authorities. These requirements include submissions of safety and other post-marketing information and reports, establishment registration and product listing requirements, cGMP requirements relating to manufacturing, quality control, quality assurance and corresponding maintenance of records and documents, requirements regarding the distribution of samples to physicians and recordkeeping. Even if the FDA or other regulators outside the United States grant marketing approval to any of our product candidates, the approval may be subject to limitations on the indicated uses for which it may be marketed as a product or to the conditions of approval, including the requirement to implement a risk evaluation and mitigation strategy, or REMS. If any of our product candidates receives marketing approval, the labeling (including the package insert) that must accompany its distribution as a product may limit its approved use, which could limit the total number of prescriptions written for such products.

        The FDA may also impose requirements for costly post-marketing studies or clinical trials and surveillance to monitor the safety or effectiveness of any approved product. The FDA closely regulates the post-approval marketing and promotion of therapeutic products to ensure they are marketed for the approved indications and in accordance with the provisions of the approved labeling, and that any marketing claims or communications by a person or company responsible for the manufacture and distribution of the product regarding off-label use are truthful and not misleading. If we market any of our products for indications that have not been approved in a manner that is considered misleading or not truthful, we may be subject to enforcement action for misbranding the product. Violations of the FD&C Act relating to the promotion of prescription products may lead to investigations alleging violations of federal and state healthcare fraud and abuse laws, as well as state consumer protection laws. In recent years, several pharmaceutical companies have been or settled lawsuits for fined significant amounts for such violations.

        In addition, later discovery of previously unknown adverse events or other problems with any of our product candidates that are approved for marketing as products, the contract manufacturers from which we obtain supplies of these products, the manufacturing processes they use to manufacture these products, or our or their failure to comply with regulatory requirements, may have negative consequences, including:

    restrictions on the manufacturers or manufacturing processes for such products;

    restrictions on the labeling or marketing of such products;

    restrictions on distribution or use of such products;

    requirements to conduct post-marketing studies or clinical trials;

55


Table of Contents

    warning letters;

    recall or withdrawal of such products from the market;

    refusal to approve pending applications or supplements to approved marketing applications that we submit;

    clinical holds on clinical studies of such products;

    fines, restitution or disgorgement of revenue or profit generated by sales of such products;

    suspension or withdrawal of the marketing approvals of such products;

    refusal to permit the import or export of such products;

    seizure of such products;

    injunctions prohibiting the manufacture, marketing, sale, distribution, or related action in respect of such products;

    the imposition of civil or criminal penalties; or

    debarment of our company and any of our officers or other employees responsible for such problems from future dealings with the FDA.

        Non-compliance with applicable regulatory requirements regarding safety monitoring, also called pharmacovigilance, and with requirements related to the development of therapeutics for the pediatric population, can also result in significant financial penalties. Similarly, failure to comply with applicable regulatory requirements regarding the protection of personal information can also lead to significant penalties and sanctions.

Many of our potential customers are located in markets with underdeveloped health care systems.

        Our lead product candidate is an oral pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for sickle cell anemia and sickle ß 0 -thalassemia, two of the most common forms of SCD. SCD is a genetic blood disorder that affects 20-25 million people worldwide, and occurs with increasing frequency among those whose ancestors are from regions including sub-Saharan Africa, South America, the Caribbean, Central America, the Middle East, India and Mediterranean regions such as Turkey, Greece and Italy. Thus, while SCD affects people throughout the world, the prevalence of SCD is higher in certain geographies, such as central and sub-Saharan Africa and the Caribbean, that currently have underdeveloped health care systems or significantly lower rates of health insurance coverage. Furthermore, a majority of people in many of these geographies are low-income and may be unable to afford our products. These factors may ultimately limit our addressable market. Our ability to achieve profitability may be adversely impacted if we are unable to access markets with greater prevalence of SCD, or if there are insufficient SCD patients in geographies with more well-developed health care systems.

Our current and future relationships with customers and third-party payors in the United States and elsewhere may be subject, directly or indirectly, to applicable anti-kickback, fraud and abuse, false claims, transparency, health information privacy and security and other healthcare laws and regulations, which could expose us to criminal sanctions, civil penalties, contractual damages, reputational harm, administrative burdens and diminished profits and future earnings.

        Our industry is highly regulated and changes in law may adversely impact our business, operations or financial results. Any present or future arrangements with third-party payors, healthcare providers and professionals and customers may expose us to broadly applicable fraud and abuse and other healthcare laws and regulations that may restrict certain marketing and contracting practices. We are subject to various federal and state laws pertaining to healthcare fraud and abuse, including inducing,

56


Table of Contents

facilitating or encouraging submission of false claims to government programs and prohibitions on the offer or payment or acceptance of kickbacks or other remuneration for the purchase of our products. Healthcare providers, physicians and third-party payors in the United States and elsewhere will play a primary role in the recommendation and prescription of any product candidates for which we obtain marketing approval. Our future arrangements with customers and third-party payors may expose us to broadly applicable fraud and abuse and other healthcare laws and regulations, which may constrain the business or financial arrangements and relationships through which we sell, market and distribute any products. In addition, we may be subject to transparency laws aimed at controlling healthcare costs and patient privacy regulation by the U.S. federal and state governments and by governments in foreign jurisdictions in which we conduct our business. The applicable federal, state and foreign healthcare laws and regulations that may affect our ability to operate include (but are not limited to):

    the federal Anti-Kickback Statute, which prohibits, among other things, persons from knowingly and willfully soliciting, offering, receiving or providing remuneration, directly or indirectly, in cash or in kind, to induce or reward, or in return for, either the referral of an individual for, or the purchase, order or recommendation of, any good or service, for which payment may be made under federal and state healthcare programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid;

    federal civil and criminal false claims laws and civil monetary penalty laws, including the federal False Claims Act, which impose criminal and civil penalties, including civil qui tam actions (commonly referred to as "whistleblower actions"), against individuals or entities for knowingly presenting, or causing to be presented, to the federal government, including the Medicare and Medicaid programs, claims for payment that are false or fraudulent or making a false statement to avoid, decrease or conceal an obligation to pay money to the federal government;

    provisions under the federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, or HIPAA, that impose criminal and civil liability for executing a scheme to defraud any healthcare benefit program or making false statements relating to healthcare matters;

    provisions under HIPAA, as amended by the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act of 2009, or HITECH, and their respective implementing regulations, that impose obligations on covered healthcare providers, health plans, and healthcare clearinghouses, as well as their business associates that create, receive, maintain or transmit individually identifiable health information for or on behalf of a covered entity, with respect to safeguarding the privacy, security and transmission of individually identifiable health information;

    the federal Open Payments program under the federal Physician Payments Sunshine Act, which requires manufacturers of drugs, biologics, cell-based therapies, medical devices and medical supplies for which payment is available under Medicare, Medicaid or the Children's Health Insurance Program, with specific exceptions, to report annually to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, or CMS, information related to "payments or other transfers of value" made to physicians, which is defined to include doctors, dentists, optometrists, podiatrists and chiropractors, and teaching hospitals and applicable manufacturers and applicable group purchasing organizations to report annually to CMS ownership and investment interests held by the physicians and their immediate family members;

    state and foreign laws and regulations analogous to those described above, such as state anti-kickback and false claims laws, which may apply to sales or marketing arrangements and claims involving healthcare items or services reimbursed by non-governmental third-party payors, including private insurers;

    state and foreign laws that require pharmaceutical companies to comply with the pharmaceutical industry's voluntary compliance guidelines and the relevant compliance guidance promulgated by

57


Table of Contents

      the federal government or otherwise restrict payments that may be made to healthcare providers;

    state and foreign laws that require pharmaceutical and biopharmaceutical manufacturers to report information related to payments and other transfers of value to physicians and other healthcare providers or marketing expenditures; and

    state and foreign laws governing the privacy and security of health information in certain circumstances, many of which differ from each other in significant ways and often are not preempted by HIPAA, thus complicating compliance efforts.

        Because of the sweeping language of the federal Anti-Kickback Statute, many potentially beneficial business arrangements would be prohibited if the statute were strictly applied. To avoid this outcome, the Department of Health and Human Services has published regulations, known as "safe harbors," that identify exceptions to or exemptions from the statute's prohibitions. Arrangements that do not fit within the safe harbors are not automatically deemed to be illegal, but must be evaluated on a case by case basis for compliance with the statute and may be subject to scrutiny (and ultimately prosecution) by enforcement agencies. We seek to comply with the Anti-Kickback Statute and, if necessary, to fit within one of the defined safe harbors. We may be less willing than some of our competitors to take actions or enter into business arrangements that do not clearly satisfy the safe harbors. As a result, this unwillingness may put us at a competitive disadvantage. However, due to the breadth of the statutory provisions and the absence of uniform guidance in the form of regulations or court decisions, there can be no assurance that our practices fit within the safe harbors or that they will not be challenged under anti-kickback or similar laws. Further, liability may be established without a person or entity having actual knowledge of the federal Anti-Kickback Statute or specific intent to violate it. Violations of such restrictions may be punishable by civil or criminal sanctions, including fines and civil monetary penalties, as well as the possibility of exclusion from U.S. federal healthcare programs (including Medicaid and Medicare). Any such violations could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results or operations and cash flows.

        Under the False Claims Act, drug manufacturers have been held responsible for claims filed by physicians for reimbursement of the cost of medical services related to uses of a pharmaceutical product that are not on the approved labeling, known as "off-label use," if the manufacturer promoted the product for such off-label use. If the FDA or other government agencies determine that our promotional materials, trainings or other activities constitute off-label promotion of any of our products, it could request that we modify our training or promotional materials or other activities or subject us to regulatory enforcement actions, including the issuance of a warning letter, injunction, seizure, civil fine, and criminal penalties. Violations of the False Claims Act may result in treble damages based on the amount of overpayment and additional civil fines of $5,000 to $10,000 for each false claim. Drug manufacturers could also be held responsible for reimbursement claims submitted by any physician for pharmaceutical products that were knowingly not manufactured in compliance with cGMP regulations.

        In addition to the state laws previously described, we also are subject to other state fraud and abuse statutes and regulations. Many of the states in which we operate or plan to expand to have adopted a form of anti-kickback law, self-referral prohibition, and false claims and insurance fraud prohibition. The scope of these laws and the interpretations of them vary from state to state and are enforced by state courts and regulatory authorities, each with broad discretion. Generally, state laws reach to all healthcare services and not just those covered under a governmental healthcare program. A determination of liability under any of these laws could result in fines and penalties and restrictions on our ability to operate in these states. We cannot assure that our arrangements or business practices will not be subject to government scrutiny or be found to violate applicable fraud and abuse laws.

58


Table of Contents

        Efforts to ensure that our business arrangements with third parties will comply with applicable healthcare laws and regulations may involve substantial costs. Further, we cannot guarantee that our arrangements or business practices will not be subject to government investigations and prosecutions which, even if we are ultimately found to be without fault, can be costly and disruptive to our business. It is possible that governmental authorities will conclude that our business practices may not comply with current or future statutes, regulations or case law involving applicable fraud and abuse or other healthcare laws and regulations. If our operations are found to be in violation of any of these laws or any other governmental regulations that may apply to us, we, our employees, officers, or directors may be subject to significant civil, criminal and administrative penalties, including, without limitation, damages, fines, imprisonment, exclusion from participation in government healthcare programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, and the curtailment or restructuring of our operations, which could have a material adverse effect on our business. If any of the physicians or other healthcare providers or entities with whom we expect to do business, including our collaborators, is found not to be in compliance with applicable laws, such person or entity may be subject to criminal, civil or administrative sanctions, including exclusions from participation in government healthcare programs, which could also materially affect our business.

Recently enacted and future legislation may increase the difficulty and cost for us to obtain marketing approval of our product candidates and then commercialize them as products and affect the prices we may obtain.

        In the United States and some foreign jurisdictions, there have been a number of legislative and regulatory changes and proposed changes regarding the healthcare system that could prevent or delay marketing approval of our product candidates, restrict or regulate post-approval activities and affect our ability to profitably sell any product candidates for which we obtain marketing approval.

        Among policy makers and payors in the United States and elsewhere, there is significant interest in promoting changes in healthcare systems with the stated goals of containing healthcare costs, improving quality and expanding access. In the United States, the pharmaceutical industry has been a particular focus of these efforts and has been significantly affected by major legislative initiatives. In March 2010, President Obama signed into law the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Affordability Reconciliation Act, or, collectively, the PPACA (often commonly referred to as the "Affordable Care Act"), a law intended to broaden access to health insurance, reduce or constrain the growth of healthcare spending, enhance remedies against fraud and abuse, add new transparency requirements for the healthcare and health insurance industries, impose new taxes and fees on the health industry and impose additional health policy reforms.

        Among the provisions of the PPACA of importance to our potential product candidates are:

    an annual, nondeductible fee on any entity that manufactures or imports specified branded prescription drugs and biologic agents, apportioned among these entities according to their market share in certain government healthcare programs;

    an increase in the statutory minimum rebates a manufacturer must pay under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program to 23.1% and 13.0% of the average manufacturer price for branded and generic drugs, respectively;

    expansion of healthcare fraud and abuse laws, including the False Claims Act and the Anti-Kickback Statute, new government investigative powers and enhanced penalties for non-compliance;

    a new Medicare Part D coverage gap discount program, in which manufacturers must agree to offer 50% point-of-sale discounts off negotiated prices of applicable brand medicines to eligible

59


Table of Contents

      beneficiaries during their coverage gap period, as a condition for a manufacturer's medicines purchased outside a hospital setting to be covered under Medicare Part D;

    extension of a manufacturer's Medicaid rebate liability to covered medicines dispensed to individuals who are enrolled in Medicaid managed care organizations;

    expansion of eligibility criteria for Medicaid programs by, among other things, allowing states to offer Medicaid coverage to additional individuals and by adding new mandatory eligibility categories for certain individuals with income at or below 133% of the federal poverty level beginning in 2014, thereby potentially increasing a manufacturer's Medicaid rebate liability;

    expansion of the entities eligible for discounts under the Public Health Service pharmaceutical pricing program;

    the new requirements under the federal Open Payments program and its implementing regulations;

    a new requirement to annually report samples of medicines that manufacturers and distributors provide to physicians; and

    a new Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute to oversee, identify priorities in, and conduct comparative clinical effectiveness research, along with funding for such research.

        In addition, other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted since the PPACA was enacted. These changes include aggregate reductions to Medicare payments to providers of up to 2% per fiscal year, starting in 2013. On March 1, 2013, the President signed an executive order implementing the 2% Medicare payment reductions, and on April 1, 2013, these reductions went into effect. In January 2013, President Obama signed into law the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012, which, among other things, reduced Medicare payments to several providers and increased the statute of limitations period for the government to recover overpayments to providers from three to five years. These new laws may result in additional reductions in Medicare and other healthcare funding, which could have a material adverse effect on customers for any of our products, and, accordingly, our financial operations. Further, there have been multiple attempts through legislative action and legal challenge to repeal or amend the PPACA, and we cannot predict the impact that such a repeal or amendment would have on our business and operations.

        We expect that the PPACA, as well as other healthcare reform measures that may be adopted in the future, may result in more rigorous coverage criteria and in additional downward pressure on the price that we receive for any of our products. Any reduction in reimbursement from Medicare or other government-funded programs may result in a similar reduction in payments from private payors. The implementation of cost containment measures or other healthcare reforms may prevent us from being able to generate revenue, attain profitability or commercialize any of our products.

        Legislative and regulatory proposals have been made to expand post-approval requirements and restrict sales and promotional activities for prescription medicines. We cannot be sure whether additional legislative changes will be enacted, or whether the FDA regulations, guidance or interpretations will be changed, or what the impact of such changes on the marketing approvals of our product candidates, if any, may be. In addition, increased scrutiny by the U.S. Congress of the FDA's approval process may significantly delay or prevent marketing approval, as well as subject us to more stringent product labeling and post-marketing testing and other requirements.

A variety of risks associated with marketing any of our products internationally could hurt our business.

        We may seek regulatory approval for our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD and our other product candidates outside of the United States and, accordingly, we expect that we will

60


Table of Contents

be subject to additional risks related to operating in foreign countries if we obtain the necessary approvals, including:

    differing regulatory requirements in foreign countries;

    the potential for so-called parallel importing, which is what happens when a local seller, faced with high or higher local prices, opts to import goods from a foreign market with low or lower prices rather than buying them locally;

    unexpected changes in tariffs, trade barriers, price and exchange controls and other regulatory requirements;

    economic weakness, including inflation or political instability in particular foreign economies and markets;

    compliance with tax, employment, immigration and labor laws for employees living or traveling abroad;

    foreign taxes, including withholding of payroll taxes;

    foreign currency fluctuations, which could result in increased operating expenses and reduced revenues, and other obligations related to doing business in another country;

    difficulties staffing and managing foreign operations;

    workforce uncertainty in countries where labor unrest is more common than in the United States;

    potential liability under the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act or comparable foreign regulations;

    challenges enforcing our contractual and intellectual property rights, especially in foreign countries that do not respect and protect intellectual property rights to the same extent as the United States;

    production shortages resulting from any events affecting raw material supply or manufacturing capabilities abroad; and

    business interruptions resulting from geo-political actions, including war and terrorism.

        These and other risks associated with our potential international operations may compromise our ability to achieve or maintain profitability.

Governments outside the United States tend to impose strict price controls, which may adversely affect our revenue, if any.

        In some countries, particularly in 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 candidate. To obtain coverage and reimbursement or pricing approval in some countries, we may be required to conduct a clinical trial that compares the cost-effectiveness of any of our products to other available therapies. If reimbursement of any of our products is unavailable or limited in scope or amount, or if pricing is set at unsatisfactory levels, our business could be harmed, possibly materially.

If we fail to comply with environmental, health and safety laws and regulations, we could become subject to fines or penalties or incur costs that could harm our business.

        We are subject to numerous environmental, health and safety laws and regulations, including those governing laboratory procedures and the handling, use, storage, treatment and disposal of hazardous

61


Table of Contents

materials and wastes. Our operations involve the use of hazardous and flammable materials, including chemicals and biological materials. Our operations also produce hazardous waste products. We generally contract with third parties for the disposal of these materials and wastes. We cannot eliminate the risk of contamination or injury from these materials. In the event of contamination or injury resulting from our use of hazardous materials, we could be held liable for any resulting damages, and any liability could exceed our resources. We also could incur significant costs associated with civil or criminal fines and penalties for failure to comply with such laws and regulations.

        Although we maintain workers' compensation insurance to cover us for costs and expenses we may incur due to injuries to our employees resulting from the use of hazardous materials, this insurance may not provide adequate coverage against potential liabilities. We do not maintain insurance for environmental liability or toxic tort claims that may be asserted against us in connection with our storage or disposal of biological, hazardous or radioactive materials.

        In addition, we may incur substantial costs in order to comply with current or future environmental, health and safety laws and regulations. These current or future laws and regulations may impair our research, development or production efforts. Our failure to comply with these laws and regulations also may result in substantial fines, penalties or other sanctions.

RISKS RELATED TO EMPLOYEE MATTERS AND MANAGING OUR GROWTH

We rely heavily on the founder of Emmaus Medical, Yutaka Niihara, M.D., MPH, our Chairman and Chief Executive Officer. The loss of his services would have a material adverse effect upon us and our business and prospects.

        Our success depends, to a significant extent, upon the continued services of Yutaka Niihara, M.D., MPH, founder of Emmaus Medical and our Chairman and Chief Executive Officer. Since inception, we have been dependent upon Dr. Niihara, who was one of the initial patentees for the method we are utilizing in our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD. While Dr. Niihara and the rest of our executive officers are parties to confidentiality agreements that prevent them from soliciting our existing customers or disclosing information deemed confidential to us, we do not have any agreement with Dr. Niihara or any key members of management that would prohibit them from joining our competitors or forming competing companies. In addition, we do not maintain key man life insurance policies on any of our executive officers. If Dr. Niihara or any key management personnel resign to join a competitor or form a competing company, the loss of such personnel, together with the loss of any customers or potential customers due to such executive's departure, could materially and adversely affect our business and results of operations.

We are dependent on a technically trained workforce and an inability to retain or effectively recruit such employees could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

        Our ability to compete effectively depends largely on our ability to attract and retain certain key personnel, including our clinical, regulatory and scientific staff members. Industry demand for such skilled employees, however, exceeds the number of personnel available, and the competition for attracting and retaining these employees is intense. Because of this intense competition for skilled employees, we may be unable to retain our existing personnel or attract additional qualified employees to keep up with future business needs. If this should happen, our business, operating results and financial condition could be adversely affected.

        In addition, we intend to hire in-house marketing personnel to promote and market and sell our SCD and SBS treatment products to patients, physicians and treatment centers, and obtain the approval of insurance companies and healthcare payors for reimbursement of the cost of these treatments. We cannot assure you that we will be able to recruit and retain qualified personnel to

62


Table of Contents

perform these marketing functions. Our inability to hire and then retain such personnel and scientists could have a materially adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

The pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries are subject to rapid technological change, and if we fail to keep up with such change, our results of operations and financial condition could be adversely impacted.

        Biotechnology and related pharmaceutical technology have undergone and are subject to rapid and significant change. We expect that the technologies associated with biotechnology research and development will continue to develop rapidly. Our failure to keep pace with such rapid change could result in our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD and other product candidates becoming obsolete and we may be unable to recoup any expenses incurred with developing such products, which may adversely affect our future revenues and financial condition.

We expect to expand our product development, regulatory and marketing capabilities, and, as a result, we may encounter difficulties managing our growth, which could disrupt our operations.

        We expect to continue to grow, which could strain our managerial, operational, financial and other resources. With the completion of our Phase 3 clinical trial of our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD and the potential expansion of clinical-stage programs and in-licensing and acquisition of additional clinical-stage product candidates, we will be required to retain experienced personnel in the regulatory, clinical and medical areas over the next several years. Also, as our preclinical pipeline diversifies through the acquisition or in-licensing of new product candidates, we will need to hire additional scientific and other personnel in order to supplement our existing scientific expertise over the next several years.

        Our staff, financial resources, systems, procedures or controls may be inadequate to support our operations, and our management may be unable to take advantage of future market opportunities or manage successfully our relationships with third parties if we are unable to adequately manage our anticipated growth and the integration of new personnel. We may not be able on a timely and cost effective basis to identify, hire and retain any needed additional management, scientific or sales and marketing personnel to develop and implement our product development plans, conduct preclinical and clinical testing of our product candidates and, if they are approved by the FDA and other government regulators, commercialize them as products. In addition, we may not be able to successfully manage potential rapid growth with our current limited managerial, operational, and financial resources.

We may pursue future growth through strategic acquisitions and alliances which may not yield anticipated benefits and may adversely affect our operating results, financial condition and existing business.

        We may seek to grow in the future through strategic acquisitions and alliances in order to complement and expand our business. The success of our acquisition strategy will depend on, among other things:

    the availability of suitable acquisition and alliance candidates;

    competition from other companies for acquiring or forming alliances with available acquisition and alliance candidates;

    our ability to value any acquisition candidates or alliances accurately and negotiate favorable terms for any prospective acquisitions or alliances;

    the availability of funds to finance any such acquisitions or alliances;

    the ability to establish new informational, operational and financial systems to meet the needs of our business;

63


Table of Contents

    the ability to achieve anticipated synergies, including with respect to complementary products; and

    the availability of management resources to oversee the integration and operation of the acquired businesses.

        If we are not successful in integrating acquired businesses and completing acquisitions in the future, we may be required to reevaluate our acquisition and alliance strategy. We also may incur substantial expenses and devote significant management time and resources in seeking to complete acquisitions and alliances. Acquired businesses and alliances may fail to meet our performance expectations. If we do not achieve the anticipated benefits of an acquisition or alliance as rapidly as expected, or at all, investors or analysts may not perceive the same benefits of the acquisition or alliance as we do. If these risks materialize, our operating results, financial condition and existing business could be materially adversely affected.

RISKS RELATED TO OWNERSHIP OF OUR COMMON STOCK

There is no current trading market for our common stock, and we cannot predict when or if an established public trading market will develop.

        There is no market for shares of our common stock. An active trading market for our shares may never develop. The lack of an active market may impair your ability to sell your shares at the time you wish to sell them or at a price that you consider reasonable. The lack of an active market may also reduce the fair market value of your shares. Further, an inactive market may also impair our ability to raise capital by selling shares of our common stock and may impair our ability to enter into collaborations or acquire companies or products by using our shares of common stock as consideration.

Our principal stockholders are able to exert significant influence over matters submitted to stockholders for approval, and may be able to take action without the approval of other stockholders.

        As of December 31, 2015, our officers and directors controlled 36.5% of our issued and outstanding common stock, and our Chief Executive Officer controlled 33.8% of our issued and outstanding common stock. These controlling stockholders can exert significant influence in determining the outcome of corporate actions requiring stockholder approval and that otherwise control our business, including mergers, consolidations and the sale of all or substantially all of our assets, election of directors, and other significant corporate actions. These stockholders may also have the power to prevent or cause a change in control which, consequently, could adversely affect the value of our common stock. In addition, without the consent of these stockholders, we could be prevented from entering into transactions that could be beneficial to us. The interests of these stockholders may differ from the interests of our other stockholders, including the interest to retain Dr. Niihara as the Chief Executive Officer of the Company. Furthermore, our certificate of incorporation and bylaws do not prohibit the taking of stockholder action by written consent, and thus the stockholders holding a majority of our common stock may be able to take stockholder action without a full stockholder vote. For example, on April 24, 2015, Dr. Niihara delivered to us written consents purporting to amend our bylaws, increase the size of our board of directors and elect and appoint a number of new directors to our board. While we have not taken the position that these actions were effective, nothing prohibits our major stockholders from taking similar actions in the future. Any such action could adversely affect the value of our common stock.

The market price and trading volume of shares of our common stock may be volatile and you could lose all of your investment.

        When and if a market develops for our securities, the market price of our common stock could fluctuate significantly for many reasons, including reasons unrelated to our specific performance, such

64


Table of Contents

as reports by industry analysts, investor perceptions, share arbitrage, the exercise of options or warrants or the conversion of convertible notes or announcements by our competitors regarding their own performance, as well as general economic and industry conditions. For example, to the extent that other companies, whether large or small, within our industry experience declines in their share price, our share price may decline as well. Fluctuations in operating results or the failure of operating results to meet the expectations of public market analysts and investors may negatively impact the price of our securities. Quarterly operating results may fluctuate in the future due to a variety of factors that could negatively affect revenues or expenses in any particular quarter, including vulnerability of our business to a general economic downturn; changes in the laws that affect our products or operations; competition; compensation related expenses; application of accounting standards; and our ability to obtain and maintain all necessary government certifications and/or licenses to conduct our business. In addition, in situations where the market price of a company's shares may drop significantly, stockholders could institute securities class action lawsuits against the company. A lawsuit against us could cause us to incur substantial costs and could divert the time and attention of our management and other resources. In addition, the market price for securities of pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies historically has been volatile, and the securities markets have from time to time experienced significant price and volume fluctuations that are unrelated to the operating performance of particular companies. These broad market fluctuations may cause the market price of our common stock to decline substantially. Market price and volume volatility could cause you to lose part or all of your investment.

If securities or industry analysts do not publish research or reports or publish unfavorable research about our business, the price and trading volume of our common stock could decline.

        In the event a public trading market develops for our common stock, the price and trading volume of our common stock will depend in part on the research and reports that securities or industry analysts publish about us or our business. We do not currently have and may never obtain research coverage by securities and industry analysts. If no securities or industry analysts commence coverage of us, the trading price for our common stock and other securities would be negatively affected. In the event we obtain securities or industry analyst coverage, if one or more of the analysts who covers us downgrades our securities, the price of our securities would likely decline. If one or more of these analysts ceases to cover us or fails to publish regular reports on us, interest in the purchase of our common stock could decrease, which could cause the price and trading volume of our common stock to decline.

We have identified a material weakness in our internal control over financial reporting and we may be unable to develop, implement and maintain appropriate controls in future periods. If the material weakness is not remediated, or if after remediation we are unable to maintain appropriate controls, the accuracy and timing of our financial reporting may be adversely affected.

        We have identified a material weakness in our internal control over financial reporting and, as a result of such weakness, our management, with the participation of our Chief Executive Officer and Interim Chief Financial Officer, concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures and internal control over financial reporting were not effective as of December 31, 2015. The material weakness related to our not having adequate depth and sufficiency of human resources with the technical accounting principles generally accepted in the United States, or GAAP, expertise available in our accounting and finance department to appropriately identify, research, analyze and conclude upon the proper accounting treatment for complex or unusual transactions involving options, equities, and other financial instruments as well as to maintain effective controls over the completeness and accuracy of financial reporting for complex or unusual transactions. This and related events contributed to a delay in the filing of our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015.

65


Table of Contents

        Unless and until remediated, this material weakness could result in additional material misstatements to our interim or annual consolidated financial statements and disclosures that may not be prevented or detected on a timely basis. In addition, we may experience delay or be unable to meet our reporting obligations or to comply with SEC rules and regulations, which could result in investigation and sanctions by regulatory authorities. Management's assessment of internal controls over financial reporting may in the future identify additional weaknesses and conditions that need to be addressed in our internal control over financial reporting. Any failure to improve our disclosure controls and procedures and our internal control over financial reporting or to address identified weaknesses in the future, if they were to occur, could prevent us from maintaining accurate accounting records and discovering accounting errors and financial frauds. Any of these results could adversely affect our business and the value of our common stock.

We incur significant costs as a result of operating as a public company, and our management is required to devote substantial time to compliance efforts.

        As a public company, we incur significant legal, accounting and other expenses that we did not incur as a private company. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act and related SEC regulations have significantly increased the costs and risks associated with accessing the public markets and public reporting. We are required to comply with many of these rules, and would be required to comply with additional of these rules if our securities are listed on a stock exchange. Our management and other personnel need to devote a substantial amount of time and financial resources to comply with these requirements, as well any new requirements implemented by the SEC. Moreover, these rules and regulations increase our legal and financial compliance costs and will make some activities more time-consuming and costly and could lead to a diversion of management time and attention from revenue generating activities to compliance activities. We are currently unable to estimate these costs with any degree of certainty. These rules and regulations could also make it more difficult for us to attract and retain qualified persons to serve on our board of directors and board committees or as executive officers and more expensive for us to obtain director and officer liability insurance.

Our certificate of incorporation and bylaws and Delaware law may have anti-takeover effects that could discourage, delay or prevent a change in control, which may cause our stock price to decline.

        Our certificate of incorporation and bylaws and Delaware law could make it more difficult for a third party to acquire us, even if closing such a transaction would be beneficial to our stockholders. We are authorized to issue up to 20,000,000 shares of preferred stock. This preferred stock may be issued in one or more series, the terms of which may be determined at the time of issuance by our board of directors without further action by stockholders. The terms of any series of preferred stock may include voting rights (including the right to vote as a series on particular matters), preferences as to dividend, liquidation, conversion and redemption rights and sinking fund provisions. No preferred stock is currently outstanding. The issuance of any preferred stock could materially adversely affect the rights of the holders of our common stock, and therefore, reduce the value of our common stock. In particular, specific rights granted to future holders of preferred stock could be used to restrict our ability to merge with, or sell our assets to, a third party and thereby preserve control by the present management.

        Provisions of our certificate of incorporation and bylaws and Delaware law also could have the effect of discouraging potential acquisition proposals or making a tender offer or delaying or preventing a change in control, including changes a stockholder might consider favorable. Such provisions may also prevent or frustrate attempts by our stockholders to replace or remove our management. In particular, the certificate of incorporation and bylaws and Delaware law, as applicable, among other things:

    provide the board of directors with the ability to alter the bylaws without stockholder approval;

66


Table of Contents

    place limitations on the removal of directors;

    provide that vacancies on the board of directors may be filled by a majority of directors in office, although less than a quorum; and

    provide that stockholders must provide advance notice to nominate directors or submit proposals for consideration at stockholder meetings.

        These provisions are expected to discourage certain types of coercive takeover practices and inadequate takeover bids and to encourage persons seeking to acquire control of our company to first negotiate with our board of directors. These provisions may delay or prevent someone from acquiring or merging with us, which may cause the market price of our common stock to decline.

We are an "emerging growth company" and we may take advantage of reduced disclosure and governance requirements applicable to emerging growth companies, which could result in our common stock being less attractive to investors.

        We are an "emerging growth company," as defined in the Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act of 2012, or the JOBS Act, and we may choose to take advantage of certain exemptions from various reporting requirements that are applicable to other public companies that are not emerging growth companies including, but not limited to, not being required to comply with the auditor attestation requirements of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, reduced disclosure obligations regarding executive compensation in our periodic reports and proxy statements, and exemptions from the requirements of holding a non-binding advisory vote on executive compensation and stockholder approval of any golden parachute payments not previously approved. We cannot predict if investors will find our common stock less attractive if we choose to rely on these exemptions. If some investors find our common stock less attractive as a result, there may be a less active trading market for our common stock if one develops and our stock price may be more volatile. We may take advantage of these reporting exemptions until we are no longer an emerging growth company, which in certain circumstances could be for up to five years.

        Because of the exemptions from various reporting requirements provided to us as an "emerging growth company" we may be less attractive to investors and it may be difficult for us to raise additional capital as and when we need it. Investors may be unable to compare our business with other companies in our industry if they believe that our financial accounting is not as transparent as other companies in our industry. If we are unable to raise additional capital as and when we need it, our financial condition and results of operations may be materially and adversely affected.

        We will remain an "emerging growth company" until the earliest of:

    the last day of the first fiscal year in which our annual gross revenues exceed $1.0 billion,

    the date that we become a "large accelerated filer" as defined in Rule 12b-2 under the Exchange Act, which would occur if the market value of our shares that are held by non-affiliates exceeds $700 million as of the last business day of our most recently completed second fiscal quarter,

    the date on which we have issued more than $1.0 billion in nonconvertible debt during the preceding three-year period, and

    the last day of our fiscal year containing the fifth anniversary of the date on which shares of our common stock become publicly traded in the U.S.

67


Table of Contents

We do not foresee paying cash dividends in the foreseeable future and, as a result, our investors' sole source of gain, if any, will depend on capital appreciation, if any.

        We do not plan to declare or pay any cash dividends on our shares of common stock in the foreseeable future and currently intend to retain any future earnings for funding growth. As a result, investors should not rely on an investment in our securities if they require the investment to produce dividend income. Capital appreciation, if any, of our shares may be investors' sole source of gain for the foreseeable future. Moreover, investors may not be able to resell their shares of our common stock at or above the price they paid for them.

ITEM 1B.    UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS

        Not applicable.

ITEM 2.    PROPERTIES

        We lease office space under operating leases from unrelated entities. The rent expense during the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014 amounted to $492,919 and $277,866, respectively.

        We lease approximately 13,329 square feet of office space for our headquarters in Torrance, California, at a base rental of $32,509 per month. The lease relating to this space expires on March 31, 2019. We lease an additional office suite in Torrance, California at a base rent of $1,960 per month for 1,400 square feet. The lease relating to this space expires on February 19, 2017.

        In addition, EM Japan leases 1,322 total square feet of office space in Tokyo, Japan and 1,313 square feet of office space in Osaka, Japan. The leases relating to these spaces will expire on September 30, 2016 and February 19, 2018, respectively. We believe our existing facilities are adequate for our operations at this time and we expect to be able to renew the office lease for our headquarters on commercially reasonable terms. In the event we determine that we require additional space to accommodate expansion of our operations, we believe suitable facilities will be available in the future on commercially reasonable terms as needed.

ITEM 3.    LEGAL PROCEEDINGS

Litigation with AFH Advisory

        From July 2012 until May 2015, the Company was engaged in litigation with AFH Holding and Advisory, LLC ("AFH Advisory"), which was the sole stockholder of AFH Acquisition IV, Inc. immediately prior to its combination with Emmaus Medical pursuant to the Merger in May 2011. On June 27, 2013, the Superior Court of the State of Delaware issued an order implementing a partial summary judgment in favor of the Company which led to the cancellation of 2,504,249 shares of the Company held by AFH Advisory and related parties. On May 4, 2015, a settlement was entered with the Superior Court of the State of Delaware dismissing all remaining claims in the case with prejudice, thus removing any right to appeal. The settlement called for the exchange of documents and financial records, and for AFH Advisory to assign and transfer to the Company 150,000 shares of stock of Targeted Medical. In addition, the parties to the litigation dismissed all remaining claims with prejudice. The Parties agree that there are no further obligations due under any of the Letters of Intent. The Letters of Intent are considered rescinded, nulled, and voided.

Section 225 Litigation

        As disclosed in the Company's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2015, on April 28, 2015, Dr. Yutaka Niihara, the Company's President, Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board, filed a complaint (the "Complaint") in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware (the "Court") under Section 225 of the Delaware General Corporation Law against Tracey C.

68


Table of Contents

Doi, Henry A. McKinnell, Jr., Akiko M. Miyashita, Phillip M. Satow and Mayuran Sriskandarajah, each of whom was a member of the Board as of April 24, 2015 (together with Dr. Niihara, the "Incumbent Directors"), Sarissa Capital Management LP ("Sarissa") and T.R. Winston & Company, LLC ("TRW"), as defendants, and the Company as nominal defendant. The Complaint requested that the Court issue an order declaring, among other things, that:

    Dr. Niihara validly delivered stockholder consents to the Company to effect certain amendments to the Company's bylaws and to elect certain additional individuals to the Company's Board of Directors, and that such stockholder consents are effective;

    the Company's bylaws were validly amended as provided in the stockholder consents;

    Blair A. Contratto, S. Steve Lee, Willis C. Lee, Masaharu Osato, M.D., Lan T. Tran, David J. Wohlberg and Ian Zwicker were validly elected as directors of the Company;

    any actions taken by the Incumbent Directors since April 24, 2015 are invalid and void; and

    the actions purportedly taken by written consent were not prohibited by the terms of the Agreement, dated as of September 11, 2013, among the Company, Dr. Niihara, Sarissa and TRW (the "Designation Agreement").

        Along with the Complaint, Dr. Niihara filed a motion for an order maintaining the status quo and a motion for expedited proceedings.

        On April 29, 2015, following their resignations from our Board, Ms. Doi and Ms. Miyashita were dismissed from the action. On May 22, 2015, Mr. Satow and Dr. McKinnell were dismissed from the action. On July 31, 2015, Mr. Sriskandarajah was dismissed from the action.

        On June 10, 2015, the Delaware court issued a Status Quo Order providing that, until conclusion of the case, the Board would be comprised of Dr. Niihara, Mr. Sriskandarajah, Mr. Satow and Dr. McKinnell; provided, however, that nothing in the Status Quo Order would prevent voluntary resignations from the Board, and no director could be seated or replaced pursuant to the Designation Agreement except upon 10 calendar days written notice to the parties in this Action by the party seeking to exercise its right to designate such director. The Status Quo Order also specified certain corporate actions that would require approval of all directors voting on an action.

        On June 15, 2015, Mr. Satow tendered his resignation from the Board of the Company, effective upon the election and qualification of Dr. Scott Gottlieb as the designee of TRW pursuant to the Designation Agreement. This resignation, as well as Dr. Gottlieb's election to the Board of the Company, became effective on August 3, 2015.

        On November 19, 2015, counsel to Dr. Niihara, Sarissa and the Company filed a joint stipulation to dismiss the action. In connection therewith, on November 19, 2015, the Company, Dr. Niihara and Sarissa entered into Amendment No. 1 (the "Amendment") to the Designation Agreement. The Amendment terminates the Designation Agreement with respect to the Company, Dr. Niihara and Sarissa, and provides that those parties shall have no further rights or obligations to each other under the Designation Agreement. Furthermore, each of the Company, Sarissa and Dr. Niihara waived all rights each has ever had, has or may have under the Designation Agreement against each other, and released each other from any and all obligations each has ever had, has or may have to the other under the Designation Agreement. As a result of the Amendment, Sarissa no longer has the right to designate any members of the Company's Board, nor does it have the right to approve any actions as were set forth in the Designation Agreement. On November 20, 2015, the Court entered the dismissal, at which time the Status Quo Order ceased to be in effect.

69


Table of Contents

        In connection with the Amendment, on November 19, 2015, Mr. Sriskandarajah tendered his resignation from the Board, effective immediately. The Company has agreed to indemnify Mr. Sriskandarajah for $43,476 in attorneys' fees and expenses he incurred in defense of this action.

        Except as described above, we are not aware of any legal proceedings in which any of our directors, nominees, officers or affiliates, any owner of record or beneficially of more than five percent of any class of our voting securities, or any associate of any such director, nominee, officer, affiliate, or securityholder is a party adverse to us or any of our subsidiaries or has a material interest adverse to us or any of our subsidiaries.

ITEM 4.    MINE SAFETY DISCLOSURES

        Not applicable.

70


Table of Contents


PART II

ITEM 5.    MARKET FOR REGISTRANT'S COMMON STOCK, RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES

Market Information

        There is no established public trading market for our common stock, and our shares of common stock are not currently listed or quoted for trading on any national securities exchange or national quotation system.

Holders

        As of May 10, 2016, we had 428 stockholders of record and 28,563,478 shares of our common stock were issued and outstanding.

Dividends

        We do not expect to declare or pay any cash dividends on our common stock in the foreseeable future, and we currently intend to retain future earnings, if any, to finance the expansion of our business. The decision whether to pay cash dividends on our common stock will be made by our board of directors in its discretion and will depend on our financial condition, operating results, capital requirements and other factors that the board of directors considers relevant. We did not pay cash dividends in the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014.

Recent Sales of Unregistered Securities

        In October 2015, the Company issued a convertible note to Jung Soo Kim, a third party, in the principal amount of $700,000, that bears interest at 10% per annum and matures on the two-year anniversary date of the note. If the Company completes a qualified public offering, the principal amount of the note will automatically convert into shares of the Company's common stock at a conversion price equal to 80% of the initial public offering price in the qualified public offering. At or after the first anniversary of the loan date, the holder of the note may convert some or all of the unpaid principal amount thereof, including unpaid accrued interest, into shares of the Company's common stock at a conversion price of $4.50 per share.

        In October 2015, the Company issued a convertible note to Charles and Kimxa Stark in the principal amount of $20,000, that bears interest at 10% per annum and matures on the two-year anniversary date of the note. Charles Stark is an officer of the Company. If the Company completes a qualified public offering, the principal amount of the note will automatically convert into shares of the Company's common stock at a conversion price equal to 80% of the initial public offering price in the qualified public offering. At or after the first anniversary of the loan date, the holder of the note may convert some or all of the unpaid principal amount thereof, including unpaid accrued interest, into shares of the Company's common stock at a conversion price of $4.50 per share.

        In November 2015, the Company issued a convertible note to Yutaka and Soomi Niihara in the principal amount of $200,000, that bears interest at 10% per annum and matures on the two-year anniversary date of the note. Yukata Niihara is an officer of the Company. If the Company completes a qualified public offering, the principal amount of the note will automatically convert into shares of the Company's common stock at a conversion price equal to 80% of the initial public offering price in the qualified public offering. At or after the first anniversary of the loan date, the holder of the note may convert some or all of the unpaid principal amount thereof, including unpaid accrued interest, into shares of the Company's common stock at a conversion price of $4.50 per share.

71


Table of Contents

        In December 2015, the Company issued a convertible note to Yoshikazu Nemoto, a third party, in the principal amount of $30,145, that bears interest at 10% per annum and matures on the two-year anniversary date of the note. If the Company completes a qualified public offering, the principal amount of the note will automatically convert into shares of the Company's common stock at a conversion price equal to 80% of the initial public offering price in the qualified public offering. At or after the first anniversary of the loan date, the holder of the note may convert some or all of the unpaid principal amount thereof, including unpaid accrued interest, into shares of the Company's common stock at a conversion price of $4.50 per share.

        In December 2015, the Company issued a convertible note to Takayasu Takemoto, a third party, in the principal amount of $82,305, that bears interest at 10% per annum and matures on the two-year anniversary date of the note. If the Company completes a qualified public offering, the principal amount of the note will automatically convert into shares of the Company's common stock at a conversion price equal to 80% of the initial public offering price in the qualified public offering. At or after the first anniversary of the loan date, the holder of the note may convert some or all of the unpaid principal amount thereof, including unpaid accrued interest, into shares of the Company's common stock at a conversion price of $4.50 per share.

        In December 2015, the Company issued a convertible note to Tamiko Matsuo, a third party, in the principal amount of $57,613, that bears interest at 10% per annum and matures on the two-year anniversary date of the note. If the Company completes a qualified public offering, the principal amount of the note will automatically convert into shares of the Company's common stock at a conversion price equal to 80% of the initial public offering price in the qualified public offering. At or after the first anniversary of the loan date, the holder of the note may convert some or all of the unpaid principal amount thereof, including unpaid accrued interest, into shares of the Company's common stock at a conversion price of $4.50 per share.

        In December 2015, the Company issued a convertible note to Yuki Takemoto, a third party, in the principal amount of $41,152, that bears interest at 10% per annum and matures on the two-year anniversary date of the note. If the Company completes a qualified public offering, the principal amount of the note will automatically convert into shares of the Company's common stock at a conversion price equal to 80% of the initial public offering price in the qualified public offering. At or after the first anniversary of the loan date, the holder of the note may convert some or all of the unpaid principal amount thereof, including unpaid accrued interest, into shares of the Company's common stock at a conversion price of $4.50 per share.

        In October, 2015, holder of our warrants exercised her rights to purchase 7,667 shares of common stock on a cashless basis. As a result of this cashless exercises, we issued 2,471 shares of our common stock to the holder of this warrants and withheld issuing 5,196 shares of our common stock in satisfaction of the exercise price under the warrants. We relied on the exemption from registration provided by Section 3(a)(9) of the Securities Act to effect this issuance.

        In November 2015, holders of our warrants exercised their rights to purchase 101,168 shares of common stock on a cashless basis. As a result of these cashless exercise, we issued 32,604 shares of our common stock to the holders of this warrants and withheld issuing 68,564 shares of our common stock in satisfaction of the exercise price under the warrants. We relied on the exemption from registration provided by Section 3(a)(9) of the Securities Act to effect these issuances.

        Except as explicitly noted above, all such securities were issued in reliance upon the exemption from registration provided by Section 4(a)(2) of the Securities Act. These securities qualified for exemption under Section 4(a)(2) of the Securities Act because the issuance of securities by the Company did not involve a "public offering." The issuance was not a public offering based upon the following factors: (i) a limited number of securities were issued to a limited number of offerees; (ii) there was no public solicitation; (iii) each offeree was an "accredited investor" as such term is

72


Table of Contents

defined by Rule 501 under the Securities Act; and (iv) the investment intent of the offerees. No underwriters were used in connection with such sales of unregistered securities.

Additional Information

        Copies of our annual reports, quarterly reports, current reports, and any amendments to those reports, are available free of charge on the Internet at www.sec.gov and on our website at www.emmausmedical.com (which is not incorporated by reference herein). All statements made in any of our filings, including all forward-looking statements, are made as of the date of the document in which the statement is included, and we do not assume or undertake any obligation to update any of those statements or documents unless we are required to do so by law.

ITEM 6.    SELECTED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL DATA

        Not required for a smaller reporting company.

ITEM 7.    MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

Forward-Looking Statements

        The following discussion of our financial condition and results of operations should be read in conjunction with our financial statements and the related notes, and the other financial information included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. This discussion contains forward-looking statements based upon current expectations that involve risks and uncertainties. Our actual results may differ materially from those anticipated in these forward looking statements as a result of various factors, including those set forth under "Risk Factors" and "Cautionary Statement Regarding Forward-Looking Statements" or in other parts of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Company Overview

        We are a biopharmaceutical company engaged in the discovery, development and commercialization of innovative treatments and therapies primarily for rare and orphan diseases. We are initially focusing our product development efforts on sickle cell disease, or SCD, a genetic disorder and a significant unmet medical need. Our lead product candidate is an oral pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment that demonstrated positive clinical results in our completed Phase 3 clinical trial for sickle cell anemia and sickle ß 0 -thalassemia, two of the most common forms of SCD.

        We are in the process of preparing a new drug application, or NDA, for submission to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, or FDA, with respect to this product candidate. If the FDA accepts our submission and approves this NDA, we will be authorized to market in the United States our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD patients who are at least five years old.

        We plan to market our L-glutamine treatment in the United States, if approved, by either strategic partnership or by building our own targeted sales force of approximately 30 sales representatives. We intend to utilize strategic partnerships to market our treatment in the rest of the world. L-glutamine for the treatment of SCD has received Fast Track designation from the FDA as well as Orphan Drug designation from both the FDA and the European Commission, or EC.

        We have extensive experience in the field of SCD, including the development, outsourced manufacturing and conduct of clinical trials of our prescription grade L-glutamine product candidate for the treatment of SCD. Our Chief Executive Officer, Yutaka Niihara, M.D., MPH, is a leading hematologist in the field of SCD. Dr. Niihara is licensed to practice medicine in both the United States and Japan and has been actively engaged in SCD research and the care of patients with SCD for over 20 years, primarily at the University of California Los Angeles and the Los Angeles Biomedical

73


Table of Contents

Research Institute, or LA BioMed, a nonprofit biomedical research institute at Harbor UCLA Medical Center.

        To a lesser extent, we are also engaged in the marketing and sale of NutreStore L-glutamine powder for oral solution, which has received FDA approval, as a treatment for short bowel syndrome, or SBS, in patients receiving specialized nutritional support when used in conjunction with a recombinant human growth hormone that is approved for this indication. Our indirect wholly owned subsidiary, Newfield Nutrition Corporation, referred to as Newfield Nutrition, sells L-glutamine as a nutritional supplement under the brand name AminoPure through retail stores in multiple states in the United States and via importers and distributors in Japan, Taiwan and South Korea. Since inception, we have generated minimal revenues from the sale and promotion of NutreStore and AminoPure.

        In May 2006, we formed Newfield Nutrition, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Emmaus Medical, Inc., referred to as Emmaus Medical, that distributes L-glutamine as a nutritional supplement under the brand name AminoPure.

        In October 2010, we formed Emmaus Medical Japan, Inc., referred to as EM Japan, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Emmaus Medical, that markets and sells AminoPure in Japan and other countries in Asia. EM Japan also manages our distributors in Japan and may also import other medical products in the future.

        In November 2011, we formed Emmaus Medical Europe, Ltd., referred to as EM Europe, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Emmaus Medical, whose primary focus is expanding our business in Europe.

        Our corporate structure is illustrated as follows:

GRAPHIC

        Emmaus Medical, LLC was organized on December 20, 2000. In October 2003, Emmaus Medical, LLC undertook a reorganization and merged with Emmaus Medical, which was originally incorporated in September 2003.

        Pursuant to an Agreement and Plan of Merger dated April 21, 2011, which we refer to as the Merger Agreement, by and among us, AFH Merger Sub, Inc., our wholly-owned subsidiary, which we refer to as AFH Merger Sub, AFH Advisory and Emmaus Medical, Emmaus Medical merged with and

74


Table of Contents

into AFH Merger Sub on May 3, 2011 with Emmaus Medical continuing as the surviving entity, which we refer to as the Merger. Upon the closing of the Merger, we changed our name from "AFH Acquisition IV, Inc." to "Emmaus Holdings, Inc." Subsequently, on September 14, 2011, we changed our name from "Emmaus Holdings, Inc." to "Emmaus Life Sciences, Inc."

        Our future capital requirements are substantial and may increase beyond our current expectations depending on many factors, including, but not limited to: the duration and results of the clinical trials for our various product candidates going forward; unexpected delays or developments when seeking regulatory approvals; the time and cost in preparing, filing, prosecuting, maintaining and enforcing patent claims; current and future unexpected developments encountered in implementing our business development and commercialization strategies; the outcome of litigation in which we are currently engaged or may become engaged in the future; and further arrangements, if any, with collaborators.

        Until we can generate a sufficient amount of product revenue, future cash requirements are expected to be financed through public or private equity offerings, debt financings or corporate collaboration and licensing arrangements. As of December 31, 2015, our accumulated deficit is $84.8 million and we had cash and cash equivalents of $0.5 million. Since inception we have had minimal revenues and have been required to rely on funding from sales of equity securities and borrowings from officers and stockholders. Currently, we estimate we will need approximately $1.7 million to submit a NDA to the FDA for our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD. We also intend to conduct a confirmatory study of our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD and are in the process of finalizing the study design.

        We also own a minority interest of less than 1% in CellSeed, Inc., a Japanese company listed on the Tokyo Stock Exchange, which is engaged in research and development of regenerative medicine products and the manufacture and sale of temperature-responsive cell culture equipment. In collaboration with CellSeed, we are engaged in research and development of cell sheet engineering regenerative medicine products.

Financial Overview

Revenue

        Since our inception in 2000, we have had limited revenue from the sale of NutreStore, an FDA-approved prescription drug to treat short bowel syndrome, or SBS, and AminoPure, a nutritional supplement. We have funded operations principally through the private placement of equity securities and debt financings. Our operations to date have been primarily limited to staffing, licensing and promoting products for SBS, outsourcing distribution and sales activities, developing and sponsoring clinical trials of our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD, manufacturing products and maintaining and improving our patent portfolio.

        Currently, we generate revenue through the sale of NutreStore L-glutamine powder for oral solution as a treatment for SBS as well as AminoPure, a nutritional supplement. Pursuant to the exclusive sublicense agreement for US Patent No. 5,288,703, or SBS Patent, we are required to pay an annual royalty equal to 10% of adjusted gross sales of NutreStore to CATO Holding Company, or CATO. We made royalty payments to CATO in the amount of $6,501 in June 2014. Management expects that any revenues generated from the sale of NutreStore and AminoPure will fluctuate from quarter to quarter based on the timing of orders and the amount of product sold.

Cost of Goods Sold

        Cost of goods sold includes the raw materials, packaging, shipping and distribution costs of NutreStore and AminoPure.

75


Table of Contents

Research and Development Expenses

        Research and development costs consist of expenditures for new products and technologies, which primarily involve fees paid to the contract research organization, or CRO that conducts the clinical trials of our product candidates, payroll-related expenses, study site payments, consultant fees, and activities related to regulatory filings, manufacturing development costs and other related supplies. The costs of later stage clinical studies, such as Phase 2 and 3 trials, are generally higher than those of earlier stages of development, such as preclinical studies and Phase 1 trials. This is primarily due to the increased size, expanded scope, patient related healthcare and regulatory compliance costs, and generally longer duration of later stage clinical studies.

        The most significant clinical trial expenditures are related to the CRO costs and the payments to study sites. The contract with the CRO is based on time and material expended, whereas the study site agreements are based on per patient costs as well as other pass-through costs, including, but not limited to, start-up costs and institutional review board fees. The financial terms of these agreements are subject to negotiation and vary from contract to contract and may result in uneven payment flows. Payments under some of these contracts depend on factors such as the successful enrollment of patients and the completion of clinical trial milestones.

        Future research and development expenses will depend on any new product candidates or technologies that we may introduce into our research and development pipeline. In addition, we cannot forecast with any degree of certainty which product candidates may be subject to future collaborations, when such arrangements will be secured, if at all, and to what degree, if any, such arrangements would affect our development plans and capital requirements. We currently estimate that we will need an additional $1.7 million to submit a NDA to the FDA for our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD. Our current cash burn rate is approximately $0.6 million per month. We also intend to conduct a confirmatory study of our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD and are in the process of finalizing the study design.

        At this time, due to the inherently unpredictable nature of the process for developing drugs, biologics and cell-based therapies and the interpretation of the regulatory requirements, we are unable to estimate with any degree of certainty the amount of costs which will be incurred in obtaining FDA approval of our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD and the continued development of our other preclinical and clinical programs. Clinical development timelines, the probability of success and development costs can differ materially from expectations and can vary widely. These and other risks and uncertainties relating to product development are described in this Annual Report on Form 10-K under the headings "Risk Factors—Risks Related to Development of our Product Candidates," "Risk Factors—Risks Related to our Reliance on Third Parties," and "Risk Factors—Risks Related to Regulatory Approval of our Product Candidates and Other Legal Compliance Matters."

        We estimate that the cost to us to develop in the United States corneal cell sheet products based on Cultured Autologous Oral Mucosal Epithelial Cell-Sheets, or CAOMECS, technology will be approximately $3.0 million, in addition to any license fees that may be payable. This estimate includes the anticipated cost of obtaining FDA approval for the corneal cell sheets and assumes that we will need the FDA to approve a Biologic License Application, or BLA, for the corneal cell sheets, rather than a NDA. We estimate that we will need another $2.4 million to commercialize any approved products based on corneal cell sheet technology.

        In addition, we estimate that we will need $2.5 million for research related to other cell sheet applications and to build a current Good Manufacturing Practices, or cGMP, laboratory to establish the infrastructure and production capabilities related to regenerative medicine products. At this time, we do not plan to incur any research and development costs for our NutreStore and AminoPure products.

76


Table of Contents

General and Administrative Expenses

        General and administrative expenses consist principally of salaries and related costs for personnel in executive, finance, business development, information technology, marketing, and legal functions. Other general and administrative expenses include share-based compensation, facility costs, patent filing costs, and professional fees for legal, consulting, auditing and tax services. Inflation has not had a material impact on our general and administrative expenses over the past two years.

Environmental Expenses

        The cost of compliance with environmental laws has not been material over the past two years and any such costs are included in general and administrative costs.

Inventories

        Inventories consist of finished goods and work-in-process and are valued based on a first-in, first-out basis and at the lower of cost or market value. All of the purchases of raw materials during 2015 and 2014 were from one vendor.

Critical Accounting Policies

        Management's discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations is based on our financial statements, which have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States, or GAAP. 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 these estimates and judgments, including those described below. We base our estimates on our historical experience and on various other assumptions that we believe to be reasonable under the present circumstances. These estimates and assumptions form the basis for making judgments about the carrying values of assets and liabilities that are not readily apparent from other sources. Actual results may differ materially from these estimates.

        While our significant accounting policies are more fully described in Note 2 to our consolidated financial statements which are provided at the end of this Annual Report on Form 10-K, we believe that the following accounting policies are the most critical to assist you in fully understanding and evaluating our reported financial results and affect the more significant judgments and estimates that we use in the preparation of our financial statements.

Notes Payable, Convertible Notes Payable and Warrants

        From time to time, we obtain financing in the form of notes payable and/or notes with detachable warrants, some of which are convertible into shares of our common stock and some of which are issued to related parties. We analyze all of the terms of our convertible notes and notes issued with warrants to determine the appropriate accounting treatment, including determining whether conversion features are required to be bifurcated and treated as a discount, allocation of fair value of the issuance to the debt instrument, detachable stock purchase warrant, and any beneficial conversion features, and the applicable classification of the convertible notes payable and warrants as debt, derivative liabilities, equity or temporary equity (mezzanine).

        We allocate the proceeds from the issuance of a debt instrument with detachable stock purchase warrants to the two elements based on the relative fair values of the debt instrument without the warrants and of the warrants themselves at the time of issuance. We account for the portion of the proceeds allocated to warrants in additional paid-in capital and the remaining proceeds are allocated to the debt instrument. The allocation to warrants results in a discount to notes payable which is amortized using the effective interest method to interest expense over the expected term of the note.

77


Table of Contents

We also include the intrinsic value of the embedded conversion feature of convertible notes payable in the discount to notes payable, which is amortized and charged to interest expense over the expected term of the note.

        We also estimate the total fair value of any beneficial conversion feature and accompanying warrants in allocating debt proceeds. The proceeds allocated to the beneficial conversion feature are determined by taking the estimated fair value of shares issuable under the convertible notes less the fair value of the number of shares that would be issued if the conversion rate equaled the fair value of our common stock as of the date of issuance. In situations where the debt includes both a beneficial conversion feature and a warrant, the proceeds are allocated to the warrants and beneficial conversion feature based on the pro-rata fair value. We use the Black Scholes-Merton option pricing model to determine the fair value of our warrants.

        Notes payable to related parties and interest expense and accrued interest to related parties are separately identified in our consolidated financial statements. We also disclose significant terms of all transactions with related parties.

Share-based Compensation

        We recognize compensation cost for share-based compensation awards during the service term of the recipients of the share-based awards. The fair value of share-based awards is calculated using the Black-Scholes-Merton pricing model. The Black-Scholes-Merton model requires subjective assumptions regarding future stock price volatility and expected time to exercise, which greatly affect the calculated values. The expected term of awards granted is calculated using the simplified method allowed under SEC Staff Accounting Bulletin Nos. 107 and 110. The risk-free rate selected to value any particular grant is based on the U.S. Treasury rate that corresponds to the vesting period of the grant effective as of the date of the grant. The expected volatility is based on the historical volatility of the common stock of comparable publicly traded companies. These factors could change, affecting the determination of stock-based awards expense in future periods.

Fair Value of Common Stock

        We are required to periodically estimate the fair value of our common stock when issuing share-based awards and accounting for share-based compensation expense. The fair value of the common stock underlying our share based awards was determined on each grant date by our board of directors, with the assistance of management and an independent third-party valuation expert. We considered multiple approaches to valuing our common stock. The Probability Weighted Expected Return Method, or PWERM, and the option pricing method were selected as the methods to allocate the enterprise value to the common stock. PWERM requires the projection of several likely scenarios and the determination of the future value of equity within different scenarios. For the scenarios analyzed, a Market Approach was used to derive the value of equity for two liquidity event scenarios and for a staying private scenario. In applying the Market Approach we relied on data of actual transactions that have occurred in our industry, more specifically orphan drug companies and pharmaceutical companies in Phase 3. Using PWERM, shares were valued upon the probability-weighted present value of expected future net cash flows, considering various future outcomes available to the company, discount rate as determined using the capital asset pricing model, as well as the rights of each share class. We then applied a probability weight to the value per share under each scenario and summed the resulting weighted values per share to estimate the fair value per share of our common stock. The majority of the weighting was applied to the liquidity event scenarios which relied on market transactions with similar type companies. We also apply a discount for lack of marketability of our common stock, as it is not freely traded in public markets.

78


Table of Contents

        The assumptions underlying these valuations represent management's best estimates, which involve inherent uncertainties and the application of significant levels of management judgment. As a result, if factors or expected outcomes change and we use significantly different assumptions or estimates, our accounting for share-based awards could be materially different.

        In estimating the fair value of our common stock, our board of directors exercised reasonable judgment and considered a range of objective and subjective factors, including:

    independent third-party valuation;

    recent arm's length transactions involving the sale of common stock, if any;

    progress of our research and development efforts;

    our operating results and financial condition, including our levels of available capital resources;

    our stages of development and material risks related to our business;

    the achievement of enterprise milestones, including entering into collaboration or license agreements and our progress in clinical trials;

    the valuation of publicly-traded companies in the life sciences and biotechnology sectors, as well as recently completed mergers and acquisitions of peer companies;

    equity market conditions affecting comparable public companies;

    issuance of new convertible notes, although not grandfathered refinanced notes;

    the likelihood of achieving a liquidity event for the shares of common stock, such as an initial public offering, sale, licensing or other strategic transaction, given prevailing market and biotechnology sector conditions; and

    the illiquid nature of our common stock.

Fair Value Measurements

        We define fair value as the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. We measure fair value under a framework that provides a fair value hierarchy that prioritizes the inputs to valuation techniques used to measure fair value. The hierarchy gives the highest priority to unadjusted quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities (Level 1 measurements) and the lowest priority to unobservable inputs (Level 3 measurements). The three levels of the fair value hierarchy are described as follows:

    Level 1: Inputs to the valuation methodology are unadjusted quoted prices for identical assets or liabilities in active markets that we have the ability to access.

    Level 2: Inputs to the valuation methodology include:

      Quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities in active markets;

      Quoted prices for identical or similar assets or liabilities in inactive markets;

      Inputs other than quoted prices that are observable for the asset or liability; and

      Inputs that are derived principally from or corroborated by observable market data by correlation or other means.

    If the asset or liability has a specified (contractual) term, the Level 2 input must be observable for substantially the full term of the asset or liability.

79


Table of Contents

    Level 3: Inputs to the valuation methodology are unobservable and significant to the fair value measurement.

        The asset's or liability's fair value measurement level within the fair value hierarchy is based on the lowest level of any input that is significant to the fair value measurement. Valuation techniques used need to maximize the use of observable inputs and minimize the use of unobservable inputs. The fair value assigned to marketable securities is determined by obtaining quoted prices on nationally recognized securities exchanges, and are classified as Level 1 investments at December 31, 2015 and 2014. The fair value of our debt instruments is not materially different from their carrying values as presented. The fair value of our convertible debt instruments was determined based on Level 2 inputs. The carrying value of the debt was discounted based on allocating proceeds to other financial instruments within the arrangement as discussed in Note 6 to our consolidated financial statements.

        We issued stock purchase warrants in conjunction with our September 2013 private placement and issued replacement warrants upon the exercise of certain of such warrants in June 2014 (see Note 7 to our consolidated financial statements). Warrants issued in September 2013 and June 2014 that were not exercised became exercisable on a cashless exercise basis in accordance with their terms on September 11, 2014 and June 10, 2015, respectively, and due to the exercisability of the cashless exercise feature, are classified as warrant derivative liabilities as of December 31, 2015 and 2014. Such warrants and replacement warrants are accounted for as liability classified warrants or warrant derivative liabilities whose fair market value is determined using Level 3 inputs. These inputs include expected term and expected volatility.

Marketable Securities

        Securities available-for-sale are recorded at cost and any increases or decreases in fair market value are recorded as unrealized gains or losses, net of taxes in accumulated other comprehensive income. We monitor these investments for impairment and make appropriate reductions in carrying values when necessary.

Revenue Recognition

        Revenue is recognized when there is persuasive evidence that an arrangement exists, delivery has occurred, the price is fixed and determinable and collection is reasonably assured. With our prior written approval, in certain situations, product is returnable only by our direct customers for a returned goods credit, for product that is expired, damaged in transit, or which is discontinued, withdrawn or recalled. We estimate our sales returns based upon our prior sales and return history and accrue a sales return allowance at the time of sale. We pay royalties on an annual basis based on existing license arrangements. These royalties are recognized as cost of goods sold upon sale of the products.

80


Table of Contents

Financial Overview

 
  Year Ended December 31,  
 
  2015   2014*  

REVENUES, Net

  $ 590,114   $ 500,679  

COST OF GOODS SOLD

    286,687     267,040  

GROSS PROFIT

    303,427     233,639  

OPERATING EXPENSES

             

Research and development

    1,579,112     1,966,254  

Selling

    428,643     668,862  

General and administrative

    9,419,683     12,555,266  

Impairment of intangible assets

    678,571      

    12,106,009     15,190,382  

LOSS FROM OPERATIONS

    (11,802,582 )   (14,956,743 )

OTHER INCOME (EXPENSE)

             

Realized gain on securities available-for-sale

    (48,709 )    

Gain on derecognition of accounts payable and settlement of litigation

    418,366      

Change in fair value of liability classified warrants

    661,000     (1,986,744 )

Change in fair value of warrant derivative liabilities

    1,202,000     548,000  

Warrant exercise inducement expense

        (3,523,000 )

Interest and other income

    102,676     246,379  

Interest expense

    (3,227,160 )   (2,082,541 )

    (891,827 )   (6,797,906 )

LOSS BEFORE INCOME TAXES

    (12,694,409 )   (21,754,649 )

INCOME TAXES

    3,564     3,665  

NET LOSS

    (12,697,973 )   (21,758,314 )

NET LOSS PER COMMON SHARE

  $ (0.44 ) $ (0.73 )

WEIGHTED AVERAGE COMMON SHARES OUTSTANDING

    28,958,580     29,846,962  

*
See Note 1 to our consolidated financial statements.

Years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014

        Net Losses.     Net losses were $12.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2015 compared to $21.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2014, representing a decrease of $9.1 million, or 42%. The decrease in losses is primarily a result of a $5.9 million decrease in other expenses, net and a $2.6 million decrease in operating expenses as discussed below. As of December 31, 2015, we had an accumulated deficit of approximately $84.8 million. Losses will continue as we advance our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD toward regulatory approval and potential commercialization. As a result, we anticipate that we will continue to incur net losses and be unprofitable for the foreseeable future. There can be no assurance that we will ever operate at a profit, even if all of our products are commercialized.

        Revenues, Net.     Net revenues increased $0.1 million, or 18%, to $0.6 million from $0.5 million for the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively. This was primarily due to a $0.1 million increase in our AminoPure® L-glutamine nutritional supplement product revenues attributable to an increase in sales volume from expansion of markets in Taiwan.

81


Table of Contents

        Cost of Goods Sold.     Cost of goods sold remained approximately the same at just under $0.3 million for the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014. Cost of goods sold includes costs for raw material, packaging, testing, shipping and costs related to scrapped inventory. All purchases of raw materials during the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014 were from one vendor.

        Research and Development Expenses.     Research and development expenses decreased $0.4 million, or 20%, to $1.6 million from $2.0 million for the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively. This decrease was primarily due to a $0.6 million decrease in external costs related to compiling and analyzing data from our Phase 3 clinical trial of our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD and other end of study reports. The decrease was partially offset by a $0.2 million increase in regulatory consulting costs relating to our NDA and a $0.1 million increase in spending on corneal cell sheets using CAOMECS technology. We expect such costs to continue in 2016 to support our submission of a NDA and to potentially increase depending upon future clinical trial activity.

        Selling Expenses.     Selling expenses decreased $0.3 million, or 36%, to $0.4 million from $0.7 million for the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively, primarily due to a $0.2 million reduction in advertising and promotional spending for AminoPure in 2015. Selling expenses included the costs for distribution, promotion, travel, tradeshows and exhibits related to NutreStore and AminoPure as well as the marketing expense for our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD.

        General and Administrative Expenses.     General and administrative expenses decreased $3.1 million, or 25%, to $9.4 million from $12.6 million for the years ended December 31, 2015 and December 31, 2014, respectively. The decrease was primarily due to a $2.8 million decrease in share-based compensation expenses due to expiration of the service period for certain options in prior periods, a $0.5 million decrease in professional fees and a $0.1 million decrease in publication expenses, partially offset by a $0.2 million increase in office rent expenses and a $0.3 million increase in insurance expenses.

        Impairment of Intangible Assets.     During the year ended December 31, 2015, we recorded an impairment loss on intangible assets of $0.7 million due to termination of our license of CAOMECS technology from CellSeed and uncertainty around the recoverability of the related license fees.

        Other Income and Expense.     Total other expense has decreased by $5.9 million, or 87%, to a $0.9 million expense from a $6.8 million expense for the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively. The decrease was primarily due to a decrease in non-recurring warrant exercise inducement expense of $3.5 million associated with replacement warrants we issued in June 2014, an aggregate increase in the change in fair value of liability classified warrants and warrant derivative liabilities of $3.3 million attributable to a decline in valuation of warrants in 2015 compared to a increase in valuation of warrants in 2014, an increase in non-recurring gain on derecognition of accounts payable and settlement of litigation of $0.4 million associated with the settlement of litigation with AFH Advisory in 2015, partially offset by a $1.1 million increase in interest expense as a result of increased debt.

        We anticipate that our operating expenses will increase for, among others, the following reasons:

    as a result of future debt repayments, increased payroll, expanded infrastructure and higher consulting, legal, accounting and investor relations costs, and director and officer insurance premiums associated with being a public company;

    to support research and development activities, which we expect to expand as development of our product candidates continues; and

    to build a sales and marketing team before we receive regulatory approval of our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD in anticipation of commercial launch.

82


Table of Contents

Liquidity and Capital Resources

        Based on our losses to date, anticipated future revenue and operating expenses, debt repayment obligations and cash and cash equivalents balance of $0.5 million as of December 31, 2015, we do not have sufficient operating capital for our business without raising additional capital. We incurred losses of $12.7 million and $21.8 million for the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively. We had an accumulated deficit at December 31, 2015 of $84.8 million. We anticipate that we will continue to incur net losses for the foreseeable future as we incur expenses for the commercialization of our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD, research costs for corneal cell sheets using CAOMECS technology and the expansion of corporate infrastructure, including costs associated with being a public reporting company. We have previously relied on private equity offerings, debt financings, and loans, including loans from related parties. As part of this effort, we have received various loans from officers, stockholders and other investors as discussed below. As of December 31, 2015, we had outstanding notes payable in an aggregate principal amount of $19.1 million, consisting of $7.4 million of non-convertible promissory notes and $11.7 million of convertible notes. Of the $19.1 million aggregate principal amount of notes outstanding as of December 31, 2015, approximately $14.1 million is either due on demand or will become due and payable within the next twelve months. Our failure to raise capital as and when needed would have a negative impact on our financial condition and our ability to pursue our business strategies, including the commercialization of our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD and the development in the United States of CAOMECS-based cell sheet technology.

        As described in Note 2 to our consolidated financial statements, we have had recurring operating losses, have a significant amount of notes payable and other obligations due within the next year and projected operating losses including the expected costs relating to the commercialization of our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD that exceed both the existing cash balances and cash expected to be generated from operations for at least the next year. In order to meet our expected obligations, management intends to raise additional funds through equity and debt financings and partnership agreements. In addition, we may seek to raise additional funds through collaborations with other companies or financing from other sources. As previously reported, the Company has filed a draft registration statement with the SEC with respect to an initial public offering. Additional funding may not be available in amounts or on terms which are acceptable to us, if at all. Due to the uncertainty of our ability to meet our current operating and capital expenses, there is substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern.

        In addition, we currently estimate that we will need an additional $1.7 million to submit a NDA to the FDA for our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD. Our current cash burn rate is approximately $0.6 million per month. We also intend to conduct a confirmatory study of our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD and are in the process of finalizing the study design.

        As discussed in this Annual Report on Form 10-K under the headings "Risk Factors—Risks Related to Development of our Product Candidates" above, if the FDA does not accept for filing our NDA for our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment or does not approve our NDA based on a single Phase 3 clinical trial, in each case unless we conduct a second Phase 3 clinical trial or confirmatory study, the potential approval of our product candidate will be delayed. Under these circumstances, we will incur additional costs to seek to convince the FDA that a confirmatory study is unnecessary for filing or approval, or to design and conduct a second Phase 3 clinical trial or confirmatory study, or both. If we conduct a second Phase 3 clinical trial or confirmatory study prior to the approval of our NDA, it is possible that the results of that trial will be less favorable than the results of our completed Phase 3 trial and further delay or complicate the approval process. The incurrence of additional costs may require us to raise additional capital, and any delay in obtaining approval of our product candidate will reduce the period during which we can market and sell our

83


Table of Contents

product with patent protection and may affect our ability to obtain other protections against competition.

        Our cash flow from operations is not adequate and our future capital requirements will be substantial and may increase beyond our current expectations depending on many factors including, but not limited to: the number, duration and results of the clinical trials for our various product candidates going forward; unexpected delays or developments in seeking regulatory approvals; the time and cost in preparing, filing, prosecuting, maintaining and enforcing patent claims; other unexpected developments encountered in implementing our business and commercialization strategies; the outcome of existing and any future litigation; and further arrangements, if any, with collaborators. We will rely, in part, on sales of AminoPure for revenues, which we expect will increase due to the expected growth in its export volume as we have added additional distributors and expanded retail markets outside of the United States. Revenues from NutreStore are currently not significant and we are unsure whether sales of NutreStore will increase.

        Until we can generate a sufficient amount of product revenue, future cash needs are expected to be financed through public or private equity offerings, debt financings, loans, including loans from related parties, or other sources, such as strategic partnership agreements and corporate collaboration and licensing arrangements.

        Until we can generate a sufficient amount of product revenue, there can be no assurance of the availability of such capital on terms acceptable to us (or at all).

        For the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, we borrowed varying amounts pursuant to convertible notes and non-convertible promissory notes, the majority of which have been issued to our officers and stockholders. As of December 31, 2015 and 2014, the aggregate principal amounts outstanding under convertible notes and non-convertible promissory notes totaled $19.1 million and $12.0 million, respectively. The convertible notes and non-convertible promissory notes bear interest at rates ranging from 0% to 11% and, except for the 2011 convertible note listed below in the principal amount of $0.5 million, are unsecured. Interest on 0% loans was imputed at the incremental borrowing rate of 6.25% per annum. The net proceeds of the loans were used for working capital.

84


Table of Contents

        The table below lists our outstanding notes payable as of December 31, 2015 and 2014, and the material terms of our outstanding borrowings:

Year
Issued
  Interest
Rate Range
  Term of
Notes
  Conversion
Price
  Principal
Outstanding
December 31,
2015
  Discount
Amount
December 31,
2015
  Carrying
Amount
December 31
2015
  Shares
Underlying
Notes
December 31,
2015
  Principal
Outstanding
December 31,
2014
  Discount
Amount
December 31,
2014
  Carrying
Amount
December 31,
2014
  Shares
Underlying
Notes
December 31,
2014
 
Notes payable  

2013

 

10%

 

Due on demand

 


 

$

830,000

 

$


 

$

830,000

 

 


 

$

1,030,000

 

$


 

$

1,030,000

 

 


 
2014   11%   Due on demand ~ 2 years       1,446,950         1,446,950         1,446,950         1,446,950      
2015   11%   Due on demand ~ 2 years       2,379,799         2,379,799                      
                $ 4,656,749       $ 4,656,749       $ 2,476,950   $   $ 2,476,950      
        Current       $ 4,656,749   $   $ 4,656,749       $ 1,643,615   $   $ 1,643,615      
        Long-term       $   $   $       $ 833,335   $   $ 833,335      

Notes payable—related party

 

2012

 

8% ~ 10%

 

Due on demand

 


 

$

626,730

 

$


 

$

626,730

 

 


 

$

656,730

 

$


 

$

656,730

 

 


 
2013   8%   Due on demand       50,000         50,000         50,000         50,000      
2014   11%   Due on demand ~ 2 years       240,308         240,308         252,165         252,165      
2015   10% ~ 11%   Due on demand ~ 2 years       1,849,266         1,849,266                      
                $ 2,766,304   $   $ 2,766,304       $ 958,895   $   $ 958,895      
        Current       $ 2,766,304   $   $ 2,766,304       $ 825,562   $   $ 825,562      
        Long-term       $   $   $       $ 133,333   $   $ 133,333      

Convertible notes payable

 

2010

 

6%

 

5 years

 

$3.05

 

$

2,000

 

$


 

$

2,000

 

 

656

 

$

74,000

 

$

3,195

 

$

70,805

 

 

24,248

 
2011   10%   5 years   $3.05     500,000         500,000     163,809     500,000         500,000     163,809  
2013   10%   2 years   $3.60     525,257         525,257     185,553     2,463,299     18,750     2,444,549     834,667  
2014   10%   Due on demand ~ 2 years   $3.05 ~$7.00     4,378,563     353,700     4,024,863     1,120,470     4,939,773     846,613     4,093,160     1,241,241  
2015   10%   Due on demand ~ 2 years   $3.50 ~$7.00     5,681,166     526,066     5,155,100     1,517,996                  
                $ 11,086,986   $ 879,766   $ 10,207,220     2,988,484   $ 7,977,072   $ 868,558   $ 7,108,514     2,263,965  
        Current       $ 6,358,698   $ 358,351   $ 6,000,347     1,762,849   $ 3,478,904   $ 21,945   $ 3,456,959     1,156,050  
        Long-term       $ 4,728,288   $ 521,415   $ 4,206,873     1,225,635   $ 4,498,168   $ 846,613   $ 3,651,555     1,107,915  

Convertible notes payable—related party

 

2012

 

10%

 

Due on demand

 

$3.30

 

$

298,000

 

$


 

$

298,000

 

 

108,505

 

$

373,000

 

$


 

$

373,000

 

 

121,461

 
2014   10%   2 years   $7.00                     200,000         200,000     30,187  
2015   10%   2 years   $4.50     320,000         320,000     72,354                  
                $ 618,000   $   $ 618,000     180,859   $ 573,000   $   $ 573,000     151,648  
        Current       $ 298,000   $   $ 298,000     108,505   $ 373,000   $   $ 373,000     121,461  
        Long-term       $ 320,000   $   $ 320,000     72,354   $ 200,000   $   $ 200,000     30,187  
        Grand Total       $ 19,128,039   $ 879,766   $ 18,248,273     3,169,343   $ 11,985,917   $ 868,558   $ 11,117,359     2,415,613  

85


Table of Contents

        Also, between June 6, 2014 and June 10, 2014 certain holders of warrants exercised their existing warrants to purchase an aggregate of 1,095,465 shares of common stock, the Exercised Warrants, for the cash exercise price of $3.50 per share, as a result of which we received aggregate exercise proceeds of $3.8 million. On June 10, 2014, based on an offer made to holders in connection with such exercises, we issued an aggregate of 1,095,465 replacement warrants to holders exercising private placement warrants, which replacement warrants have terms that are generally the same as the exercised warrants, including an expiration date of September 11, 2018 and an exercise price of $3.50 per share.

        Subsequent to December 31, 2015, we entered into financing arrangements as set forth below. The total amount of these loans amounted to $6.2 million.

Notes issued after December 31, 2015
  Principal
Amounts
  Annual
Interest
Rate
  Term of Notes   Conversion
Price
 

Convertible notes(1)

  $ 749,009   10%   Due on Demand up to 2 Years   $ 3.60  

Convertible notes(2)

    490,110   10%   2 years   $ 4.50  

Promissory note

    250,000   11%   6 months      

Promissory note(1)

    833,335   11%   Due on Demand      

Promissory notes—related party(1)

    263,843   11%   Due on Demand      

Promissory notes—related party

    529,700   10% ~ 11%   Due on Demand up to 2 Years      

Total

  $ 3,115,997                

(1)
Refinancings of prior notes already outstanding.

(2)
Includes mandatory conversion at the time of an initial public offering at a conversion price equal to 80% of the initial public offering price.

        Subsequent to the year ended December 31, 2015, the Company issued the following:

Common Shares Issued after December 31, 2015
  Principal
Amounts
  Number of
Shares Issued
 

Common shares

  $ 1,700,000     377,778  

Common shares—related party

    99,999     22,222  

Total

  $ 1,799,999     400,000  

        In April and May of 2016, we entered into secured loan agreements, pursuant to which we borrowed in the aggregate amount of $1,295,000 at a fixed interest rate of 10% per annum. These loans will mature on the earlier of the closing of a new debt financing (subject to certain exceptions, including refinancings of our outstanding convertible notes) or May 1, 2017. These loans are secured by all of our personal property and are personally guaranteed by Dr. Niihara and secured by certain of his real property. Furthermore, the loan agreements contain certain negative covenants that may hinder our ability to raise additional capital or might otherwise affect our liquidity, including restrictions on our ability to (1) acquire material assets outside of the ordinary course of business, (2) sell, lease, license transfer or dispose of our personal property outside of the ordinary course of business, (3) pay or declare dividends, (4) make investments in or loans to other persons, (5) redeem or repurchase our stock, (6) make deposits or investments unless they are subject to a deposit control account, (7) incur additional indebtedness other than permitted debt, (8) make payments on subordinated obligations, (9) undergo a merger, change in control or sale of a substantial portion of our assets, or (10) use loan proceeds to make payments to our affiliates. If we are unable to repay these loans when they become due, or if we otherwise suffer an event of default under the loan agreements, the lender may have the

86


Table of Contents

right to foreclose on their collaterals, which could have a material and adverse effect on our business, financial condition, liquidity and operations.

        In connection with these loans, we also issued the lender a warrant for the purchase of 62,500 shares of our common stock at an exercise price of $4.50 per share. In addition, if these loans remain outstanding for at least 30 days during the 90 day periods ending June 30, 2016, September 30, 2016 and December 31, 2016, we will be obligated to issue the lender additional warrants for the purchase of 37,500, 18,750 and 18,750 shares of our common stock, respectively, for an exercise price of the lowest of the fair market value of our common stock as of the start or end of such 90-day period or the lowest public sale price of our common stock during the quarter ended on the applicable measurement date. These warrants may be exercised through a cashless feature.

Secured Loans after December 31, 2015
  Principal
Amounts
  Annual
Interest
Rate
  Term of Loans

Secured loans

  $ 1,295,000     10 % Earlier of closing of new debt financing or May 1, 2017

Total

  $ 1,295,000          

        We are required to pay royalties which are recognized as an expense upon sale of the related products. We are required to pay a royalty to CATO equivalent to 10% of our adjusted gross sales of NutreStore calculated on an annual basis. The 10% royalty is calculated at the end of the year and accrued on an annual basis. Once commercialized and pursuant to an addendum to the license agreement with LA BioMed, we agreed to pay royalties to LA BioMed during the term of the agreement equal to 4.5% of net sales of Licensed Products in the United States until lifetime royalty payments made to LA BioMed total $100,000, at which time the royalty rate will decrease to 2.5% of net sales of the Licensed Products. No royalties will be paid to LA BioMed for Licensed Products sold or distributed, or Licensed Methods practiced, on a non-profit basis. Royalty payments are due within 45 days of the end of each fiscal quarter, with the last payment due 45 days after the termination of the agreement. Any payments not made when due accrue interest on and after the due date at a rate equal to the prime interest rate quoted by the Bank of America on the date the payment is due, with interest being compounded on the last day of each calendar quarter.

Cash Flows

Net cash used in operating activities

        Net cash flows used in operating activities decreased by $1.7 million, or 20%, to $7.0 million from $8.7 million for the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively. The decrease was primarily due to a decrease of $9.1 million in net loss, partially offset by an $8.5 million decrease in non-cash adjustments to net loss and a $1.2 million decrease in working capital. The decrease in non-cash adjustments to net loss was primarily attributable to the following: $3.5 million for the lack of any warrant exercise inducement expense in the current year, $3.3 million for the change in fair value of liability classified warrants and warrant derivative liabilities, $2.8 million for a decrease in share-based compensation and $0.4 million for a gain on settlement of litigation, partially offset by the impact of an increase of $0.7 million in interest expense accrued from discount of convertible notes.

Net cash from (used in) investing activities

        Net cash flows from (used in) investing activities increased by $0.1 million, or 165%, to cash flows of $42,000 from $(64,000) used in investing activities for the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively. The increase was due to fewer purchases of property and equipment and an increase of

87


Table of Contents

proceeds from the sale of marketable securities of $47,000. No other investing activities occurred in the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014.

Net cash from financing activities

        Net cash flows from financing activities increased by $1.1 million, or 19%, to $6.8 million from $5.7 million for the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively, primarily as a result of a $5.1 million increase in aggregate proceeds from issuance of notes payable and convertible notes payable, which was partially offset by a $4.2 million decrease in proceeds from the exercise of warrants.

Off-Balance-Sheet Arrangements

        Since our inception, we have not engaged in any off-balance sheet arrangements, including the use of structured finance, special purpose entities or variable interest entities.

ITEM 7A.    QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK

        Not required for a smaller reporting company.

ITEM 8.    FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA

        The information required by this Item 8 is incorporated by reference to the information that begins on Page F-1 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

ITEM 9.    CHANGES IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE

        None.

ITEM 9A.    CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES

Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures

        We are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures ("DCP") that are designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed by us in the reports filed by us under the Exchange Act is: (a) recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in the SEC's rules and forms; and (b) accumulated and communicated to our management, including our principal executive and principal financial officers, to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosures. In designing and evaluating our DCP, we recognize that any controls and procedures, no matter how well designed and implemented, can provide only reasonable assurance of achieving the desired control objectives.

        We conducted an evaluation pursuant to Rule 13a-15 of the Exchange Act of the effectiveness of the design and operation of our DCP as of December 31, 2015. This evaluation was conducted under the supervision (and with the participation) of our management, including our Chief Executive Officer and Interim Chief Financial Officer. Based on that evaluation, our Chief Executive Officer and Interim Chief Financial Officer concluded that our DCP were not effective as of December 31, 2015, because of the continuance of a material weakness (the "Material Weakness") in our internal control over financial reporting, initially identified in our evaluations of the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2014 and 2013, with respect to the application of generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) in the United States of America on certain complex transactions as well as maintaining effective controls over the completeness and accuracy of financial reporting for complex or unusual transactions. Notwithstanding the Material Weakness, our management, based on the substantial work performed, concluded that our consolidated financial statements for the periods covered by and included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K are fairly

88


Table of Contents

stated in all material respects in accordance with GAAP for each of the periods presented in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

        We committed to remediating the control deficiencies that constituted the Material Weaknesses by implementing changes to our internal control over financial reporting. In 2015, we implemented measures designed to remediate the underlying causes of the control deficiencies that gave rise to the Material Weaknesses, including, without limitation:

    engaging a third-party accounting consulting firm to assist us in the review of our application of GAAP on complex debt financing transactions;

    use of GAAP Disclosure and SEC Reporting Checklist;

    increased the amount of external continuing professional training and academic education on accounting subjects for accounting staff including management staff to receive professional certification as a CPA or CMA;

    enhanced the level of the precision of review controls related to our financial close and reporting; and

    engaging supplemental internal and external resources.

        Our management concluded that, as of December 31, 2015, while the remedial actions implemented in an effort to remediate the underlying causes of the control deficiencies that gave rise to the Material Weakness has been completed for certain areas, we have not completed all of the corrective processes, procedures and related evaluation or remediation that we believe are necessary to determine whether the Material Weakness has been remediated. Specifically, we are continuing to address the adequacy of the depth and sufficiency of human resources with the technical GAAP expertise available in our accounting and finance department to appropriately identify, research, analyze and conclude upon the proper accounting treatment for complex or unusual transactions involving options, equities, and other financial instruments as well as to maintain effective controls over the completeness and accuracy of financial reporting for complex or unusual transactions. Because certain corrective actions specific to this Material Weakness have not been fully implemented as of the date of this report, the Material Weakness was not considered remediated as of December 31, 2015.

Management's Plan for Remediation

        Our management and Board of Directors are committed to the remediation of the Material Weakness, as well as the continued improvement of our overall system of internal control over financial reporting. We are in the process of implementing measures to remediate the underlying causes of the control deficiency that gave rise to the Material Weakness, which primarily include engaging additional and supplemental internal and external resources with the technical expertise in US GAAP as well as to implement new policies and procedures to provide more effective controls to track, process, analyze, and consolidate the financial data and reports.

        We believe these measures will remediate the control deficiencies that gave rise to a Material Weakness. As we continue to evaluate and work to remediate these control deficiencies, we may determine that additional measures may be required.

        We are committed to maintaining a strong internal control environment, and believe that these remediation actions will represent improvements in our internal control over financial reporting when they are fully implemented. Certain remediation steps, however, have not been implemented or have not had sufficient time to be fully integrated in the operations of our internal control over financial reporting. As a result, the identified Material Weakness will not be considered remediated until controls have been designed and/or controls are in operation for a sufficient period of time for our management to conclude that the control environment is operating effectively. Additional remediation

89


Table of Contents

measures may be required, which may require additional implementation time. We will continue to assess the effectiveness of our remediation efforts in connection with our evaluation of our internal control over financial reporting and DCP.

        As we continue to evaluate and work to remediate the Material Weakness and enhance our internal control over financial reporting and DCP, we may determine that we need to modify or otherwise adjust the remediation measures described above. As a result, we cannot assure you that our remediation efforts will be successful or that our internal control over financial reporting or DCP will be effective as a result of those efforts.

Management's Annual Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting

        Our management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting as defined in Rules 13a-15(f) under the Exchange Act. Our internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States of America. Our internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that (i) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect our transactions and our dispositions of the assets; (ii) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and that our receipts and expenditures are being made only in accordance with authorizations of our management and directors; and (iii) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of our assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.

        Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risks that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate. Under the supervision and with the participation of our management, including our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, we conducted an evaluation of the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting based on the criteria set forth in Internal Control—Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission. Based on this evaluation, our management concluded that our internal control over financial reporting was not effective as of December 31, 2015.

        A material weakness is a deficiency, or combination of deficiencies, in internal control over financial reporting such that there is a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement of a company's annual or interim financial statements will not be prevented or detected on a timely basis. Material weaknesses would permit information required to be disclosed by a company in the reports that it files or submits to not be recorded, processed, summarized and reported, within the time periods specified in the SEC's rules and forms. In conducting our review of our internal control over financial reporting, we identified a continuing material weakness in our internal control over financial reporting initially identified in our evaluations of the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2014 and 2013. This material weakness relates to the adequacy of resources and controls resulting from us not having an adequate level of resources with the appropriate level of training and experience in regards to the application of generally accepted accounting principles for certain complex transactions. In addition, we did not maintain effective controls over the completeness and accuracy of financial reporting for complex or significant unusual transactions.

        The material weakness described above resulted in a material misstatement of our liabilities, stockholders' deficit, net loss, non-cash expenses and related financial disclosures for the three month period ended September 30, 2013 that was not prevented or detected on a timely basis and,

90


Table of Contents

consequently, a restatement of the unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements contained in our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2013. Additionally, other prior and current period adjustments related to recording share based compensation are attributable to us not having an adequate level of resources in regard to these transactions. As a result of these matters, we were unable to timely file our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2013.

        To assist with the accounting for complex and/or significant unusual transactions, we have retained a consulting professional with greater knowledge and experience of U.S. GAAP and related regulatory requirements to supplement our internal resources and added to our accounting staff. We also have implemented procedures to evaluate and improve our existing internal control documentation and procedures to develop clear identification of key financial and reporting controls over complex or significant unusual transactions. We continue to strengthen our procedures and staffing levels in order to fully address this material weakness.

Attestation Report

        This Annual Report on Form 10-K does not include an attestation report of our independent registered public accounting firm regarding internal control over financial reporting. We are not subject to the attestation requirement because we are a smaller reporting company

Changes in Internal Control over Financial Reporting

        Except as described above, based on the evaluation of our management as required by paragraph (d) of Rule 13a-15 of the Exchange Act, we believe that there were no changes in our internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the quarter ended December 31, 201 that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting.

ITEM 9B.    OTHER INFORMATION

        None.

91


Table of Contents


PART III

ITEM 10.    DIRECTORS, EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

Executive Officers, Directors and Key Employees

        The following individuals constitute our board of directors and executive management:

Name
  Age   Position

Yutaka Niihara, M.D., MPH

    56   Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board

Steve Lee

    50   Interim Chief Financial Officer

Willis C. Lee

    55   Chief Operating Officer and Vice-Chairman of the Board

Peter B. Ludlum

    60   Co-President and Chief Business Officer

Lan T. Tran, MPH

    40   Co-President, Chief Administrative Officer and Corporate Secretary

Yasushi Nagasaki

    48   Senior Vice President, Finance

Charles Stark, Pharm.D. 

    60   Senior Vice President, Research and Development

Ian Zwicker. 

    68   Director

Masaharu Osato, M.D. 

    61   Director

Jon Kuwahara

    51   Director

        All of our officers each devote at least 40 hours per week, the equivalent of a full-time employee, to our affairs.

Background of Officers and Directors

        The following is a brief summary of the background of each of our directors, executive officers and executive management:

         Yutaka Niihara, M.D., MPH has served as our President and Chief Executive Officer since May 2011 and has served as the President, Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board of Emmaus Medical since 2003. Since May 2005, Dr. Niihara has also served as the President, Chief Executive Officer and Medical Director of Hope International Hospice, Inc., or Hope Hospice, a Medicare-certified hospice program. From June 1992 to October 2009, Dr. Niihara served as a physician specialist for Los Angeles County. Dr. Niihara is the principal inventor of the patented L-glutamine treatment for SCD. Dr. Niihara has been involved in patient care and research for sickle cell disease during most of his career and is a widely published author in the area of sickle cell disease. Dr. Niihara is board-certified by the American Board of Internal Medicine and the American Board of Internal Medicine/Hematology. He is licensed to practice medicine in both the United States and Japan. Dr. Niihara is a Professor of Medicine at the David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA. Dr. Niihara received his B.A. in Religion from Loma Linda University in 1982, obtained his MD degree from the Loma Linda University School of Medicine in 1986 and received his MPH from Harvard School of Public Health in 2006. We believe Dr. Niihara is qualified to serve as a director due to his knowledge and experience.

         Willis C. Lee, MS has served as Chief Operating Officer of the Company since May 2011, as a director since December 2015, and as Vice-Chairman of the board of directors since January 2016. Mr. Lee also previously served as a director of Emmaus Life Sciences, Inc. from May 2011 to May 2014 and also served as the Co-Chief Operating Officer and Chief Financial Officer and as a director of Emmaus Medical from March 2010 to May 2011. Prior to that, he was the Controller at Emmaus Medical from February 2009 to February 2010. From 2004 to 2010, Mr. Lee led worldwide sales and business development of Yield Dynamics product group at MKS Instruments, Inc., a provider of instruments, subsystems, and process control solutions for the semiconductor, flat panel display, solar cell, data storage media, medical equipment, pharmaceutical manufacturing, and energy generation and environmental monitoring industries. Mr. Lee also served as President and Managing Director of

92


Table of Contents

Kenos Inc., a private service provider that provides funeral services to individuals, from January 2004 to December 2008. Mr. Lee held various managerial and senior positions at semiconductor companies such as MicroUnity Systems Engineering, Inc., a private semiconductor company that designs and develops new generation multimedia processors for computers and cable control boxes, from August 1995 to July 1996, HPL, Inc., a public semiconductor company that provides a software platform that enables data-driven decisions by gathering, managing and analyzing semiconductor manufacturing data, from June 2000 to October 2002, Syntricity, Inc., a private semiconductor software company that provides a software platform that enables data-driven decisions by gathering, managing and analyzing semiconductor manufacturing data, from November 2002 to April 2004 and also at Reden & Anders, a subsidiary of United Healthcare that provides actuarial services including capitation and risk assessment analyses for healthcare insurance carriers, from September 1996 to June 2000. Mr. Lee received his B.S. and M.S. in Physics from University of Hawaii (1984) and University of South Carolina (1986), respectively. We believe Mr. Lee is qualified to serve as a director due to his extensive knowledge and experience, as well as his intimate knowledge of the Company through his service as executive officer of the Company.

         Ian Zwicker is the founder of Zwicker Advisory Group and has been its Chief Executive Officer since 2014. From 1981 to 1990, Mr. Zwicker served as Managing Director and held a variety of management positions at the investment banking firms of SG Cowen and Hambrecht & Quist. From 1990 to 1999, Mr. Zwicker served as Managing Director and head of worldwide technology investment banking for Donaldson, Lufkin & Jenrette Securities Corporation, and from 2000 to 2001 as the President of WR Hambrecht + Co (WRH). He was a Director of Stirling Energy Systems, Inc. from 2006 to 2012. Mr. Zwicker was a Partner at WRH and was also Head of Capital Markets from 2013 to 2014. We believe Mr. Zwicker is qualified to serve as a director due to his executive experience and business expertise .

         Masaharu Osato, M.D. has been practicing gastroenterology and internal medicine ("GI") at his private practice, the Osato Medical Clinic, Inc. in Torrance, CA, since 2001. Between 1998 and 2001 he completed a GI Fellowship at the Harbor-UCLA Medical Center. Between 1993 and 1997 and 1988 and 1993, respectively, Dr. Osato served as General Internist and Director of Health Screening Center at the Tokyo Adventist Hospital in Tokyo, Japan, and at the Kobe Adventist Hospital in Kobe, Japan. He attended the Loma Linda University School of Medicine in California between 1979 and 1983 and completed an internal medicine residency at the Kettering Memorial Medical Center at Wright State University between 1983 and 1986. Between 1986 and 1988 he completed a pediatric residency at the Loma Linda University Medical Center. We believe Dr. Osato is qualified to serve as a director due to his extensive knowledge of and experience in the GI sector.

         Jon Kuwahara, CPA has served as Corporate Controller of Avanir Pharmaceuticals ("Avanir"), a biopharmaceutical company focused on acquiring, developing, and commercializing therapeutic products for the treatment of central nervous system disorders, since 2014. Mr. Kuwahara also briefly served as a consultant for Avanir between August 2010 and November 2010. Between 2010 and 2014, Mr. Kuwahara served as Associate Director of Finance and Assistant Corporate Controller of Questcor Pharmaceuticals, a specialty pharmaceutical company. Between 2003 and 2009, Mr. Kuwahara provided consultant services for Resources Global Professionals, a global project-based professional services firm, and between 1999 and 2003 he served as Solutions Consultant for Lawson Software, a provider of enterprise software solutions specializing in service industries. Between 1988 and 1999, Mr. Kuwahara held positions as Controller, Director of Finance and Senior Accountant with companies in various industries around the U.S. Mr. Kuwahara holds a B.B.A. with emphasis in accounting from the University of Hawaii and is a certified public accountant in California (active license) and Hawaii (inactive license). We believe Mr. Kuwahara is qualified to serve as a director due to his business and financial management experience.

93


Table of Contents

         Steve Lee, CPA has served as our Interim Chief Financial Officer since April 2016, and currently is the CEO & Managing Director of The Garret Group, an accounting and management consulting firm, having served in that position since 2006. Mr. Lee, through The Garret Group, has been engaged by the Company as a GAAP consultant since January 13, 2014. Mr. Lee's professional experience includes working for SingerLewak LLP as an audit partner from 2012 to 2013, as well as in a regulatory capacity with the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (the "PCAOB") from 2004 to 2006, performing inspections of registered public accounting firms to assess their compliance with the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, rules of the PCAOB, regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission and professional standards, in connection with the PCAOB's performance of audits, issuance of audit reports, and related matters involving issuers. Prior to Mr. Lee's tenure at the PCAOB, he served in various accounting and finance executive and management capacities with Mitsubishi Motors Credit of America, Inc., Premier Automotive Group of Ford Motor Company, Deloitte & Touche LLP, and a private company involved in the semiconductor business. Prior to the completion of graduate school in 1993 for a M.A. degree in Accounting at University of Southern California, Mr. Lee worked as a financial analyst at Security Pacific Merchant Bank Group based in Los Angeles, California. Mr. Lee has a B.A. in Economics from University of California, Irvine.

         Peter B. Ludlum, CMA has served as our Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer since April 2012. Mr. Ludlum previously served as the Chief Financial Officer of Energy and Power Solutions, Inc., an energy intelligence company, from April 2008 to March 2012. Mr. Ludlum also served as the Financial Compliance Officer from April 2006 to March 2008 and the Chief Financial Officer from April 2005 to April 2006 of Applied Medical Resources Corporation, a medical device company. Mr. Ludlum also served as Group Controller for IsoTis S.A., a biomedical company, from October 2003 to April 2005. IsoTis S.A. acquired GenSci Regeneration Sciences Inc., an orthobiologics company, in October 2003 where Mr. Ludlum served as Vice President and Chief Financial Officer from December 1999 to October 2003. Prior to his position at GenSci, Mr. Ludlum had served as the Vice President Finance and Chief Financial Officer from November 1996 to December 1999 of Pacific Biometrics, Inc., a diagnostic products and reference laboratory company. Earlier in his career, Mr. Ludlum had worked for Derlan Industries, Ltd., a diversified manufacturing company, as Corporate Controller and Treasurer and in various positions at Mobil Oil Corporation, an international oil and gas company, and for subsidiaries of Bechtel Corporation, an engineering, procurement, construction, and project management services provider, and PacifiCorp, a diversified utility holding company. He received a B.S. in Business and Economics with a major in accounting from Lehigh University in 1977 and a Masters in Business Administration with a concentration in Finance from California State University, Fullerton in 1991.

        On September 23, 2011, Mr. Ludlum was serving as the Chief Financial Officer of Energy and Power Solutions, Inc., or EPS, when EPS filed for bankruptcy protection under Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code. The bankruptcy filing was made in part to effect a sale of EPS' primary assets pursuant to Section 363 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code, and the EPS bankruptcy case has been dismissed.

         Lan T. Tran, MPH has served as our Chief Administrative Officer and Corporate Secretary since May 2011. She has served as the Co-Chief Operating Officer and Corporate Secretary of Emmaus Medical since April 2010 and as the Chief Compliance Officer of Emmaus Medical since May 2008. Prior to joining Emmaus Medical, Ms. Tran was with LA BioMed, a non-profit medical research and education company, from September 1999 to April 2008 and held positions of increasing responsibility including Grants and Contracts Trainee from September 1999 to March 2000, Grants and Contracts Officer from April 2000 to August 2004, Associate Director, Pre-Clinical/Clinical Trials Unit from September 2004 to June 2005, Director, Pre-Clinical/Clinical Trials Unit from July 2005 to June 2007, and Assistant Vice President, Research Administration from June 2007 to April 2008. In her position as Director, Pre-Clinical/Clinical Trials Unit and Assistant Vice President, Research Administration,

94


Table of Contents

Ms. Tran was part of the executive management team of LA BioMed and was responsible for all administrative aspects of research in her assigned area at LA BioMed, which had a research budget of $61,000,000 in 2008. Ms. Tran holds a B.S. in Psychobiology from UCLA, which was awarded in 1999, and a Masters of Public Health from UCLA which was awarded in 2002.

         Yasushi Nagasaki, CPA was appointed as our Senior Vice President, Finance effective April, 2012. From May 2011 to April 2012, Mr. Nagasaki served as our Chief Financial Officer. From September 2005 until joining us, Mr. Nagasaki was the Chief Financial Officer of Hexadyne Corporation, an aerospace and defense supplier. Mr. Nagasaki also served on the board of directors at Hexadyne Corporation from September 2005 to April 2011. From May 2003 to August 2005, Mr. Nagasaki was the Controller at Upsilon Intertech Corporation, an international distributor of defense and aerospace parts and sub systems. Mr. Nagasaki is a Certified Public Accountant and received a B.A. in Commerce from Waseda University and a M.A. in International Policy Studies from the Monterey Institute of International Studies, a graduate school of Middlebury College.

         Charles Stark, Pharm.D. was appointed Senior Vice President of Research and Development of the Company effective November 2013. Dr. Stark previously served as Director of Clinical Development at Bavarian Nordic, Inc., an immunotherapeutic company, from March 2013 to November 2013. Dr. Stark had also served as Associate Director of Medical Affairs from July 2010 to March 2013 for the Dendreon Corporation, an immunotherapeutic company, and prior to his position at Dendreon, he was the Director, Medical Science Liaisons (cardiovascular, metabolic and oncology) from July 1999 to July 2010 at Pfizer, Inc., a pharmaceutical company. Dr. Stark served as the Director of Investigational Drug Services and Clinical Research at LA BioMed at Harbor-UCLA Medical Center from 1989 to 2003 and at the Health Research Association at Los Angeles County USC Medical Center from 1995 to 1999. Dr. Stark has also served as a faculty member at the University of Southern California School of Pharmacy since 1997. Dr. Stark received his Pharm.D from the University of Southern California in 1982 and completed his residency at the Veteran's Affairs Medical Center in West Los Angeles in 1983.

Family Relationships

        There are no family relationships among any of the officers and directors.

Involvement in Certain Legal Proceedings

        Mr. Kuwahara filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy protection in August 2010. Mr. Kuwahara was discharged as debtor in December 2010.

Board of Directors and Committees and Director Independence

        Our board of directors currently consists of five members. Our board of directors has determined that each of Ian Zwicker, Masaharu Osato and Jon Kuwahara is an "independent" director as defined by the NASDAQ Marketplace Rules currently in effect and all applicable rules and regulations of the SEC. All members of the Audit and Compensation, Nominating and Corporate Governance Committees satisfy the "independence" standards applicable to members of each such committee. The board of directors made this affirmative determination regarding these directors' independence based on discussions with the directors and on its review of the directors' responses to a standard questionnaire regarding employment and compensation history; affiliations, family and other relationships; and transactions with the Company. The board of directors considered relationships and transactions between each director or any member of his immediate family and the Company and its subsidiaries and affiliates.

95


Table of Contents

Audit Committee

        We established our Audit Committee on May 3, 2011. The Audit Committee consists of Mr. Kuwahara, Mr. Zwicker and Dr. Osato, each of whom is an independent director as defined by the NASDAQ Marketplace Rules. Mr. Kuwahara serves as Chairman of the Audit Committee and qualifies as an "audit committee financial expert" as defined under Item 407(d) of Regulation S-K. The purpose of the Audit Committee is to represent and assist our board of directors in its general oversight of our accounting and financial reporting processes, audits of the financial statements and internal control and audit functions. The Audit Committee's responsibilities include:

    The appointment, replacement, compensation, and oversight of work of the independent registered public accounting firm, including resolution of disagreements between management and the independent registered public accounting firm regarding financial reporting, for the purpose of preparing or issuing an audit report or performing other audit, review or attest services.

    Reviewing and discussing with management and the independent registered public accounting firm various topics and events that may have significant financial impact on our company or that are the subject of discussions between management and the independent registered public accounting firm.

        The board of directors has adopted a written charter for the Audit Committee. A copy of the Audit Committee Charter is available on our website at www.emmausmedical.com.

Compensation, Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee

        We established our Compensation Committee and Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee on May 3, 2011. In May 2013, we combined these two committees into one. The Compensation, Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee consists of Mr. Zwicker, Dr. Osato and Mr. Kuwahara, each of whom is an independent director as defined by the NASDAQ Marketplace Rules. Mr. Zwicker serves as Chairman of the Compensation, Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee. The Compensation, Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee is responsible for the design, review, recommendation and approval of compensation arrangements for our directors, executive officers and key employees, and for the administration of our equity incentive plans, including the approval of grants under such plans to our employees, consultants and directors, assists in the selection of director nominees, approves director nominations to be presented for stockholder approval at our annual general meeting, fills any vacancies on our board of directors, considers any nominations of director candidates validly made by stockholders, and reviews and considers developments in corporate governance practices. The Compensation, Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee also reviews and determines compensation of our executive officers, including our Chief Executive Officer. The board of directors has adopted a written charter for the Compensation, Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee. A copy of the Compensation, Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee Charter is available on our website at www.emmausmedical.com.

Director Designation Agreement

        In connection with the private placement of securities we completed on September 11, 2013, we entered into an agreement, referred to as the Designation Agreement, with Dr. Niihara, TRW, who served as our placement agent, and Sarissa, an investor in the private placement. Pursuant to the agreement, we agreed to expand the size of our board of directors by three members to a total of eight directors, with one member to be designated by TRW and two members to be designated by Sarissa to fill the newly-created vacancies. On November 19, 2015, we, Dr. Niihara and Sarissa entered into an amendment to the Designation Agreement which terminated the Designation Agreement with respect to the Company, Dr. Niihara and Sarissa, and provides that those parties shall have no further rights or

96


Table of Contents

obligations to each other under the Designation Agreement. Furthermore, each of the Company, Sarissa and Dr. Niihara waived all rights each has ever had, has or may have under the Designation Agreement against each other, and released each other from any and all obligations each has ever had, has or may have to the other under the Designation Agreement. As a result of the amendment, Sarissa no longer has the right to designate any members of the Company's Board, nor does it have the right to approve any actions as were set forth in the Designation Agreement. On March 14, 2016, we, Dr. Niihara and TRW entered into an agreement which terminated the Designation Agreement in full. Accordingly, neither Sarissa nor TRW has any further right to designate any directors of the Company, and the Company does not need the consent of Sarissa or TRW to take actions with respect to any of the matters specified in the Designation Agreement.

Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance

        Our common stock is currently registered under Section 12 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. As a result, and pursuant to Rule 16a-2, our directors and officers and holders of 10% or more of our common stock are currently required to file statements of beneficial ownership with respect to their ownership of our equity securities under Sections 13 or 16 of the Exchange Act. Based on a review of written representations from our executive officers and directors and a review of Forms 3, 4 and 5 furnished to us, we believe that during the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015 the directors, officers and owners of more than 10% of our common stock filed, on a timely basis, all reports required by Section 16(a) of the Exchange Act except as follows: Dr. Osato filed one not timely Form 3 due to SEC filer codes being received late; Dr. Osato and Mr. Kuwahara each filed one not timely Form 4 reporting grant of options, in each case due to an administrative error; and Dr. Niihara failed to file one Form 4 reporting the exercise of warrants held by him, due to an administrative error.

Code of Business Conduct and Ethics

        On May 3, 2011, our board of directors approved a Code of Conduct and Ethics, which we refer to as the Code of Ethics, which applies to all of our directors, officers and employees. The Code of Ethics addresses, among other things, honesty and ethical conduct, conflicts of interest, compliance with laws, regulations and policies, including disclosure requirements under the federal securities laws, confidentiality, trading on inside information, and reporting of violations of the code. A copy of the Code of Ethics is available on our website at www.emmausmedical.com. Requests for copies of the Code of Ethics should be sent in writing to Emmaus Medical, Inc., Attention: Secretary, 21250 Hawthorne Boulevard, Suite 800, Torrance, California 90503.

97


Table of Contents

ITEM 11.    EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

Summary Compensation Table

        The following table sets forth information concerning the compensation earned by our Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer and our next three most highly compensated executive officers for the two fiscal years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014.

Name and Position
  Year   Salary   Bonus   Option
Awards
  Total  

Yutaka Niihara, M.D., MPH

    2015   $ 250,000   $   $   $ 250,000  

President, Chief Executive Officer and Chairman(1)

    2014     250,000             250,000  

Willis C. Lee

   
2015
   
180,000
   
   
   
180,000
 

Chief Operating Officer and Director

    2014     180,000             180,000  

Peter B. Ludlum

   
2015
   
180,000
   
   
   
180,000
 

Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer(2)

    2014     180,000             180,000  

Lan T. Tran, MPH

   
2015
   
180,000
   
   
   
180,000
 

Chief Administrative Officer and Corporate Secretary(2)

    2014     180,000             180,000  

Yasushi Nagasaki

   
2015
   
180,000
   
   
   
180,000
 

Senior Vice President, Finance

    2014     180,000             180,000  

(1)
Dr. Niihara was elevated to the title of Chairman on May 1, 2015. From May 1, 2015 until December 16, 2015, Dr. Niihara served as our Chief Scientific Officer rather than our Chief Executive Officer.

(2)
From May 1, 2015 until December 16, 2015, Mr. Ludlum and Ms. Tran served as an executive committee that served the role of our principal executive officer.

        Total compensation for Dr. Niihara, Mr. Lee and Ms. Tran for the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014 did not include an amount for the annual performance bonus pursuant to their respective employment agreements. We did not grant performance-based cash bonuses in 2015 and 2014 in part because of management's emphasis on preserving available capital to fund operating expenses. Additionally, specific performance criteria were not established for our executive officers for 2015 or 2014. Each of our executive officers waived any right under their respective employment agreement to an annual performance bonus for 2015 and 2014 and we did not incur any liability as a result of not granting such performance-based cash bonuses.

        There were no option or other equity grants to management in 2014 or 2015.

98


Table of Contents

Outstanding Equity Awards at 2015 Fiscal Year End

        The following table sets forth information regarding outstanding equity awards held by our named executive officers at the end of the 2015 fiscal year.

Name
  Number of Securities
Underlying
Unexercised
Options (#)
Exercisable
  Number of Securities
Underlying
Unexercised
Options (#)
Unexercisable(1)
  Option
Exercise
Price
  Option
Expiration
Date
 

Yutaka Niihara, M.D., MPH

    250,000       $ 3.60     4/1/2022  

    472,222     27,778 (1) $ 3.60     2/28/2023  

Willis C. Lee

   
250,000
   
 
$

3.60
   
4/1/2022
 

    472,222     27,778 (1) $ 3.60     2/28/2023  

Peter B. Ludlum

   
472,222
   
27,778

(1)

$

3.60
   
2/28/2023
 

Lan T. Tran, MPH

   
250,000
   
 
$

3.60
   
4/1/2022
 

    472,222     27,778 (1) $ 3.60     2/28/2023  

Yasushi Nagasaki

   
250,000
   
 
$

3.60
   
4/1/2022
 

    472,222     27,778 (1) $ 3.60     2/28/2023  

(1)
One-third ( 1 / 3 ) of the options vested on February 28, 2014, the first anniversary of the grant date. The remaining two-thirds ( 2 / 3 ) vest in approximately equal monthly installments over a period of two years thereafter.

Employment Agreements

        On April 5, 2011, we entered into employment agreements with Yutaka Niihara, M.D., MPH, our Chief Executive Officer, Willis C. Lee, our Chief Operating Officer, and Lan T. Tran, MPH, our Chief Administrative Officer. On April 8, 2011, we entered into an employment agreement with Yasushi Nagasaki, our former Chief Financial Officer and current Senior Vice President, Finance. On April 2, 2012, we entered into an employment agreement with Peter B. Ludlum, our Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer (the employment agreements, collectively, are referred to as the "Employment Agreements"). Each of the Employment Agreements has an initial two-year term, unless terminated earlier. Mr. Nagasaki's employment agreement expired in April 2013, and Mr. Ludlum's employment agreement expired in April 2014. The Employment Agreements for Dr. Niihara, Mr. Lee and Ms. Tran automatically renew for additional one-year periods unless the Company or the officer provides notice of non-renewal at least 60 days prior to the expiration of the then current term.

        Base Salary, Bonus and Other Compensation.     Dr. Niihara's, Mr. Lee's, and Ms. Tran's base salary is $250,000, $180,000, and $180,000 per year, respectively, which will be reviewed at least annually. In addition to base salary, the officers may be entitled to receive an annual performance bonus based on the officer's performance for the previous year. The Employment Agreements each provide that the respective officer's performance for the previous year will be measured against a set of targets and goals as mutually established by us and the officer. To date, our board of directors and the Compensation, Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee have evaluated an officer's performance on an overall basis related to the Company's progress on major milestones, without reliance on specific position by position pre-established targets and goals. The officers are also eligible to receive paid vacation, and participate in health and other benefit plans and will be reimbursed for reasonable and necessary business expenses.

        Equity Compensation.     The Employment Agreements state that at the end of each calendar year on December 31, or as soon as reasonably practicable after such date (each a "Grant Date"), the

99


Table of Contents

Company will grant non-qualified 10-year stock options with a Black-Scholes-Merton value of $100,000 to Dr. Niihara, $50,000 to Mr. Lee, and $40,000 to Ms. Tran, in each case with an exercise price per share equal to the "Fair Market Value" (as such term is defined in the Company's 2011 Stock Incentive Plan) on the applicable Grant Date. One-third of the options granted to each officer will vest on the first anniversary of the applicable Grant Date, one-third will vest on the second anniversary of the applicable Grant Date and the final one-third will vest on the third anniversary of the applicable Grant Date, although our current practice is to grant options that vest one-third on the first anniversary of the applicable Grant Date and then vest equally on a monthly basis until the third anniversary of the applicable Grant Date. Any unvested options will vest immediately upon a change in control (as defined below), termination of the officer's employment other than a voluntary termination by the officer or a termination of the officer for cause. In the event that the officer is terminated for any reason other than cause, death or disability or retirement, each option, to the extent that it is exercisable at the time of such termination, shall remain exercisable for the 90 day period following such termination, but in no event following the expiration of its term. In the event that the officer's employment terminates on account of death, disability or, with respect to any non-qualified stock option, retirement, each option granted that is outstanding and vested as of the date of such termination shall remain exercisable by such officer (or the officer's legal representatives, heirs or legatees) for the one-year period following such termination, but in no event following the expiration of its term.

        Severance Compensation.     If Dr. Niihara's, Mr. Lee's, or Ms. Tran's employment is terminated for any reason during the term of his or her respective employment agreement, other than without cause or good reason, each will be entitled to receive his or her base salary prorated through the termination date, any expense reimbursement due and owing for reasonable and necessary business expenses, and unpaid vacation benefits (the "Voluntary Termination Benefits"). If Dr. Niihara's, Mr. Lee's, or Ms. Tran's employment is terminated due to death or disability of such officer during the term of his or her respective employment agreement, then such officer will also receive an amount equal to his or her target annual performance bonus, and for a termination due to disability only, six additional months of his or her base salary to be paid out over a six-month period and payment of COBRA benefits of up to six months following the termination. If Dr. Niihara's employment is terminated without cause or Dr. Niihara resigns with good reason (not within two years following a change in control), he will receive the Voluntary Termination Benefits and, provided he signs a Release, a severance package equal to one year of his base salary to be paid out over a 12-month period, a pro rata amount of the annual performance bonus for the calendar year in which the termination date occurs based on the achievement of any applicable performance terms or goals for the year, and payment of COBRA benefits of up to 12 months following the termination. If the employment of any of Mr. Lee, or Ms. Tran is terminated without cause or any of them resigns with good reason (not within two years following a change in control) during the term of his or her respective employment agreement, he or she will receive the Voluntary Termination Benefits and, provided he or she signs a Release, a severance package equal to six months of his or her base salary to be paid out over a six-month period, an amount equal to half of the targeted annual performance bonus, and payment of COBRA benefits of up to six months following the termination.

        Termination with cause includes a proven act of dishonesty, fraud, embezzlement or misappropriation of Company proprietary information; a conviction of, or plea of nolo contendere to, a felony or a crime involving moral turpitude; willful misconduct which cannot be cured on reasonable notice to the officer; or the officer's habitual failure or refusal to perform his duties if such failure or refusal is not cured within 20 days after receiving written notice thereof from the board of directors. Good reason includes a reduction of more than 10% to the officer's base salary or other compensation (except as part of a general reduction for all executive employees); a material diminution of the officer's authority, responsibilities, reporting or job duties (except for any reduction for cause); the Company's material breach of the Employment Agreement; or, in the case of Dr. Niihara, Mr. Lee and

100


Table of Contents

Ms. Tran, a relocation of the business requiring the officer to move or drive to work more than 40 miles from its current location. The officer may terminate the Employment Agreement for good reason if he or she provides written notice to the Company within 90 days of the event constituting good reason and the Company fails to cure the good reason within 30 days after receiving such notice.

        Change of Control.     The Employment Agreements will not be terminated upon a change of control. A change of control means any merger or reorganization where the holders of the Company's capital stock prior the transaction own fewer than 50% of the shares of capital stock after the transaction, an acquisition of 50% of the voting power of the Company's outstanding securities by another entity, or a transfer of at least 50% of the fair market value of the Company's assets. Upon Dr. Niihara's termination without cause or good reason that occurs within two years after a change of control, he will receive the Voluntary Termination Benefits and, provided he signs a release of all claims relating to his employment, a severance package equal to two years of his base salary to be paid out over a 12-month period, an amount equal to double the targeted annual performance bonus, payment of COBRA benefits of up to 18 months following the termination; and a one-time cash payment of $3.0 million. Upon Mr. Lee's or Ms. Tran's termination without cause or good reason that occurs within two years after a change of control, he or she will receive the Voluntary Termination Benefits and, provided he or she signs a Release, a severance package equal to one year of his or her base salary to be paid out over a 12-month period, an amount equal to the full year targeted annual performance bonus, payment of COBRA benefits of up to 12 months following the termination. Mr. Lee and Ms. Tran will also receive a one-time cash payment of $200,000. In addition, each officer's unvested equity awards shall vest upon such termination and the officer will have 36 months in which to sell or exercise such awards (subject to expiration of the term of such options). The officer will also be free from all lock-up or other contractual restrictions upon the free sale of shares that are subject to waiver by the Company upon such termination.

Director Compensation

        Since February 26, 2014, the compensation program for non-employee directors has consisted of:

    a cash retainer of $500 per month;

    cash compensation of $700 for each in-person board meeting attended, $400 for each telephonic board meeting attended, $400 for each committee meeting attended, and $200 for each meeting chaired by such non-employee director;

    an initial grant of 100,000 options upon election and 50,000 stock options annually thereafter;

    a one-time grant of 2,000 options to the chairman of each committee; and

    a one-time grant of 10,000 options to the Chairman of the Board, if a non-employee.

Options granted under this program are expected to vest over 3 years. Pursuant to the 2011 Stock Incentive Plan, non-employee directors receive at a minimum an annual grant of 10,000 options. Additionally, the Chairman of the Board receives a one-time retainer grant of 10,000 options and each committee chair receives a one-time retainer grant of 2,000 options. These provisions of the 2011 Stock Incentive Plan have effectively been superseded by the current non-employee director compensation program. Because the Company did not hold a 2015 annual meeting of stockholders, directors were not granted any options in 2015.

        The following table shows information regarding the compensation earned during the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015 by the non-employee members of our board of directors. Compensation earned by our current and former employee directors, Yutaka Niihara, M.D., MPH and Willis C. Lee,

101


Table of Contents

who do not receive compensation for their services as a director, is reported above under the heading "Summary Compensation Table."

Name
  Fees Earned or
Paid in Cash
  Option
Awards
  Total  

Henry A. McKinnell, Jr., Ph.D. 

  $ 13,900   $   $ 13,900  

Tracey C. Doi

    9,400         9,400  

Duane K. Kurisu(4)

    4,100         4,100  

Akiko Moni Miyashita

    10,300         10,300  

Phillip M. Satow

    10,400         10,400  

Mayuran Sriskandarajah

    12,200         12,200  

Scott Gottlieb

             

Ian Zwicker

             

Jon Kuwahara

             

Masaharu Osato, M.D. 

             

Total

  $ 60,300   $   $ 60,300  

        As of December 31, 2015, our former non-employee directors had option awards outstanding pursuant to the 2011 Stock Incentive Plan to purchase the following number of shares of our common stock in the table directly below:

Name
  Number of
Securities
Underlying
Unexercised
Options ($)
Exercisable
(Vested)
  Number of
Securities
Underlying
Unexercised
Options ($)
Unexercisable
(Unvested)
  Option
Exercise
Price
  Option
Expiration
Date
 

Henry A. McKinnell, Jr., Ph.D(1). 

    27,000       $ 3.60     12/19/2021  

    166,667 (a)     $ 3.60     2/28/2023  

    10,000       $ 0.00     2/28/2023  

    20,000       $ 3.60     2/26/2024  

Maurice J. DeWald(2)

    12,000       $ 3.60     12/19/2021  

    75,000       $ 3.60     4/2/2022  

    166,667 (a)   83,333   $ 3.60     2/28/2023  

    10,000       $ 0.00     2/28/2023  

    17,333 (b)   34,667   $ 3.60     2/26/2024  

Duane K. Kurisu(3)

    100,000       $ 4.90     5/8/2024  

Phillip M. Satow(4)

    33,334       $ 4.90     5/8/2024  

Mayuran Sriskandarajah(5)

    33,334       $ 5.10     7/17/2024  

(a)
Options vest annually in equal amounts (or as close to an equal amount as possible) over a period of three years with the first one-third ( 1 / 3 ) vesting on February 28, 2014.

(b)
Options vest annually in equal amounts (or as close to an equal amount as possible) over a period of three years with the first one-third ( 1 / 3 ) vesting on February 26, 2015.

(1)
Dr. McKinnell resigned from the board of directors on August 19, 2015.

(2)
Mr. DeWald resigned from the board of directors on May 8, 2014.

(3)
Mr. Kurisu resigned from the board of directors on January 9, 2015.

(4)
Mr. Satow resigned from the board of directors on August 3, 2015

(5)
Mr. Sriskandarajah resigned from the board of directors on November 19, 2015

102


Table of Contents

        On March 19, 2015, the board of directors authorized and approved the annual option grants to non-employee directors contemplated by our director compensation program, which options have a term of 10 years and an exercise price of $3.60 per share, the fair market value of a share of common stock as of the grant date as determined by the board of directors.

2011 Stock Incentive Plan

Background

        On May 3, 2011, the board of directors and stockholders adopted the Emmaus Life Sciences, Inc. 2011 Stock Incentive Plan, or the Plan. Stockholder approval of the Plan enables us to satisfy stock exchange listing requirements, if and when we become subject to such requirements, and to make awards that qualify as performance-based compensation that is exempt from the deduction limitation set forth under Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, or the Code. Subject to certain exceptions, Section 162(m) generally limits the corporate income tax deductions to $1,000,000 annually for compensation paid to each of the Chief Executive Officer and our other three highest paid executive officers required to be reported under the proxy disclosure rules.

        The Plan permits grants of stock options, stock appreciation rights, or SARs, restricted stock, stock units, stock bonus and unrestricted stock awards, which we collectively refer to as Awards. Our board of directors believes that the Plan is an important factor in attracting, retaining and motivating our employees, consultants, agents, and directors and our affiliates, who are collectively referred to as Eligible Persons. Our board of directors believes that we need the flexibility both to have an ongoing reserve of common stock available for future equity-based awards, and to make future awards in a variety of forms.

        On February 28, 2013, our board of directors authorized and adopted an amendment to Section 1.5(a) of the Plan. The amendment increased the total number of shares of our common stock with respect to which awards may be granted pursuant to the Plan from 3,000,000 to 6,000,000 (subject to adjustment as set forth in the Plan), which we refer to as the Cap. Except for this increase in the Cap, the terms of the Plan, including the adjustment mechanisms set forth therein, were unchanged by the amendment. The amendment was subsequently ratified by our stockholders at our 2013 Annual Meeting on September 23, 2013. On July 17, 2014, our board of directors authorized and adopted an amendment to Section 1.5(a) of the Plan. The amendment increased the total number of shares of our common stock with respect to which awards may be granted pursuant to the Plan from 6,000,000 to 9,000,000 (subject to adjustment as set forth in the Plan) and was subsequently ratified by our stockholders at our 2014 Annual Meeting on October 23, 2014.

Purpose

        The purpose of the Plan is to attract, retain and motivate select employees, consultants and directors for us and our affiliates and to provide incentives and rewards for superior performance. As of December 31, 2015, there were approximately 21 Eligible Persons who were our directors or employees of one of our subsidiaries.

Shares Subject to the Plan

        The Plan provides that no more than 9,000,000 shares of common stock may be issued pursuant to Awards under the Plan. The number of shares available for Awards, as well as the terms of outstanding Awards, is subject to adjustment as provided in the Plan for stock splits, stock dividends, recapitalizations and other similar events.

        The maximum awards that can be granted under the Plan to a single participant in any calendar year shall be 500,000 shares of common stock in the form of options or SARs, and 500,000 shares of

103


Table of Contents

common stock in the form of restricted shares, restricted stock units, stock bonus and other stock-based awards.

Administration

        The Compensation, Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee of the board of directors or another committee appointed by our board of directors administer the Plan. The Compensation, Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee of our board of directors and any other committee exercising discretion under the Plan from time to time are referred to below as the Committee.

        Subject to the terms of the Plan, the Committee has express authority to determine the Eligible Persons who will receive Awards, the number of shares of common stock, units or dollars to be covered by each Award, and the terms and conditions of Awards. The Committee has broad discretion to prescribe, amend, and rescind rules relating to the Plan and its administration, to interpret and construe the terms of the Plan and the terms of all Award agreements, and to take all actions necessary or advisable to administer the Plan.

        Stock awards granted under the Plan (other than performance-based awards, awards involving an aggregate number of shares equal to less than 5% of shares available for awards and annual director stock grants described below) will have a minimum vesting period of three years.

        The Plan provides that we will indemnify members of the Committee and their delegates against any claims, liabilities or costs arising from the good faith performance of their duties under the Plan. The Plan releases these individuals from liability for good faith actions associated with the Plan's administration.

Eligibility

        The Committee may grant options that are intended to qualify as incentive stock options, or ISOs, only to our and our subsidiaries' employees, and may grant all other Awards to Eligible Persons. The Plan and the discussion below use the term "Participant" to refer to an Eligible Person who has received an Award.

Types of Awards

        Options.     Options granted under the Plan provide Participants with the right to purchase shares of common stock at a predetermined exercise price. The Committee may grant options that are intended to qualify as ISOs or options that are not intended to so qualify, referred to as Non-ISOs. The Plan also provides that ISO treatment may not be available for options that become first exercisable in any calendar year to the extent the value of the underlying shares that are the subject of the option exceeds $100,000 (based upon the fair market value of the shares of common stock on the option grant date).

        Stock Appreciation Rights (SARs).     A stock appreciation right generally permits a Participant to receive, upon exercise, cash and/or shares of common stock equal in value to an amount determined by multiplying (a) the excess of the fair market value, on the date of exercise, of the shares of common stock with respect to which the SAR is being exercised, over the exercise price of the SAR for such shares by (b) the number of shares with respect to which the SARs are being exercised. The Committee may grant SARs in tandem with options or independently of them.

        Exercise Price for Options and SARs.     The exercise price of ISOs, Non-ISOs, and SARs may not be less than 100% of the fair market value on the grant date of the shares of common stock subject to the Award (110% of fair market value for ISOs granted to employees who, on the grant date, own stock representing more than 10% of the combined voting power of all classes of our stock).

104


Table of Contents

        Exercise of Options and SARs.     To the extent exercisable in accordance with the agreement granting them, an option or SAR may be exercised in whole or in part, during the term established by the Committee, subject to earlier termination relating to a holder's termination of employment or service. The expiration date of options and SARs may not exceed 10 years from the date of grant (five years in the case of ISOs granted to employees who, on the grant date, own more than 10% of the combined voting power of all classes of our stock).

        Unless otherwise provided under the terms of the agreement evidencing a grant, options and SARs that have vested may be exercised during the one-year period after the optionee's termination of service due to death or permanent disability or after the optionee retires (with respect to SARs and Non-ISOs only) and during the 90-day period after the optionee's termination of employment other than for cause (but in no case later than the termination date of the option or SAR). Each option or SAR that remains unexercisable at the time of termination shall be terminated at the time of termination.

        Restricted Stock, Stock Units, Stock Bonus, and Other Stock-Based Awards.     Under the Incentive Plan, the Committee may grant restricted stock that is forfeitable until certain vesting requirements are met, may grant restricted stock units, or RSUs, which represent the right to receive shares of common stock after certain vesting requirements are met, and may grant unrestricted stock as to which the Participant's interest is immediately vested (subject to the exceptions to the minimum vesting requirements described above). The Plan provides the Committee with discretion to determine the terms and conditions under which a Participant's interests in such Awards becomes vested, which may include the achievement of financial or other objective performance goals or other objectives.

        Annual Non-Employee Director Grants.     The Plan provides for annual grants of 10,000 options to non-employee directors, which we refer to as the Annual Director Award. Each Annual Director Award will vest in four substantially equal quarterly installments. These grants have been superseded by, and are not in addition to, the compensation program for non-employee directors.

Clawback of Awards

        Unless otherwise provided in an agreement granting an Award, we may terminate any outstanding, unexercised, unexpired or unpaid Award, rescind any exercise, payment or delivery pursuant to the Award, or recapture any common stock (whether restricted or unrestricted) or proceeds from the Participant's sale of shares issued pursuant to the Award in the event of the discovery of the Participant's fraud or misconduct, or otherwise in connection with a financial restatement.

Income Tax Withholding

        As a condition for the issuance of shares pursuant to Awards, the Plan requires satisfaction of any applicable federal, state, local, or foreign withholding tax obligations that may arise in connection with the award or the issuance of shares.

Transferability

        Awards may not be sold, pledged, assigned, hypothecated, transferred or disposed of other than by will or the laws of descent and distribution, except to the extent the Committee permits.

Certain Corporate Transactions

        The Committee shall equitably adjust, as it deems necessary and appropriate, the number of shares covered by each outstanding Award, the number of shares that have been authorized for issuance under the Plan but have not yet been granted or that have been returned to the Plan upon cancellation, forfeiture or expiration of an Award, and the maximum number of shares that may be

105


Table of Contents

granted in any calendar year to individual participants, as well as the price per share covered by each outstanding Award, to reflect any increase or decrease in the number of issued shares resulting from a stock split, reverse stock split, stock dividend, combination, recapitalization or reclassification of the shares, or any other increase or decrease in the number of issued shares effected without receipt of consideration by us.

        The Committee has the authority, in the event of a merger, sale of assets, reorganization or similar change in control transaction, to cause us to accelerate the vesting of Awards. To the extent that an Award is not exercised prior to consummation of a transaction in which the Award is not being assumed or substituted, such Award shall terminate upon such consummation.

Term of the Plan; Amendments or Termination

        The term of the Plan is 10 years from the date of adoption by the board of directors. Our board of directors may from time to time, amend, alter, suspend, discontinue or terminate the Plan; provided that no amendment, suspension or termination of the Plan shall materially and adversely affect Awards already granted. Furthermore, the Plan specifically prohibits the repricing of stock options or SARs without stockholder approval. For this purpose, a "repricing" means any of the following (or any other action that has the same effect as any of the following): (i) changing the terms of a stock option or SAR to lower its exercise price; (ii) any other action that is treated as a "repricing" under generally accepted accounting principles; and (iii) repurchasing for cash or canceling a stock option or SAR at a time when its exercise price is greater than the fair market value of the underlying stock in exchange for another award, unless the cancellation and exchange occurs in connection with a change in capitalization or similar change. Such cancellation and exchange would be considered a "repricing" regardless of whether it is treated as a "repricing" under generally accepted accounting principles and regardless of whether it is voluntary on the part of the participant.

U.S. Federal Income Tax Consequences

        The U.S. federal income tax rules applicable to awards under the Plan under the Code are summarized below. This summary omits the tax laws of any municipality, state, or foreign country in which a participant resides.

        Stock option grants under the Plan may be intended to qualify as incentive stock options under Section 422 of the Code or may be non-qualified stock options governed by Section 83 of the Code. Generally, federal income tax is not due from a participant upon the grant of a stock option, and a deduction is not taken by us. Under current tax laws, if a participant exercises a non-qualified stock option, he or she will have taxable income equal to the difference between the market price of the common stock on the exercise date and the stock option grant price. We are entitled to a corresponding deduction on our income tax return. A participant will not have any taxable income upon exercising an incentive stock option after the applicable holding periods have been satisfied (except that the alternative minimum tax may apply), and we will not receive a deduction when an incentive stock option is exercised. The treatment for a participant of a disposition of shares acquired through the exercise of a stock option depends on how long the shares were held and whether the shares were acquired by exercising an incentive stock option or a non-qualified stock option. We may be entitled to a deduction in the case of a disposition of shares acquired under an incentive stock option before the applicable holding periods have been satisfied.

        Generally, taxes are not due when a restricted stock or RSU award is initially granted, but the restricted stock becomes taxable when it is no longer subject to a "substantial risk of forfeiture" (generally, when it becomes vested or nontransferable), in the case of restricted stock, or when shares are issued in connection with vesting, in the case of an RSU. Income tax is calculated on the value of the stock at ordinary rates at that time, and then at capital gain rates when the shares are sold.

106


Table of Contents

However, no later than 30 days after a participant receives an award of restricted stock, pursuant to Section 83(b) of the Code, the participant may elect to recognize taxable ordinary income in an amount equal to the fair market value of the stock at the time of receipt. Provided that the election is made in a timely manner, the participant will not recognize any additional income when the award is no longer transferable or subject to a "substantial risk of forfeiture."

        The grant of a stock appreciation right ("SAR') generally will have no federal income tax consequences for the participant. Upon the exercise of a SAR, the participant will recognize ordinary income equal to the excess of the fair market value, on the date of exercise, of the shares of common stock with respect to which the SAR is being exercised, over the exercise price of the SAR for such shares. Generally, we will be entitled to a deduction equal to the amount of ordinary income recognized by the participant at the time the participant recognizes such income for tax purposes.

        Section 409A of the Code provides additional tax rules governing non-qualified deferred compensation. Generally, Section 409A will not apply to awards granted under the Plan, but may apply in some cases to RSUs. For such awards subject to Section 409A, certain of our officers may experience a delay of up to six months in the settlement of the awards in shares of our stock.

        Awards granted under the Plan may be structured to qualify as performance-based compensation under Section 162(m) of the Code. To qualify, the Plan must satisfy the conditions set forth in Section 162(m) of the Code, and stock options and other awards must be granted under the Plan by a committee consisting solely of two or more outside directors (as defined under Section 162 regulations) and must satisfy the Plan's limit on the total number of shares that may be awarded to any one participant during any calendar year. For awards other than stock options and SARs to qualify, the grant, issuance, vesting, or retention of the award must be contingent upon satisfying one or more of the performance criteria set forth in the Plan, as established and certified by a committee consisting solely of two or more outside directors. The rules and regulations promulgated under Section 162(m) are complicated and subject to change from time to time, sometimes with retroactive effect. In addition, a number of requirements must be met in order for particular compensation to so qualify. As such, there can be no assurance that any compensation awarded or paid under the Plan will be deductible under all circumstances. The Compensation, Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee retains the right to make awards which would not be deductible under Section 162(m).

ITEM 12.    SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT AND RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS

        Beneficial ownership is determined in accordance with the rules of the SEC. In computing the number of shares beneficially owned by a person and the percentage of ownership of that person, shares of common stock subject to options, warrants and convertible notes held by that person that are currently exercisable or become exercisable within 60 days of May 10, 2016 are deemed outstanding even if they have not actually been exercised. Those shares, however, are not deemed outstanding for the purpose of computing the percentage ownership of any other person.

        The following table sets forth certain information with respect to beneficial ownership of our common stock based on issued and outstanding shares of common stock owned by:

    Each person known to be the beneficial owner of 5% or more of our outstanding common stock;

    Each named executive officer;

    Each director; and

    All of our executive officers and directors as a group.

107


Table of Contents

        The number of shares of our common stock outstanding as of May 10, 2016 excludes 7,316,201 shares of common stock underlying outstanding options, 5,015,918 shares of common stock underlying outstanding warrants and 3,264,535 shares of common stock underlying outstanding principal and accrued interest amount on the convertible notes as of May 10, 2016. Unless otherwise indicated, the persons and entities named in the table have sole voting and sole investment power with respect to the shares set forth opposite the stockholder's name, subject to community property laws, where applicable. Unless otherwise indicated in the table or its footnotes, the address of each stockholder listed in the table is c/o Emmaus Life Sciences, Inc., 21250 Hawthorne Boulevard, Suite 800, Torrance, California 90503.

Name of Beneficial Owner
  Title   Amount and
Nature of
Beneficial
Ownership of
Shares of
Common Stock
  Percent of
Class(1)
 

Directors and Executive Officers

                 

Yutaka Niihara, M.D., MPH

  Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board     11,793,005 (2)   38.4 %

Steve Lee

  Interim Chief Financial Officer         *  

Peter B. Ludlum

  Co-President and Chief Business Officer     503,000 (3)   1.7 %

Yasushi Nagasaki

  Senior Vice President, Finance     840,841 (4)   2.9 %

Willis C. Lee

  Chief Operating Officer and Director     999,057 (5)   3.4 %

Lan T. Tran, MPH

  Co-President, Chief Administrative Officer and Corporate Secretary     775,294 (6)   2.6 %

Ian Zwicker. 

  Director         *  

Masaharu Osato, M.D. 

  Director     493,616 (7)   1.7 %

Jon Kuwahara

  Director         *  

Officers and Directors as a Group (total of 9 persons)

        15,404,813 (8)   45.9 %

5% or More Owners

                 

Daniel R. and Yuka I. Kimbell

        2,434,028 (9)   8.5 %

Sarissa Capital Management LP

        1,997,657 (10)   6.8 %

*
Less than 1%.

(1)
Based on 28,563,478 shares of common stock issued and outstanding as of May 10, 2016.

(2)
Includes 9,671,718 shares that are held jointly by Yutaka Niihara and his wife and Soomi Niihara. Also includes 44,229 shares of common stock for which Dr. Niihara is custodian. Dr. Niihara may be deemed the indirect beneficial owner of these securities since he has sole voting and investment control over the securities. Also includes 55,556 shares owned by Hope Hospice. Dr. Niihara is the Chief Executive Officer of Hope Hospice and has voting and investment power over such shares. Also includes 750,000 shares underlying stock options, 1,300,000 shares underlying warrants to purchase shares of common stock and 71,287 shares of common stock underlying outstanding convertible notes, in each case exercisable or convertible within 60 days after May 10, 2016.

(3)
Includes 500,000 shares underlying options to purchase shares of common stock.

(4)
Includes 90,841 shares of common stock underlying outstanding convertible notes convertible within 60 days after May 10, 2016, and 750,000 shares underlying options to purchase shares of common stock exercisable within 60 days after May 10, 2016.

(5)
Includes 750,000 shares underlying options to purchase shares of common stock exercisable within 60 days after May 10, 2016.

(6)
Includes 750,000 shares underlying options to purchase shares of common stock exercisable within 60 days after May 10, 2016.

108


Table of Contents

(7)
Includes 491,506 shares that are held by Osato Medical Clinic and its pension plan.

(8)
Includes options to purchase 3,500,000 shares of common stock, warrants to purchase 1,300,000 shares of common stock and 162,128 shares of common stock underlying outstanding convertible notes, in each case exercisable or convertible within 60 days after May 10, 2016.

(9)
Includes 44,229 shares of common stock held by the holder as custodian. Daniel and Yuka Kimbell may be deemed the indirect beneficial owner of these securities since they have sole voting and investment control over the securities. The address for these stockholders is 16 N. Marengo Street, Suite 307, Pasadena, CA 91101.

(10)
Includes (i) 1,192,801 shares of common stock held by Sarissa Capital Domestic Fund LP ("Sarissa Domestic"), consisting of 715,121 shares of common stock and 477,680 shares underlying warrants to purchase shares of common stock and (ii) 804,856 shares of common stock held by Sarissa Capital Offshore Master Fund LP ("Sarissa Offshore"), consisting of 482,536 shares of common stock and 322,320 shares underlying warrants to purchase shares of common stock. Sarissa, as the investment advisor to Sarissa Domestic and Sarissa Offshore (collectively, the "Sarissa Funds"), may be deemed to beneficially own the 1,997,657 aggregate shares beneficially owned by the Sarissa Funds on the basis of its sole or shared power to vote or direct the vote of such shares and/or its sole or shared power to dispose or direct the disposition of such shares. By virtue of his position as the Chief Investment Officer of Sarissa and as the managing member of Sarissa's general partner, Dr. Alexander J. Denner may also be deemed to have the shared power to vote or direct the vote of (and the shared power to dispose or direct the disposition of) the 1,997,657 shares beneficially owned by the Sarissa Funds. The address for this stockholder is 660 Steamboat Road, Greenwich, CT 06830.

Securities Authorized for Issuance under Equity Compensation Plans

        The following table provides information as of December 31, 2015 regarding compensation plans, including any individual compensation arrangements, under which equity securities of the Company are authorized for issuance. Please see Part III. Item 11 "2011 Stock Incentive Plan" for a description of the terms of the 2011 Stock Incentive Plan as amended.

Plan Category
  Number of Securities
to be issued
upon exercise of
outstanding options,
warrants and rights
  Weighted-average
exercise price of
outstanding options,
warrants and rights
  Number of securities
remaining available
for future issuance
under equity
compensation plans
 

Equity compensation plans approved by securityholders

    4,753,335   $ 3.60     4,246,665  

ITEM 13.    CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS, AND DIRECTOR INDEPENDENCE

Emmaus Medical, Inc.

        Emmaus Life Sciences, Inc., Emmaus Medical Emmaus Medical, Newfield Nutrition, EM Japan and EM Europe, which are either our directly or indirectly wholly-owned subsidiaries, each have interlocking executive and director positions with us and with each other. Dr. Niihara and Mr. Lee are directors of Newfield Nutrition. Dr. Niihara is a director of EM Japan. Dr. Niihara and Ms. Tran are directors of EM Europe. The officers of Emmaus Life Sciences are also the officers of Emmaus Medical and Newfield Nutrition and hold the same officer positions in Emmaus Medical and Newfield Nutrition as they do in Emmaus Life Sciences.

109


Table of Contents

Loans by Related Persons

        The following table sets forth information relating to our loans from related persons outstanding as of the date hereof or at any time during the year ended December 31, 2015.

Class
  Lender   Annual
Interest
Rate
  Date
of
Loan
  Term
of
Loan
  Principal
Amount
Outstanding
at
December 31,
2015
  Highest
Principal
Outstanding
  Amount
of
Principal
Repaid
  Amount
of
Interest
Paid
  Conversion
Rate
  Shares
Underlying
Notes at
December 31,
2015
 

Notes payable to related parties—current:

                                                     

  Hope Hospice(1)     8 %   1/17/2012   Due on demand   $ 200,000   $ 200,000   $   $ 8,000   $      

  Hope Hospice(1)     8 %   6/14/2012   Due on demand     200,000     200,000         8,000          

  Hope Hospice(1)     8 %   6/21/2012   Due on demand     100,000     100,000         4,000          

  Yutaka Niihara(2)(4)     10 %   12/5/2012   Due on demand     126,730     1,213,700     1,086,970     56,722          

  Hope Hospice(1)     8 %   2/11/2013   Due on demand     50,000     50,000         2,000          

  Lan T. Tran(2)     11 %   2/10/2014   2 years(3)     106,976     106,976                  

  Hideki & Eiko Uehara(5)     11 %   2/15/2014   2 years     133,333     133,333                  

  Hope Hospice(1)     10 %   1/7/2015   2 years(3)     100,000     100,000                  

  James Lee(5)     10 %   1/26/2015   2 years(3)     50,000     50,000                  

  Hope Hospice(1)     10 %   1/29/2015   2 years(3)     30,000     30,000                  

  Yutaka Niihara(2)(4)     10 %   1/29/2015   Due on demand         20,000     20,000     773              

  Lan T. Tran(2)     10 %   2/9/2015   2 years(3)     10,000     10,000                  

  Charles Stark(2)     10 %   2/10/2015   2 years(3)     10,000     10,000                  

  IRA Service Trust Co. FBO Peter B. Ludlum(2)     10 %   2/20/2015   2 years(3)     10,000     10,000                  

  Cuc T. Tran(5)     11 %   3/5/2015   1 year     13,161     13,161                  

  Yutaka Niihara(2)(4)     10 %   4/7/2015   2 years(3)     500,000     500,000                  

  Yutaka Niihara(2)(4)     10 %   5/21/2015   Due on demand     826,105     826,105                  

  Masaharu & Emiko Osato(4)     11 %   12/29/2015   Due on demand     300,000     300,000                  

                  Sub total   $ 2,766,304   $ 3,873,275   $ 1,106,970   $ 79,495   $      

Convertible notes payable to related parties—current:

                                                     

  Yasushi Nagasaki(2)     10 %   6/29/2012   Due on demand   $ 298,000   $ 388,800   $ 90,800   $   $ 3.30     108,505  

                  Sub total   $ 298,000   $ 388,800   $ 90,800   $   $     108,505  

Non-Current, convertible notes payable to related parties:

                                                     

  Yutaka Niihara(2)(4)     10 %   9/29/2015   2 years   $ 100,000   $ 100,000   $   $   $ 4.50     22,794  

  Charles & Kimxa Stark(2)     10 %   10/1/2015   2 years     20,000     20,000                 4.50     4,556  

  Yutaka & Soomi Niihara(2)(4)     10 %   11/16/2015   2 years     200,000     200,000                 4.50     45,004  

                  Sub total     320,000     320,000   $   $   $     72,354  

                  Total   $ 3,384,304   $ 4,582,075   $ 1,197,770   $   $     180,859  

(1)
Dr. Niihara, who is our CEO, is also the CEO of Hope Hospice.

(2)
Officer

(3)
Due on Demand

(4)
Director

(5)
Family of Officer/Director

        The above loans were made to provide us with needed working capital.

        In March 2015, we refinanced a one year promissory note payable to Ms. Cuc T. Tran, in the amount of $13,161. The new note bears interest at 11% per annum and matures on the anniversary date of the note. Ms. Tran is a family member of Ms. Lan T. Tran, one of our officers.

Guarantees by Officers

        On October 10, 2014, we refinanced a promissory note payable to the Shitabata Family Trust for $2,136,146. Dr. Niihara and Mr. Lee each provided a personal guarantee of the new promissory note issued to the Shitabata Family Trust.

        On October 10, 2014, we issued a promissory note payable to The Shitabata Family Trust for $613,615. Dr. Niihara and Mr. Lee each provided a personal guarantee of the new promissory note issued to The Shitabata Family Trust.

        On March 5, 2015, we issued a convertible promissory note to Dr. Terasaki in the amount of $656,052. Dr. Niihara provided a personal guarantee of the promissory note issued to Dr. Terasaki.

110


Table of Contents

        On December 9, 2015, we issued a convertible promissory note payable to Dr. Takemoto for $82,305. Dr. Niihara provided a personal guarantee of the promissory note issued to Dr. Takemoto.

        On December 9, 2015, we issued a convertible promissory note payable to Ms. Matsuo for $57,613. Dr. Niihara provided a personal guarantee of the promissory note issued to Ms. Matsuo.

        On December 9, 2015, we issued a convertible promissory note payable to Ms. Takemoto for $41,152. Dr. Niihara provided a personal guarantee of the promissory note issued to Ms. Takemoto.

        On December 30, 2015, we issued a promissory note payable to Dr. Osato & Mrs. Osato for $300,000. Dr. Niihara provided a personal guarantee of the promissory note issued to Dr. Osato & Mrs. Osato.

        On February 25, 2016, we issued a promissory note payable to Dr. Osato & Mrs. Osato for $400,000. Dr. Niihara provided a personal guarantee of the promissory note issued to Dr. Osato & Mrs. Osato.

        On April 14, 2016, we issued a promissory note payable to The Shitabata Family Trust for $250,000. Dr. Niihara provided a personal guarantee of the new promissory note issued to The Shitabata Family Trust.

        On April 18, 2016, we entered into a loan agreement with Agility Capital II, LLC for $1,035,000. This loan is personally guaranteed by Dr. Niihara and secured by certain of his real property.

        On May 13, 2016, we entered into a loan agreement with Agility Capital II, LLC for $260,000. This loan is personally guaranteed by Dr. Niihara and secured by certain of his real property.

Policy for Approval of Related Party Transactions

        All related party transactions during the year ended December 31, 2015 have been reviewed and approved by the independent directors of our board of directors. On May 9, 2013, our board of directors approved a written policy, or the Policy, for the review, approval and ratification of related-party transactions required to be disclosed pursuant to Item 404(a) of Regulation S-K. It is the responsibility of the board to administer the Policy. From time to time, however, the board may delegate responsibility for administration of the Policy to the Compensation, Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee of the board. Whichever body is responsible for administering the Policy at any given time or in regard to a particular related-party transaction is referred to as the "Reviewing Body."

        Our management is responsible for determining whether a transaction requires review under the Policy, based on a review of all facts and circumstances. Upon a determination by management that a transaction requires review under this Policy, the material facts concerning the transaction and the related person's interest in the transaction must be disclosed to the Reviewing Body.

        At each of its meetings, the Reviewing Body is provided with the details of each new, existing or proposed related-party transaction, including the terms of the transaction, the business purpose of the transaction, and the benefits to us and to the relevant related party. In determining whether to approve a related-party transaction, the Reviewing Body considers, among other factors, the following factors to the extent relevant to the related-party transaction: (i) whether the terms of the related-party transaction are fair to us and on the same basis as would apply if the transaction did not involve a related party; (ii) whether there are business reasons for us to enter into the related-party transaction; (iii) whether the related-party transaction would impair the independence of an outside director; and (iv) whether the related-party transaction would present an improper conflict of interests for any of our directors or executive officers, taking into account the size of the transaction, the overall financial position of the director, executive officer or related party, the direct or indirect nature of the director's, executive officer's or related party's interest in the transaction and the ongoing nature of any proposed relationship, and any other factors the Reviewing Body deems relevant.

111


Table of Contents

        Any member of the Reviewing Body who has an interest in the transaction under discussion must abstain from voting on its approval but may, if so requested by the Chairperson of the Reviewing Body, participate in some or all of the Reviewing Body's discussions of the transaction. Upon completion of its review of the transaction, the Reviewing Body may determine to permit or to prohibit the transaction.

        A related-party transaction entered into without pre-approval of the Reviewing Body is not deemed to violate the Policy, or be invalid or unenforceable, so long as the transaction is brought to the Reviewing Body as promptly as reasonably practical after it is entered into or after it becomes reasonably apparent that the transaction is covered by the Policy.

Director Independence

        Currently, our board of directors has determined that each of Ian Zwicker, Masaharu Osato and Jon Kuwahara is an "independent" director as defined by the NASDAQ Marketplace Rules, currently in effect and all applicable rules and regulations of the SEC. All members of the Audit and Compensation, Nominating and Corporate Governance Committees satisfy the "independence" standards applicable to members of each such committee. The board of directors made this affirmative determination regarding these directors' independence based on discussions with the directors and on its review of the directors' responses to a standard questionnaire regarding employment and compensation history; affiliations, family and other relationships; and transactions with the Company. The board of directors considered relationships and transactions between each director or any member of his immediate family and the Company and its subsidiaries and affiliates.

        Mr. Zwicker, Dr. Osato and Mr. Kuwahara, each of whom is an independent director as defined by the NASDAQ Marketplace Rules, are the sole members of the Audit Committee and the Compensation, Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee.

ITEM 14.    PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTING FEES AND SERVICES

        SingerLewak LLP ("SingerLewak") was engaged by the Company to serve as its independent registered public accounting firm on January 14, 2016. Prior to such engagement, KPMG LLP ("KPMG") was serving as the Company's independent registered public accounting firm. The following table presents fees billed or to be billed, including reimbursements for expenses, for professional audit services rendered by SingerLewak for the audit of the Company's consolidated financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2015 and re-audit of 2014. It also includes fees for services rendered by KPMG for the audit of the Company's consolidated financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2014 and interim reviews of the Company's quarterly financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2014 and the periods ended June 30, 2015 and March 31, 2015. The schedule includes fees billed for other services rendered by KPMG during those periods.

 
  Year ended
December 31,2015
  Year ended
December 31,2014
 
 
  SingerLewak   KPMG   SingerLewak   KPMG  

Audit Fees (including fees for interim reviews)

  $ 218,587   $ 121,850   $ 95,500   $ 231,200  

Audit-Related Fees

          10,000          

All Other Fees

                71,780  

Total

  $ 218,587   $ 131,850   $ 95,500   $ 302,980  

        On January 14, 2016, the Company dismissed KPMG as its independent registered public accounting firm. In connection with the audits of the fiscal years ended December 31, 2014 and 2013 and through January 14, 2016, there were no: (1) disagreements with KPMG on any matter of accounting principles or practices, financial statement disclosure, or auditing scope or procedure, which

112


Table of Contents

disagreements if not resolved to the satisfaction of KPMG would have caused them to make reference to the subject matter of the disagreements in connection with their report, or (2) reportable events, as that term is defined in Item 304(a)(1)(v) of Regulation S-K, except as follows:

    The Company's management had identified that the Company had a material weakness in its internal control over financial reporting and concluded that the Company's disclosure controls and procedures and internal control over financial reporting were not effective as of the periods set forth therein; and

    As of such time, the Company had not yet filed its interim financial statements for the periods ended June 30, 2015, and September 30, 2015, since a member of the Company's Audit Committee (who is no longer on the Company's Board of Directors) would not approve the filing of the June 30, 2015 Form 10-Q. The unwillingness of the Audit Committee member to approve the Form 10-Q filing arose from unspecified concerns. KPMG informed the Company that they would not be able to complete their review of the Company's interim financial statements for the period ended June 30, 2015 until such concerns had been independently investigated by the Company's Audit Committee or Board of Directors. The lack of independent representation on the Company's Audit Committee delayed the Company's ability to review and investigate the reasons the former Audit Committee member would not approve the filing of the June 30, 2015 Form 10-Q.

        On January 14, 2016, the Company engaged SingerLewak LLP ("SingerLewak") as the Company's independent registered public accounting firm, effective immediately. The engagement was approved by the Audit Committee on January 14, 2016. Prior to January 14, 2016, neither the Company nor anyone acting on its behalf consulted with SingerLewak regarding either (i) the application of accounting principles to a specified transaction, either completed or proposed, or the type of audit opinion that might be rendered with respect to the consolidated financial statements of the Company; or (ii) any matter that was the subject of a disagreement as described in Item 304(a)(1)(iv) of Regulation S-K or a "reportable event" as described in Item 304(a)(1)(v) of Regulation S-K.

Pre-Approval Policy

        The Audit Committee on an annual basis reviews audit and non-audit services performed by the independent registered public accounting firm for such services. The audit committee pre-approves (i) auditing services (including those performed for purposes of providing comfort letters and statutory audits) and (ii) non-auditing services that exceed a de minimis standard established by the committee, which are rendered to the Company by its outside auditors (including fees).

113


Table of Contents


PART IV

ITEM 15.    EXHIBITS AND FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULES

1.
Financial Statements: See "Index to Consolidated Financial Statements" on page F-1 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

2.
Financial Statement Schedule: See Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements starting on page F-8 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

3.
Exhibits: The exhibits listed in the accompanying "Exhibit Index" are filed or incorporated by reference as part of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Exhibit Index

Exhibit No.   Exhibit Description
  2.1   Merger Agreement dated as of April 21, 2011 by and among the registrant, AFH Merger Sub, Inc., AFH Holding and Advisory, LLC, and Emmaus Medical, Inc. (incorporated by reference from Exhibit 2.1 to the registrant's Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on April 25, 2011).
        
  3.1   Certificate of Incorporation (incorporated by reference from Exhibit 3.1 to the registrant's Form 10-SB filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on February 1, 2008).
        
  3.2   Bylaws (incorporated by reference from Exhibit 3.2 to the registrant's Form 10-SB filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on February 1, 2008).
        
  3.2(a ) Amendment No. 1 to the Company's Bylaws (incorporated by reference from Exhibit 3.1 to the registrant's Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 6, 2013).
        
  3.3   Certificate of Ownership and Merger filed with the Office of Secretary of State of Delaware on May 3, 2011 (incorporated by reference from Exhibit 3.3 to the registrant's Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 4, 2011).
        
  3.4   Certificate of Ownership and Merger effecting the name change to Emmaus Life Sciences, Inc. filed with the Delaware Secretary of State on September 14, 2011 (incorporated by reference from Exhibit 3.1 to the registrant's Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on September 15, 2011).
        
  4.1   Convertible Promissory Note (Cash Interest) dated March 14, 2011 (incorporated by reference from Exhibit 4.2 to the registrant's Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 4, 2011).
        
  4.2   Form of Convertible Note (No Interest) entered into with the persons indicated in Schedule A attached to the Form of Convertible Note (incorporated by reference from Exhibit 4.3 to the registrant's Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 4, 2011).
        
  4.3   Convertible Promissory Note (Cash Interest) dated November 23, 2010 (incorporated by reference from Exhibit 4.5 to the registrant's Current Report on Form 8-K/A filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on July 5, 2011).
        
  4.4   Specimen Certificate of Common Stock (incorporated by reference from Exhibit 4.6 to the registrant's Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 8, 2014).
 
   

114


Table of Contents

Exhibit No.   Exhibit Description
  4.5   Warrant dated January 17, 2012 issued by the registrant to Hope International Hospice, Inc (incorporated by reference from Exhibit 4.11 to the registrant's Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 8, 2014).
        
  4.6   Form of Warrant issued by the registrant to the persons indicated in Schedule A attached to the Form of Warrant (incorporated by reference from Exhibit 4.12 to the registrant's Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 8, 2014).
        
  4.7   Warrant issued by the registrant to the persons indicated in Schedule A attached to the Warrant (incorporated by reference from Exhibit 4.13 to the registrant's Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 8, 2014).
        
  4.8   Form of Warrant dated February 29, 2012 issued to Henry McKinnell in the amounts indicated on Schedule A attached to the Form of Warrant (incorporated by reference from Exhibit 4.15 to the registrant's Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 8, 2014).
        
  4.9   Form of Warrant issued by the registrant to Yutaka Niihara (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.9 to the registrant's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on November 14, 2012).
        
  4.10   Form of Convertible Promissory Note issued by the registrant to the persons indicated in Schedule A attached to the Form of Convertible Promissory Note (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to the registrant's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 15, 2013)
        
  4.11   Form of Convertible Promissory Note issued by the registrant to the persons indicated in Schedule A attached to the Form of Convertible Promissory Note (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.3 to the registrant's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 15, 2013).
        
  4.12   Form of Convertible Promissory Note issued by the registrant to the persons indicated in Schedule A attached to the Form of Convertible Promissory Note (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.4 to the registrant's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 15, 2013).
        
  4.13   Form of Convertible Promissory Note issued by the registrant to the persons indicated in Schedule A attached to the Form of Convertible Promissory Note (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.5 to the registrant's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 15, 2013).
        
  4.14   Form of Convertible Promissory Note issued by the registrant to the persons indicated in Schedule A attached to the Form of Convertible Promissory Note (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to the registrant's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on August 14, 2013).
        
  4.15   Convertible Promissory Note, dated April 3, 2013, issued by the registrant to Yoshiko & Yuki Takemoto (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.2 to the registrant's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on August 14, 2013).
 
   

115


Table of Contents

Exhibit No.   Exhibit Description
  4.16   Form of Convertible Promissory Note issued by the registrant to the persons indicated in Schedule A attached to the Form of Convertible Promissory Note (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.3 to the registrant's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on August 14, 2013).
        
  4.17   Convertible Promissory Note, dated May 1, 2013, issued by the registrant to Dr. Paul Terasaki (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.4 to the registrant's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on August 14, 2013).
        
  4.18   Form of Warrant issued by the registrant to Dr. Paul Terasaki (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.5 to the registrant's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on August 14, 2013).
        
  4.19   Form of Convertible Promissory Note issued by the registrant to the persons indicated in Schedule A attached to the Form of Convertible Promissory Note (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to the registrant's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on November 14, 2013).
        
  4.20   Form of Convertible Promissory Note issued by the registrant to the persons indicated in Schedule A attached to the Form of Convertible Promissory Note (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.2 to the registrant's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on November 14, 2013).
        
  4.21   Convertible Promissory Note, dated July 11, 2013, issued by the registrant to Yung Ming Suh (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.3 to the registrant's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on November 14, 2013).
        
  4.22   Convertible Promissory Note, dated July 18, 2013, issued by the registrant to the Takemoto Family (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.4 to the registrant's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on November 14, 2013).
        
  4.23   Convertible Promissory Note, dated October 5, 2013, issued by the registrant to MLPF&S Cust FBO Willis C. Lee (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.5 to the registrant's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on November 14, 2013).
        
  4.24   Convertible Promissory Note, dated October 10, 2013, issued by the registrant to The Shitabata Family Trust (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.6 to the registrant's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on November 14, 2013).
        
  4.25   Form of Convertible Promissory Note issued by the registrant to the persons indicated in Schedule A (incorporated by reference from Exhibit 4.22 to the registrant's Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 29, 2013).
        
  4.26   Promissory Note dated December 5, 2012 issued by the registrant to Dr. Yutaka Niihara (incorporated by reference from Exhibit 4.23 to the registrant's Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 29, 2013).
        
  4.27   Convertible Promissory Note dated January 12, 2014 issued by the registrant to Shigeru Matsuda (incorporated by reference from Exhibit 4.47 to the registrant's Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 8, 2014).
 
   

116


Table of Contents

Exhibit No.   Exhibit Description
  4.28   Form of Promissory Note issued by the registrant to the persons (Matsuda and Uehara) indicated in Schedule A (incorporated by reference from Exhibit 4.48 to the registrant's Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 8, 2014).
        
  4.29   Form of Convertible Promissory Note issued by the registrant to the persons indicated in Schedule A attached to the Form of Convertible Promissory Note (incorporated by reference from Exhibit 4.1 to the registrant's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on August 14, 2014).
        
  4.30   Convertible Promissory Note, dated May 1, 2014, issued by the registrant to Dr. Paul Terasaki (incorporated by reference from Exhibit 4.2 to the registrant's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on August 14, 2014).
        
  4.31   Form of Warrant issued by the registrant to Dr. Paul Terasaki (incorporated by reference from Exhibit 4.3 to the registrant's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on August 14, 2014).
        
  4.32   Form of Warrant issued by the registrant on June 10, 2014 to holders of warrants issued by the registrant in its September 11, 2013 private placement who exercised such warrants (incorporated by reference from Exhibit 4.4 to the registrant's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on August 14, 2014).
        
  4.33   Convertible Promissory Note, dated October 10, 2014, issued by the registrant to The Shitabata Family Trust (incorporated by reference from Exhibit 4.1 to the registrant's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on November 13, 2014).
        
  4.34   Convertible Promissory Note, Dated December 21, 2014, issued by the registrant to Alison Brown-Carvalho (incorporated by reference from Exhibit 4.35 to the registrant's Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 31, 2015).
        
  4.35   Form of Convertible Promissory Note issued by the registrant to Sun Moo & Hyon Sil Lee, Shigenori Yoshida, and Yoshiko Takemoto (incorporated by reference from Exhibit 4.1 to the registrant's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 20, 2015).
        
  4.36   Convertible Promissory Note, dated March 2, 2015, issued by the registrant to J.R. Downey (incorporated by reference from Exhibit 4.2 to the registrant's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 20, 2015).
        
  4.37   Convertible Promissory Note, dated March 5, 2015, issued by the registrant to Dr. Paul Terasaki (incorporated by reference from Exhibit 4.3 to the registrant's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 20, 2015).
        
  4.38   Convertible Promissory Note, dated March 20, 2015, issued by the registrant to Yukio Hatoyama (incorporated by reference from Exhibit 4.4 to the registrant's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 20, 2015).
        
  4.39   Form of Warrant to Purchase Shares of Common Stock issued by the registrant to J. R. Downey and Dr. Paul Terasaki (incorporated by reference from Exhibit 4.5 to the registrant's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 20, 2015).
 
   

117


Table of Contents

Exhibit No.   Exhibit Description
  4.40   Convertible Promissory Note, dated April 2, 2015, issued by the registrant to Yu Mei Lun Susan (incorporated by reference from Exhibit 4.1 to the registrant's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 20, 2016).
        
  4.41   Convertible Promissory Note, dated April 3, 2015, issued by the registrant to Yoshiko & Yuki Takemoto (incorporated by reference from Exhibit 4.2 to the registrant's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 20, 2016).
        
  4.42   Form of Convertible Promissory Note issued by the registrant to Alvin Yong, Eastwind, Ltd., and Alfred and Janet Lui Family Trust (incorporated by reference from Exhibit 4.3 to the registrant's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 20, 2016).
        
  4.43   Form of Convertible Promissory Note issued by the registrant to IBC Solutions Ltd. and Dr. Yutaka Niihara (incorporated by reference from Exhibit 4.1 to the registrant's Quarterly Report on From 10-Q filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 20, 2016).
        
  4.44   Convertible Promissory Note, dated July 18, 2015, issued by the registrant to The Takemoto Family (incorporated by reference from Exhibit 4.2 to the registrant's Quarterly Report on From 10-Q filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 20, 2016).
        
  4.45   Form of Convertible Promissory Note issued by the registrant to the persons indicated in Schedule A attached to the Form of Convertible Promissory Note
        
  10.1 + 2011 Stock Incentive Plan (incorporated by reference from Exhibit 10.3 to the registrant's Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 4, 2011).
        
  10.1(a) + Form of Incentive Stock Option Agreement (Time-based and Performance-based Vesting) under the Emmaus Life Sciences, Inc. 2011 Stock Incentive Plan (incorporated by reference from Exhibit 10.3(a) to the registrant's Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 4, 2011).
        
  10.1(b) + Form of Incentive Stock Option Agreement (Time-based Vesting) under the Emmaus Life Sciences, Inc. 2011 Stock Incentive Plan (incorporated by reference from Exhibit 10.3(b) to the registrant's Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 4, 2011).
        
  10.1(c) + Form of Non-Qualified Stock Option Agreement (Time-based and Performance-based Vesting) under the Emmaus Life Sciences, Inc. 2011 Stock Incentive Plan (incorporated by reference from Exhibit 10.3(c) to the registrant's Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 4, 2011).
        
  10.1(d) + Form of Non-Qualified Stock Option Agreement (Time-based Vesting) under the Emmaus Life Sciences, Inc. 2011 Stock Incentive Plan (incorporated by reference from Exhibit 10.3(d) to the registrant's Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 4, 2011).
        
  10.1(e) + Form of Restricted Stock Agreement (Time-based and Performance-based Vesting) under the Emmaus Life Sciences, Inc. 2011 Stock Incentive Plan (incorporated by reference from Exhibit 10.3(e) to the registrant's Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 4, 2011).
 
   

118


Table of Contents

Exhibit No.   Exhibit Description
  10.1(f) + Form of Restricted Stock Agreement (Time-based Vesting) under the Emmaus Life Sciences, Inc. 2011 Stock Incentive Plan (incorporated by reference from Exhibit 10.3(f) to the registrant's Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 4, 2011).
        
  10.1(g) + Amended and Restated 2011 Stock Incentive Plan (incorporated by reference from Annex A to the registrant's Definitive Proxy Statement on Schedule 14A filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on August 21, 2013).
        
  10.1(h) + Amended and Restated 2011 Stock Incentive Plan (incorporated by reference from Annex A to the registrant's Definitive Proxy Statement on Schedule 14A filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on September 19, 2014).
        
  10.2   License Agreement dated as of March 7, 2001 by and between Harbor-UCLA Research and Education Institute and Orphan Drug International, L.L.C (i.e. Emmaus Medical, Inc.) and corresponding Addendum to the License Agreement entered into December 19, 2003 between Harbor-UCLA Research and Education Institute and Emmaus Medical, Inc. (incorporated by reference from Exhibit 10.4 to the registrant's Current Report on Form 8-K/A filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on July 5, 2011).
        
  10.3   Assignment and Transfer Agreement dated as of February 1, 2011 by and among CATO Holding Company, Nutritional Restart Pharmaceutical Limited Partnership and Emmaus Medical, Inc. (incorporated by reference from Exhibit 10.8 to the registrant's Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 4, 2011).
        
  10.4   Joint Research and Development Agreement dated as of April 8, 2011 by and between Emmaus Medical, Inc. and CellSeed, Inc. (incorporated by reference from Exhibit 10.10 to the registrant's Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 4, 2011).
        
  10.4(a ) Addendum to the Joint Research and Development Agreement effective August 8, 2011 (incorporated by reference from Exhibit 10.4(a) to the registrant's Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 8, 2014).
        
  10.5   Individual Agreement dated as of April 8, 2011 by and between Emmaus Medical, Inc. and CellSeed, Inc. (incorporated by reference from Exhibit 10.11 to the registrant's Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 4, 2011).
        
  10.6 + Employment Agreement dated as of April 5, 2011 by and between Emmaus Medical, Inc. and Yutaka Niihara, M.D., MPH (incorporated by reference from Exhibit 10.12 to the registrant's Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 4, 2011).
        
  10.7 + Employment Agreement dated as of April 5, 2011 by and between Emmaus Medical, Inc. and Willis C. Lee (incorporated by reference from Exhibit 10.13 to the registrant's Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 4, 2011).
        
  10.8 + Employment Agreement dated as of April 5, 2011 by and between Emmaus Medical, Inc. and Lan T. Tran (incorporated by reference from Exhibit 10.14 to the registrant's Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 4, 2011).
 
   

119


Table of Contents

Exhibit No.   Exhibit Description
  10.9 + Form of Indemnification Agreement and List of Officers and Directors (incorporated by reference from Exhibit 10.20 to the registrant's Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 4, 2011).
        
  10.10   Trademark Assignment dated as of February 14, 2011 by and between CATO Research Ltd. and Emmaus Medical, Inc. (incorporated by reference from Exhibit 10.23 to the registrant's Current Report on Form 8-K/A filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on July 5, 2011).
        
  10.11   Letter of Intent by and between Ajinomoto Company and Emmaus Medical, Inc. (incorporated by reference from Exhibit 10.24 to the registrant's Current Report on Form 8-K/A filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on July 5, 2011).
        
  10.12   Promissory Note dated January 17, 2012 issued by the registrant to Hope International Hospice, Inc. (incorporated by reference from Exhibit 10.13 to the registrant's Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 8, 2014)
        
  10.13   Form of Subscription Agreement dated September 11, 2013 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the registrant's Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on September 17, 2013).
        
  10.14   Form of Warrant issued to the Investors (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2 to the registrant's Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on September 17, 2013).
        
  10.15   Agreement dated September 11, 2013 by and among the Company, Dr. Yutaka Niihara, TRW and Sarissa (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.3 to the registrant's Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on September 17, 2013).
        
  10.15(a ) Amendment No. 1 to Agreement by and among the Company, Dr. Yutaka Niihara and Sarissa (incorporated by reference from Exhibit 10.1 to the registrant's Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on November 24, 2015).
        
  10.16   Form of Placement Agent Warrant (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.4 to the registrant's Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on September 17, 2013).
        
  10.17   Form of Promissory Note issued by the registrant on the dates and to the persons and in the amounts indicated on Schedule A attached to the Form of Promissory Note (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the registrant's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on August 14, 2012).
        
  10.18   Form of Promissory Note issued by the registrant to Hope International Hospice, Inc. in the amounts indicated in Schedule A attached to the Form of Promissory Note (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2 to the registrant's Current Report on Form 10-Q filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 15, 2013).
        
  10.19   Promissory Note, dated June 28, 2013, issued by the registrant to For Days Co., Ltd. (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the registrant's Current Report on Form 10-Q filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on August 14, 2013).
 
   

120


Table of Contents

Exhibit No.   Exhibit Description
  10.20   Share Cancellation Agreement dated as of April 21, 2011 by and between the registrant and AFH Holding and Advisory, LLC (incorporated by reference from Exhibit 10.1 to the registrant's Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 4, 2011).
        
  10.21   Registration Rights Agreement dated as of May 3, 2011 by and among the registrant and the individuals listed on Schedule A thereto (incorporated by reference from Exhibit 10.2 to the registrant's Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 4, 2011).
        
  10.21(a ) Amendment and Waiver No. 1 to Registration Rights Agreement dated as of March 6, 2012 by and among the registrant and the individuals listed on Schedule A thereto (incorporated by reference from Exhibit 10.26(a) to the registrant's Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 8, 2014).
        
  10.22   Amended and Restated Letter of Intent by and between the registrant and AFH Holding & Advisory LLC dated September 30, 2011 (incorporated by reference from Exhibit 10.27 to the registrant's Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 8, 2014).
        
  10.23   Office Lease, dated March 12, 2008, by and between Emmaus Medical, Inc. and 20655 S. Western Avenue, LLC (incorporated by reference from Exhibit 10.6 to the registrant's Current Report on Form 8-K/A filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on July 5, 2011).
        
  10.23(a ) Office Lease extension, dated November 4, 2013, by and between Emmaus Medical, Inc. and 20655 S. Western Avenue, LLC (incorporated by reference from Exhibit 10.28(a) to the registrant's Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 8, 2014).
        
  10.23(b ) Office Lease extension, dated July 30, 2014, by and between Emmaus Medical, Inc. and 20655 S. Western Avenue, LLC (incorporated by reference from Exhibit 10.23(b) to the registrant's Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 31, 2015).
        
  10.23(c ) Office Lease extension, dated July 30, 2014, by and between Emmaus Medical, Inc. and 3830 Del Amo Blvd, LLC (incorporated by reference from Exhibit 10.23(c) to the registrant's Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 31, 2015).
        
  10.23(d ) Consent to Subletting Agreement, dated October 20, 2014, by and between Bixby Torrance LLC, Flipswap, Inc. and Emmaus Life Sciences, Inc (incorporated by reference from Exhibit 10.23(d) to the registrant's Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 31, 2015).
        
  10.23(e ) Office Sublease, dated October 20, 2014, by and between Emmaus Life Sciences, Inc. and Flipswap, Inc (incorporated by reference from Exhibit 10.23(e) to the registrant's Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 31, 2015).
        
  10.23(f ) Office Lease, dated October 20, 2014, by and between Emmaus Life Sciences, Inc. and Bixby Torrance LLC (incorporated by reference from Exhibit 10.23(f) to the registrant's Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 31, 2015).
 
   

121


Table of Contents

Exhibit No.   Exhibit Description
  10.24   Form of Warrant issued by the registrant to the persons indicated in Schedule A attached to the Form of Warrant (incorporated by reference from Exhibit 10.33 to the registrant's Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 8, 2014).
        
  10.25   Federal Supply Schedule Contract Award dated December 8, 2010 by and between the United States Department of Veterans Affairs and Emmaus Medical, Inc. (incorporated by reference from Exhibit 10.5 to the registrant's Current Report on Form 8-K/A filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on July 5, 2011).
        
  10.26   Promissory Note dated as of October 10, 2014 by and between Emmaus Medical, Inc. and The Shitabata Family Trust (incorporated by reference from Exhibit 10.1 to the registrant's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on November 13, 2014).
        
  10.27   Form of Promissory Note issued by the registrant to Hope International Hospice, James Lee, Yutaka Niihara, Lan T. Tran, Charles Stark, Shigeru Matsuda, IRS Service Trust Co. FBO Peter B. Ludlum, and Cuc T. Tran (incorporated by reference from Exhibit 10.1 to the registrant's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 20, 2015).
        
  10.28   Termination Agreement, dated December 29, 2015, between CellSeed Inc. and Emmaus Medial, Inc. (incorporated by reference from Exhibit 10.2 to the registrant's Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on January 4, 2016).
        
  10.29   Form of Promissory Note issued by the registrant to the persons indicated in Schedule A attached to the Form of Convertible Promissory Note (incorporated by reference from Exhibit 10.1 to the registrant's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March XX, 2016).
        
  10.30   Promissory Note dated as of December 29, 2015 by and between Emmaus Medical, Inc. and Masaharu & Emiko Osato
        
  21.1   List of Subsidiaries (incorporated by reference from Exhibit 21.1 to the registrant's Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 8, 2014).
        
  31.1   Certification of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Item 601(b)(31) of Regulation S-K, as adopted pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
        
  31.2   Certification of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Item 601(b)(31) of Regulation S-K, as adopted pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
        
  32.1   Certification of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
        
  101.INS   XBRL Instance Document
        
  101.SCH   XBRL Taxonomy Extension Schema Document
        
  101.CAL   XBRL Taxonomy Extension Calculation Linkbase Document
        
  101.DEF   XBRL Taxonomy Extension Definition Linkbase Document
        
  101.LAB   XBRL Taxonomy Extension Label Linkbase Document
        
  101.PRE   XBRL Taxonomy Extension Presentation Linkbase Document

+
Designates management contract or compensatory plan or arrangement.

122


Table of Contents


SIGNATURES

        Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the Registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized, in the City of Torrance, California, on May 20, 2016.

    Emmaus Life Sciences, Inc.

 

 

By:

 

/s/ YUTAKA NIIHARA

        Name:   Yutaka Niihara, MD, MPH
        Title:   Chief Executive Officer (principal executive officer and duly authorized officer)

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

SIGNATURE
 
TITLE
 
DATE

 

 

 

 

 
/s/ YUTAKA NIIHARA

Yutaka Niihara, M.D., MPH
  Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer) and Chairman of the Board   May 20, 2016

/s/ STEVE LEE

Steve Lee

 

Interim Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)

 

May 20, 2016

/s/ WILLIS C. LEE

Willis C. Lee

 

Vice Chairman

 

May 20, 2016

/s/ JON KUWAHARA

Jon Kuwahara

 

Director

 

May 20, 2016

/s/ IAN ZWICKER

Ian Zwicker

 

Director

 

May 20, 2016

/s/ MASAHARU OSATO

Masaharu Osato, M.D.

 

Director

 

May 20, 2016

123


Table of Contents


INDEX TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

EMMAUS LIFE SCIENCES, INC.

INDEX TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

 
  PAGE  

REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

    F-2  

CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS AS OF DECEMBER 31, 2015 AND 2014

    F-3  

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF COMPREHENSIVE LOSS FOR THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2015 AND 2014

    F-4  

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CHANGES IN STOCKHOLDERS' DEFICIT FOR THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2015 AND 2014

    F-5  

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS FOR THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2015 AND 2014

    F-7  

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AS OF AND FOR THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2015 AND 2014

    F-8  

F-1


Table of Contents


REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

To the Board of Directors and Shareholders
Emmaus Life Sciences, Inc. and subsidiaries

        We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of Emmaus Life Sciences, Inc. and subsidiaries (collectively, the "Company") as of December 31, 2015 and 2014, and the related consolidated statements of comprehensive loss, changes in stockholders' deficit, and cash flows for the years then ended. These financial statements are the responsibility of the Company's 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. The Company is not required to have, nor were we engaged to perform, an audit of its 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 Company's 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, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.

        In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the Company as of December 31, 2015 and 2014, and the results of its operations and its cash flows for the years then ended in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles.

        The accompanying consolidated financial statements have been prepared assuming that the Company will continue as a going concern. As discussed in Note 2 to the consolidated financial statements, the Company has suffered recurring losses from operations, its total liabilities exceed its total assets and it has an accumulated stockholders' deficit. This raises substantial doubt about the Company's ability to continue as a going concern. Management's plans in regard to these matters also are described in Note 2. The consolidated financial statements do not include any adjustments that might result from the outcome of this uncertainty.

/s/ SingerLewak LLP
Los Angeles, California
May 20, 2016

F-2


Table of Contents


EMMAUS LIFE SCIENCES, INC.

CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS


 
  As of  
 
  December 31,
2015
  December 31,
2014
 
 
   
  (Note 1)
 

ASSETS

 

CURRENT ASSETS

             

Cash and cash equivalents

  $ 472,341   $ 556,318  

Accounts receivable

    101,639     42,734  

Inventories, net

    219,163     250,413  

Marketable securities

        79,236  

Marketable securities, pledged to creditor

    219,015      

Prepaid expenses and other current assets

    131,113     129,554  

Total current assets

    1,143,271     1,058,255  

PROPERTY AND EQUIPMENT, net

    58,227     72,391  

OTHER ASSETS

             

Marketable securities, pledged to creditor

        334,410  

Intangibles, net

        892,857  

Deposits

    275,500     306,379  

Total other assets

    275,500     1,533,646  

Total Assets

  $ 1,476,998   $ 2,664,292  

LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS' DEFICIT

 

CURRENT LIABILITIES

             

Accounts payable and accrued expenses

  $ 3,780,494   $ 2,601,420  

Due to related party

        394,446  

Other current liability

    88,331      

Notes payable, net

    4,656,749     1,643,615  

Notes payable to related parties, net

    2,766,304     825,562  

Convertible notes payable, net

    6,000,347     3,456,959  

Convertible notes payable to related parties, net

    298,000     373,000  

Total current liabilities

    17,590,225     9,295,002  

LONG-TERM LIABILITIES

             

Deferred rent

    59,886     3,729  

Liability classified warrants

        3,206,000  

Warrant derivative liabilities

    7,863,000     6,520,000  

Notes payable, net

        833,335  

Notes payable to related parties, net

        133,333  

Convertible notes payable, net

    4,206,873     3,651,555  

Convertible notes payable to related parties, net

    320,000     200,000  

Total long-term liabilities

    12,449,759     14,547,952  

Total Liabilities

    30,039,984     23,842,954  

COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

             

STOCKHOLDERS' DEFICIT

             

Preferred stock—par value $0.001 per share, 20,000,000 shares authorized, none issued and outstanding

         

Common stock—par value $0.001 per share, 100,000,000 shares authorized, 28,163,478 and 30,511,573 shares issued and outstanding at December 31, 2015 and December 31, 2014, respectively

    28,163     30,512  

Additional paid-in capital

    56,508,984     51,068,677  

Accumulated other comprehensive loss

    (318,324 )   (194,015 )

Accumulated deficit

    (84,781,809 )   (72,083,836 )

Total Stockholders' Deficit

    (28,562,986 )   (21,178,662 )

Total Liabilities & Stockholders' Deficit

  $ 1,476,998   $ 2,664,292  

   

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

F-3


Table of Contents


EMMAUS LIFE SCIENCES, INC.

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF COMPREHENSIVE LOSS


 
  Year Ended December 31,  
 
  2015   2014  
 
   
  (Note 1)
 

REVENUES, Net

  $ 590,114   $ 500,679  

COST OF GOODS SOLD

    286,687     267,040  

GROSS PROFIT

    303,427     233,639  

OPERATING EXPENSES

             

Research and development

    1,579,112     1,966,254  

Selling

    428,643     668,862  

General and administrative

    9,419,683     12,555,266  

Impairment of intangible assets

    678,571      

    12,106,009     15,190,382  

LOSS FROM OPERATIONS

    (11,802,582 )   (14,956,743 )

OTHER INCOME (EXPENSE)

             

Realized gain on securities available-for-sale

    (48,709 )    

Gain on derecognition of accounts payable and settlement of litigation

    418,366      

Change in fair value of liability classified warrants

    661,000     (1,986,744 )

Change in fair value of warrant derivative liabilities

    1,202,000     548,000  

Warrant exercise inducement expense

        (3,523,000 )

Interest and other income

    102,676     246,379  

Interest expense

    (3,227,160 )   (2,082,541 )

    (891,827 )   (6,797,906 )

LOSS BEFORE INCOME TAXES

    (12,694,409 )   (21,754,649 )

INCOME TAXES

    3,564     3,665  

NET LOSS

    (12,697,973 )   (21,758,314 )

COMPONENTS OF OTHER COMPREHENSIVE LOSS

             

Unrealized holding loss on securities available-for-sale

    (123,113 )   (435,010 )

Unrealized foreign currency translation effect

    (1,196 )   (21,688 )

    (124,309 )   (456,698 )

COMPREHENSIVE LOSS

  $ (12,822,282 ) $ (22,215,012 )

NET LOSS PER COMMON SHARE

  $ (0.44 ) $ (0.73 )

WEIGHTED AVERAGE COMMON SHARES OUTSTANDING

    28,958,580     29,846,962  

   

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

F-4


Table of Contents


EMMAUS LIFE SCIENCES, INC.

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF CHANGES IN STOCKHOLDERS' DEFICIT

FOR THE PERIOD FROM DECEMBER 31, 2013 TO DECEMBER 31, 2014


 
  Common stock—par
value
$0.001 per share,
100,000,000 shares
authorized
   
   
   
   
 
 
   
  Accumulated
Other
Comprehensive
Income
(Loss)
   
   
 
 
  Shares   Common
Stock
  Additional
Paid-in
Capital
  Accumulated
Deficit
  Total  

Balance, December 31, 2013

    29,228,306   $ 29,228   $ 35,606,951   $ 262,683   $ (50,325,522 ) $ (14,426,660 )

Warrant issued in conjunction with convertible note

            126,732             126,732  

Beneficial conversion feature related to convertible and promissory notes payable

            1,392,387             1,392,387  

Proceeds from exercise of warrants

    1,254,621     1,255     4,276,380             4,277,635  

Share-based compensation

            6,521,812             6,521,812  

Conversion of notes payable to common stock

    528,646     529     1,768,671             1,769,200  

Excess value of liability classified warrants upon exercise

            1,752,744             1,752,744  

Common stock repurchased and cancelled

    (500,000 )   (500 )   (377,000 )           (377,500 )

Unrealized loss on marketable securities net of tax

                (435,010 )       (435,010 )

Foreign currency translation effect

                (21,688 )       (21,688 )

Net loss

                    (21,758,314 )   (21,758,314 )

Balance, December 31, 2014

    30,511,573   $ 30,512   $ 51,068,677   $ (194,015 ) $ (72,083,836 ) $ (21,178,662 )

   

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

F-5


Table of Contents


EMMAUS LIFE SCIENCES, INC.

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF CHANGES IN STOCKHOLDERS' DEFICIT
(Continued)

FOR THE PERIOD FROM DECEMBER 31, 2014 TO DECEMBER 31, 2015


 
  Common stock—par
value
$0.001 per share,
100,000,000 shares
authorized
   
   
   
   
 
 
   
  Accumulated
Other
Comprehensive
Loss
   
   
 
 
  Shares   Common
Stock
  Additional
Paid-in
Capital
  Accumulated
Deficit
  Total  

Balance, December 31, 2014

    30,511,573   $ 30,512   $ 51,068,677   $ (194,015 ) $ (72,083,836 ) $ (21,178,662 )

Warrants issued in conjunction with convertible note

            220,071             220,071  

Beneficial conversion feature related to convertible and promissory notes payable

            1,388,201             1,388,201  

Proceeds from exercise of warrants

    148,256     148     102,737             102,885  

Share-based compensation

            3,708,801             3,708,801  

Conversion of notes payable to common stock

    5,898     5     17,995             18,000  

Exercise of common stock options (cashless)

    2,000     2     (2 )            

Stock cancelled

    (2,504,249 )   (2,504 )   2,504              

Unrealized loss on marketable securities, net of tax

                (123,113 )       (123,113 )

Foreign currency translation effect

                (1,196 )       (1,196 )

Net loss

                    (12,697,973 )   (12,697,973 )

Balance, December 31, 2015

    28,163,478   $ 28,163   $ 56,508,984   $ (318,324 ) $ (84,781,809 ) $ (28,562,986 )

   

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

F-6


Table of Contents


EMMAUS LIFE SCIENCES, INC.

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS

 
  Year ended December 31,  
 
  2015   2014  
 
   
  (Note 1)
 

CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES

             

Net loss

  $ (12,697,973 ) $ (21,758,314 )

Adjustments to reconcile net loss to net cash flows used in operating activities

   
 
   
 
 

Depreciation and amortization

    233,179     230,906  

Impairment of intangible assets

    678,571      

Interest expense accrued from discount of convertible notes

    1,597,064     897,353  

Foreign exchange adjustments on convertible notes and notes payable

    474     (157,494 )

Realized gain on marketable securities available-for-sale

    48,709      

Gain on settlement of litigation

    (418,366 )    

Share-based compensation

    3,708,801     6,521,812  

Warrant exercise inducement expense

        3,523,000  

Change in fair value of liability classified warrants

    (661,000 )   1,986,744  

Change in fair value of warrant derivative liabilities

    (1,202,000 )   (548,000 )

Net changes in operating assets and liabilities

             

Accounts receivable

    (58,904 )   (9,259 )

Inventories

    31,251     (19,233 )

Prepaid expenses and other current assets

    (1,559 )   (69,178 )

Deposits

    30,879     (172,903 )

Accounts payable and accrued expenses

    1,607,203     835,012  

Other current liability

    88,331      

Deferred rent

    56,157     4,075  

Net cash flows used in operating activities

    (6,959,183 )   (8,735,479 )

CASH FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES

             

Proceeds from sales of investment securities available-for-sale

    46,728      

Purchases of property and equipment

    (4,731 )   (64,192 )

Net cash flows from (used in) investing activities

    41,997     (64,192 )

CASH FLOWS FROM FINANCING ACTIVITIES

             

Proceeds from notes payable issued

    4,235,566     400,000  

Proceeds from convertible notes payable issued

    3,024,558     1,720,000  

Due to dissenters

        (125,000 )

Repurchase of common stock

        (377,500 )

Payments of notes payable

    (250,000 )    

Payments of convertible notes payable

    (279,800 )   (174,300 )

Proceeds from exercise of warrants

    102,885     4,277,635  

Net cash flows from financing activities

    6,833,209     5,720,835  

Effect of exchange rate changes on cash

        (3,446 )

Net decrease in cash and cash equivalents

    (83,977 )   (3,082,282 )

Cash and cash equivalents, beginning of period

    556,318     3,638,600  

Cash and cash equivalents, end of period

  $ 472,341   $ 556,318  

SUPPLEMENTAL DISCLOSURES OF CASH FLOW ACTIVITIES

             

Interest paid

  $ 319,282   $ 434,115  

Income taxes paid

  $ 3,364   $ 3,665  

Conversion of notes payable to common stock

  $ 18,000   $ 1,621,862  

Conversion of accrued interest payable to common stock

      $ 147,338  

   

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

F-7


Table of Contents


Emmaus Life Sciences, Inc.

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

NOTE 1—DESCRIPTION OF BUSINESS

        Organization —Emmaus Life Sciences, Inc. (the "Company" or "Emmaus"), which is engaged in the discovery, development, and commercialization of innovative treatments and therapies primarily for rare and orphan diseases, was incorporated in the state of Delaware on September 24, 2007. Pursuant to an Agreement and Plan of Merger, dated April 21, 2011 (the "Merger Agreement"), by and among the Company, AFH Merger Sub, Inc., a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company ("AFH Merger Sub"), AFH Holding and Advisory, LLC ("AFH Advisory"), and Emmaus Medical, Inc. ("Emmaus Medical"), Emmaus Medical merged with and into AFH Merger Sub with Emmaus Medical continuing as the surviving entity (the "Merger"). Upon the closing of the Merger, the Company changed its name from "AFH Acquisition IV, Inc." to "Emmaus Holdings, Inc." and became the parent company of Emmaus Medical. The Company changed its name from "Emmaus Holdings, Inc." to "Emmaus Life Sciences, Inc." on September 14, 2011.

        Emmaus Medical is a Delaware corporation originally incorporated on September 12, 2003. Emmaus Medical, LLC was organized on December 20, 2000. In October 2003, Emmaus Medical, LLC conducted a reorganization and merged with Emmaus Medical. As a result of the merger, Emmaus Medical acquired the exclusive patent rights for a treatment for sickle cell disease ("SCD").

        In October 2010, the Company established Emmaus Medical Japan, Inc., a Japanese corporation ("EM Japan") by funding 97% of the initial capital. EM Japan is engaged in the business of trading in nutritional supplements and other medical products and drugs. The results of EM Japan have been included in the consolidated financial statements of the Company since the date of formation. The aggregate formation cost was $52,500. Emmaus Medical acquired the additional 3% of the outstanding shares of EM Japan during the three months ended March 31, 2011 and is now the 100% owner of the outstanding share capital.

        In November 2011, the Company formed Emmaus Medical Europe, Ltd. ("EM Europe"), a wholly owned subsidiary of Emmaus Medical. EM Europe's primary focus is expanding the business of Emmaus Medical in Europe.

        Emmaus, its wholly-owned subsidiary, Emmaus Medical, and Emmaus Medical's wholly-owned subsidiaries, Newfield Nutrition Corporation ("Newfield Nutrition"), EM Japan and EM Europe, are collectively referred to herein as the "Company."

        Nature of Business —The Company has undertaken the business of developing and commercializing cost-effective treatments and therapies for rare diseases. The Company's primary business purpose is to commercialize its treatment for SCD.

        To a lesser extent, the Company is also engaged in the marketing and sale of NutreStore®, which has received approval from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration ("FDA"), as a treatment for short bowel syndrome ("SBS") in patients receiving specialized nutritional support when used in conjunction with a recombinant human growth hormone that is approved for this indication. The Company's indirect wholly-owned subsidiary, Newfield Nutrition, sells L- glutamine as a nutritional supplement under the brand name AminoPure® through retail stores in multiple states in the United States and via importers and distributors in Japan, Taiwan and South Korea. The Company also owns a minority interest of less than 1% in CellSeed, Inc., a Japanese company listed on the Tokyo Stock Exchange ("CellSeed"), which is engaged in research and development of regenerative medicine products and the manufacture and sale of temperature-responsive cell culture equipment.

F-8


Table of Contents


Emmaus Life Sciences, Inc.

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)

NOTE 1—DESCRIPTION OF BUSINESS (Continued)

        The Company also is involved in research focused on providing innovative solutions for tissue-engineering through the development of novel cell harvest methods and three-dimensional living tissue replacement products for "cell sheet therapy" and regenerative medicine and the future commercialization of such products.

        Correction of Immaterial Prior Year Errors —During the first quarter of 2016, management became aware of prior period accounting errors related to stock option accounting that were made in the previously filed SEC Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2014. Specifically, the prior period accounting errors involving shared based payments instruments related to not appropriately accounting for stock option modifications and not re-measuring the fair value of stock options issued to non-employees from the issuance date until the services required under the arrangement had been completed.

        Further, during the preparation and filing of its financial statements for the three months ended March 31, 2015, the Company identified and disclosed an immaterial error relating to certain warrant derivative liability instruments for its financial statements as of and for the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2014 as well as the interim periods ended September 30, 2013 and 2014. This prior period error involved not recording a purchase warrant for the purchase of 300,000 shares of the common stock of the Company issued to a certain broker as compensation for services rendered in a private placement transaction during 2013. These purchase warrants were deemed to be a derivative liability instrument and had an initial fair value of $681,000 on the date of transaction of which $62,000 needed to be allocated to additional paid in capital and $619,000 charged as transaction costs. The Company did not account for changes in the fair value of these warrants in periods subsequent to their issuance. This immaterial error was then corrected by adjusting the prior-period information in the financial statements as of and for the three months ended March 31, 2015.

        The cumulative adjustments to the consolidated statements of comprehensive loss for fiscal year ended December 31, 2014 for the stock option accounting errors and that related to warrant derivative were $651,174 and $290,000, respectively, for an aggregate incremental charge of $941,174. The adjustments to the consolidated statements of comprehensive loss for the fourth quarter of 2014 for the stock option accounting errors and that related to warrant derivative liabilities applicable to were ($99,169) and ($74,000), respectively, for an aggregate reduction of expenses of ($173,169).

        Pursuant to the guidance of Staff Accounting Bulletin ("SAB") No. 99, Materiality, the Company evaluated these errors individually as well as in the aggregate and concluded that the errors were not material to any of its prior period financial statements. Although the errors were immaterial to prior periods, the prior period financial statements were revised, in accordance with SAB No. 108, Considering the Effects of Prior Year Misstatements when Quantifying Misstatements in Current Year Financial Statements, due to the significance of the out-of-period correction.

F-9


Table of Contents


Emmaus Life Sciences, Inc.

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)

NOTE 1—DESCRIPTION OF BUSINESS (Continued)

        A reconciliation of the effects of the adjustments to the previously reported consolidated balance sheet at December 31, 2014 follows:

 
  As Previously
Reported
  Adjustment   As Revised  
 
  As of December 31, 2014
 

Warrant derivative liabilities

    5,641,000     879,000     6,520,000  

Total liabilities

    22,963,954     879,000     23,842,954  

Additional paid in capital

    50,479,843     588,834     51,068,677  

Accumulated deficit

    (70,616,002 )   (1,467,834 )   (72,083,836 )

Total stockholders' deficit

    (20,299,662 )   (879,000 )   (21,178,662 )

        A reconciliation of the effect of the adjustments to the previously reported consolidated statement of comprehensive loss for the year ended December 31, 2014 follows:

 
  As Previously
Reported
  Adjustment   As Revised  

General and administrative

    11,904,092     651,174     12,555,266  

Loss from operations

    (14,305,569 )   (651,174 )   (14,956,743 )

Change in fair value of warrant derivative liabilities

    474,000     74,000     548,000  

Loss before income taxes

    (20,813,475 )   (941,174 )   (21,754,649 )

        A reconciliation of the effect of the adjustments to the previously reported consolidated statements of cash flows for the year ended December 31, 2014 follows:

 
  As Previously
Reported
  Adjustment   As Revised  

Net loss

    (20,817,140 )   (941,174 )   (21,758,314 )

Share-based compensation

    5,870,638     651,174     6,521,812  

Change in fair value of warrant derivative liabilities

    (474,000 )   (74,000 )   (548,000 )

NOTE 2—SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES

        Basis of presentation —The accompanying consolidated financial statements have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America ("GAAP") codified in the Accounting Standards Codification ("ASC") and Accounting Standards Updates ("ASU") of the Financial Accounting Standards Board ("FASB"). Certain prior period amounts have been reclassified to conform to the current period presentation.

        Going concern —The accompanying consolidated financial statements have been prepared on the basis that the Company will continue as a going concern. The Company had recurring net losses of $12.7 million and $21.8 million in 2015 and 2014, respectively. In addition, the Company has a significant amount of notes payable and other obligations due within the next twelve months and is projecting that its operating losses and expected capital needs, including the expected costs relating to the commercialization of the Company's pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD, will exceed its existing cash balances and cash expected to be generated from operations for the foreseeable

F-10


Table of Contents


Emmaus Life Sciences, Inc.

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)

NOTE 2—SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (Continued)

future. In order to meet the Company's expected obligations, management intends to raise additional funds through equity and debt financings and partnership agreements. However, there can be no assurance that the Company will be able to complete any additional equity or debt financings or enter into partnership agreements. Therefore, due to the uncertainty of the Company's ability to meet its current operating and capital expenses, there is substantial doubt about the Company's ability to continue as a going concern, as the continuation and expansion of its business is dependent upon obtaining further financing, successful and sufficient market acceptance of its products, and achieving a profitable level of operations. The consolidated financial statements do not include any adjustments that might result from the outcome of these uncertainties.

        Principles of consolidation —The consolidated financial statements include the accounts of the Company (and its wholly-owned subsidiary, Emmaus Medical, and Emmaus Medical's wholly-owned subsidiaries, Newfield Nutrition, EM Japan and EM Europe). All significant intercompany transactions have been eliminated.

        Estimates —Financial statements prepared in accordance with GAAP require management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Among other things, management has estimated the useful lives of equipment and other assets, valuation of intangible assets, along with the variables used to calculate the valuation of stock options and warrants using the Black-Scholes-Merton option valuation model.

        The warrants issued by the Company in a private placement in September 2013 and replacement warrants issued in June 2014 contain non-standard anti- dilution protection and, consequently, are being accounted for as liabilities that are remeasured to fair market value at each reporting period (Note 7). In addition, the remaining initial private placement warrants may now utilize a cashless exercise feature since the shares associated with them were not registered by the one-year anniversary of their issue. These warrants have now been reclassified from liability classified warrants to warrant derivative liabilities and to continue to be remeasured at fair value each reporting period. The initial value as well as the fair value of all such warrants were determined using a Binomial Monte-Carlo Cliquet (aka Ratchet) Option Pricing Model. The model is similar to traditional Black-Scholes-type option pricing models except that the exercise price resets at certain dates in the future. Actual results could differ from those estimates.

        Cash and cash equivalents —Cash and cash equivalents include short-term securities with original maturities of less than ninety days. The Company maintains its cash and cash equivalents at insured financial institutions, the balances of which may, at times, exceed federally insured limits. Management believes that the risk of loss due to the concentrations is minimal.

        Inventories —Inventories are valued based on first-in, first-out and at the lesser of cost or market value. Work-in-process inventories consist of L-glutamine for the Company's AminoPure and NutreStore products that has not yet been packaged and labeled for sale.

F-11


Table of Contents


Emmaus Life Sciences, Inc.

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)

NOTE 2—SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (Continued)

        All of the raw material purchases during the year ended December 31, 2015 and 2014 was from one vendor. The below table presents inventory by category:

 
  December 31,  
Inventory by category
  2015   2014  

Raw materials and components

  $   $ 43,700  

Work-in-process

    45,355     27,665  

Finished goods

    173,808     179,048  

Total

  $ 219,163   $ 250,413  

        Prepaid expenses and other current assets —Prepaid expenses and other current assets consisted of the following at December 31, 2015 and 2014:

 
  December 31,
2015
  December 31,
2014
 

Prepaid insurance

  $ 97,708   $ 86,061  

Other prepaid expenses and current assets

    33,405     43,493  

  $ 131,113   $ 129,554  

        Deposits —Carrying value of amounts transferred to third parties for security purposes that are expected to be returned or applied towards payment after one year or beyond the operating cycle, if longer, are recorded as deposits. Deposit amounts consist of retainer payments for professional services and security deposits for its offices.

        Revenue recognition —Revenue is recognized when there is persuasive evidence that an arrangement exists, delivery has occurred, the price is fixed and determinable and collection is reasonably assured.

        With prior written approval of the Company, in certain situations, product is returnable only by its direct customers for a returned goods credit, for product that is expired, damaged in transit, or which is discontinued, withdrawn or recalled.

        The Company estimates its sales returns based upon its prior sales and return history and accrues a sales return allowance at the time of sale. Historically, sales returns have been immaterial. The Company pays royalties on an annual basis based on existing license arrangements. These royalties are recognized as cost of goods sold upon sale of the products.

        Allowance for doubtful accounts —The Company provides an allowance for uncollectible accounts based upon prior experience and management's assessment of the collectability of existing specific accounts.

        Advertising cost —Advertising costs are expensed as incurred. Advertising costs for the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014 were $62,388 and $222,883, respectively.

        Property and equipment —Furniture and fixtures are recorded at historical cost and depreciated on a straight-line basis over their estimated useful lives of 5 to 7 years. Leasehold improvements are recorded at historical cost and depreciated on a straight-line basis over the shorter of their estimated

F-12


Table of Contents


Emmaus Life Sciences, Inc.

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)

NOTE 2—SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (Continued)

useful lives or the lease terms. Maintenance and repairs are expensed as incurred, while major additions and improvements are capitalized. Gains and losses on disposition are included in current operations.

        Intangibles —The Company's intangible assets include license issue fees and patent costs relating to license agreements (Note 4). These intangible assets are amortized over a period of 3 to 7 years, the estimated legal life of the patents and economic life of the license agreements. The intangible assets are assessed by management for potential impairment on an annual basis. During the year ended December 31, 2015, the Company recorded impairment of $678,571, which represents the remaining carrying value of the intangible asset associated with CAOMECS license fees paid. No impairment existed as of December 31, 2014 (See Note 4).

        Impairment of long-lived assets —The Company evaluates the carrying value of its long-lived assets for impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that such carrying values may not be recoverable. The Company uses its best judgment based on the current facts and circumstances relating to its business when determining whether any significant impairment factors exist.

        If the Company determines that the carrying values of long-lived assets may not be recoverable based upon the existence of one or more indicators of impairment, the Company performs an undiscounted cash flow analysis to determine if impairment exists. If impairment exists, the Company measures the impairment based on the difference between the asset's carrying amount and its fair value, and the impairment is charged to consolidated statement of comprehensive loss in the period in which the long-lived asset impairment is determined to have occurred.

        The Company has determined that an impairment of the carrying value of its long-lived assets existed at December 31, 2015 (Note 4) and no impairment existed at December 31, 2014.

        Research and development —Research and development consists of expenditures for the research and development of new products and technologies, which primarily involve contract research, payroll-related expenses, and other related supplies. Research and development costs are expensed as incurred. Intangible assets acquired for research and development purposes are capitalized if they have alternative future use.

        Share-based compensation —The Company recognizes compensation cost for share-based compensation awards over the service term of the recipients of the share-based awards. The fair value of share-based compensation is calculated using the Black-Scholes-Merton pricing model. The Black-Scholes-Merton model requires subjective assumptions regarding future stock price volatility and expected time to exercise, which greatly affect the calculated values. The expected term of awards granted is calculated using the simplified method allowed under SEC Staff Accounting Bulletin Nos. 107 and110. The risk- free rate selected to value any particular grant is based on the U.S. Treasury rate on the grant date that corresponds to the expected term of the award. The expected volatility is based on the historical volatility of the common stock of comparable publicly traded companies. These factors could change, affecting the determination of stock-based compensation expense in future periods.

        Income taxes —The Company accounts for income taxes under the asset and liability method, wherein deferred tax assets and liabilities are recognized for the future tax consequences attributable to the differences between the financial statement carrying amounts of existing assets and liabilities and

F-13


Table of Contents


Emmaus Life Sciences, Inc.

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)

NOTE 2—SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (Continued)

their respective tax bases. Deferred tax assets and liabilities are measured using enacted tax rates expected to apply to taxable income in the years in which those temporary differences are expected to be recovered or settled. The effect on deferred tax assets and liabilities of a change in tax rates is recognized in income in the period the enactment occurs. A valuation allowance is provided for certain deferred tax assets if it is more likely than not that the Company will not realize tax assets through the generation of future taxable income for the related jurisdictions.

        For balance sheet presentation, current deferred tax assets and liabilities within each tax jurisdiction have been offset and presented as a single amount and non-current deferred tax assets and liabilities within each tax jurisdiction have been offset and presented as a single amount.

        When tax returns are filed, it is highly probable that some positions taken would be sustained upon examination by the taxing authorities, while others are subject to uncertainty about the merits of the position taken or the amount of the position that would be ultimately sustained. The benefit of a tax position is recognized in the financial statements in the period during which, based on all available evidence, management believes it is more likely than not that the position will be sustained upon examination, including the resolution of appeals or litigation processes, if any. Tax positions taken are not offset or aggregated with other positions. Tax positions that meet the more- likely-than-not recognition threshold are measured as the largest amount of tax benefit that is more than 50 percent likely of being realized upon settlement with the applicable taxing authority. The portion of the benefits associated with tax positions taken that exceeds the amount measured as described above is reflected as a liability for unrecognized tax benefits along with any associated interest and penalties that would be payable to the taxing authorities upon examination. As of December 31, 2015, the Company had no unrecognized tax benefits, and the Company had no positions which, in the opinion of management, would be reversed if challenged by a taxing authority. In the event the Company is assessed interest and/or penalties, such amounts will be classified as income tax expense in the financial statements.

        As of December 31, 2015, all federal tax returns since 2012 and state tax returns since 2011 are still subject to adjustment upon audit. No tax returns are currently being examined by taxing authorities.

        Comprehensive income (loss) —Comprehensive income (loss) includes net loss and other comprehensive income (loss). The items of other comprehensive income (loss) for the Company are unrealized gains and losses on marketable securities classified as available-for-sale and foreign translation adjustments relating to its subsidiaries. When the Company realizes a gain or loss on securities available-for-sale for which an unrealized gain or loss was previously recognized, a corresponding reclassification adjustment is made to remove the unrealized gain or loss from accumulated other comprehensive income and reflect the realized gain or loss in current operations.

        Marketable securities —Investment securities as of December 31, 2015 and December 31, 2014 are classified as available-for-sale. Available-for-sale securities are recorded at cost and any increases or decreases in fair market value are recorded as unrealized gain or loss, net of taxes in accumulated other comprehensive income. The Company monitors these investments for impairment and makes appropriate reductions in carrying values when necessary. CellSeed, Inc. securities are the only marketable security the Company currently carries on its books. The Company's marketable securities consist of 39,250 shares of CellSeed stock which are part of 147,100 shares acquired in January 2009 for 100,028,000 Japanese Yen (equivalent to $1,109,819), at 680 Yen per share. CellSeed's IPO (Tokyo

F-14


Table of Contents


Emmaus Life Sciences, Inc.

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)

NOTE 2—SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (Continued)

Stock Exchange symbol 7776) was completed on March 16, 2010. As of December 31, 2015 and December 31, 2014, the closing price per share of CellSeed's stock was 672 Yen and 1,027 Yen, respectively.

        In July 2013, based on an increase in market value of CellSeed shares, Mitsubishi UFJ Capital III Limited Partnership (Mitsubishi) released to the Company 34,300 shares of CellSeed stock. This was part of the 73,550 shares of CellSeed stock held by Mitsubishi as collateral on a $500,000 convertible note issued to Mitsubishi which is due in 2016 ("the Mitsubishi note"). The Mitsubishi note is now secured by the remaining 39,250 shares of CellSeed stock held by Mitsubishi as collateral.

        During the fourth quarter of 2015, the Company sold 9,300 of the shares released from Mitsubishi in open market transactions for $71,517. The remaining 39,250 shares of CellSeed stock are pledged to secure the Mitsubishi note and are classified as marketable securities, pledged to creditor.

        Gain on derecognition of accounts payable and settlement of litigation —The Company derecognizes accounts payable and records gain when the related contractual obligation is discharged, cancelled or expired. During the year ended December 31, 2015, the Company recorded a gain on derecognition of accounts payable and settlement of litigation of $394,446 from extinguishment of a payable to AFH Holding and Advisory, LLC in the same amount as a result of settlement of litigation as discussed in Note 10.

        Foreign Currency Translation —The Company's reporting currency is the U.S. dollar. The yen and the euro are the functional currencies of its subsidiaries, EM Japan and EM Europe, respectively, as they are the primary currencies within the economic environments in which EM Japan and EM Europe operate. Assets and liabilities of their operations are translated into U.S. dollars at period-end exchange rates, and revenues and expenses are translated into U.S. dollars at average exchange rates in effect during each reporting period. Adjustments resulting from the translation are reported in other comprehensive income or loss.

        Financial Instruments —Financial instruments included in the financial statements are comprised of cash and cash equivalents, short-term and long-term available-for-sale investments, accounts receivable, liability classified warrants, warrant derivative liabilities, accounts payable, certain accrued liabilities, convertible notes, promissory notes, due to related party, dissenting stockholders payable, contingent consideration and other contingent liabilities. The carrying amounts of cash and cash equivalents, accounts receivable, accounts payable and accrued liabilities, due to related party, and dissenting stockholders payable approximate their fair values due to the short-term nature of those instruments.

        Fair value measurements —The Company defines fair value as the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. The Company measures fair value under a framework that provides a fair value hierarchy that prioritizes the inputs to valuation techniques used to measure fair value. The hierarchy gives the highest priority to unadjusted quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities (Level 1 measurements) and the lowest priority to unobservable inputs (Level 3 measurements). The three levels of the fair value hierarchy are described as follows:

    Level 1: Inputs to the valuation methodology are unadjusted quoted prices for identical assets or liabilities in active markets that the Company has the ability to access.

F-15


Table of Contents


Emmaus Life Sciences, Inc.

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)

NOTE 2—SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (Continued)

    Level 2: Inputs to the valuation methodology include:

      Quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities in active markets;

      Quoted prices for identical or similar assets or liabilities in inactive markets;

      Inputs other than quoted prices that are observable for the asset or liability;

      Inputs that are derived principally from or corroborated by observable market data by correlation or other means.

    If the asset or liability has a specified (contractual) term, the Level 2 inputs must be observable for substantially the full term of the asset or liability.

    Level 3: Inputs to the valuation methodology are unobservable and significant to the fair value measurement.

        The asset's or liability's fair value measurement level within the fair value hierarchy is based on the lowest level of any input that is significant to the fair value measurement. Valuation techniques used need to maximize the use of observable inputs and minimize the use of unobservable inputs. The fair value assigned to marketable securities is determined by obtaining quoted prices on nationally recognized securities exchanges, and are classified as Level 1 investments at December 31, 2015 and 2014. The fair value of the Company's debt instruments is not materially different from their carrying values as presented. The fair value of the Company's convertible debt instruments was determined based on Level 2 inputs. The carrying value of the debt was discounted based on allocating proceeds to other financial instruments within the arrangement as discussed in Note 6.

        The Company issued stock purchase warrants in conjunction with its September 2013 private placement and issued replacement warrants upon the exercise of certain of such warrants in June 2014 (see Note 1 and Note 7). Such warrants and replacement warrants contain non-standard anti-dilution protection, and consequently, are accounted for as liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis, whose fair value is determined using Level 3 inputs. In addition, the remaining initial private placement warrants may now utilize a cashless exercise feature since the shares associated with them were not registered by the one-year anniversary of their issue. These warrants have now been reclassified from liability classified warrants to warrant derivative liabilities and continue to be remeasured at fair value each reporting period.

        The Level 3 inputs in the valuation of warrants include expected term and expected volatility.

F-16


Table of Contents


Emmaus Life Sciences, Inc.

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)

NOTE 2—SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (Continued)

        The following tables present the activity for those items measured at fair value on a recurring basis using Level 3 inputs during 2015 and 2014:

 
  Year ended
December 31,
 
Liability Classified Warrants—Stock Purchase Warrants
  2015   2014  

Balance, beginning of period

  $ 3,206,000   $ 6,517,000  

Fair value at issuance date

        3,523,000  

Settlement of liability associated with warrants exercised

        (1,752,744 )

Reclassification to warrant derivative liabilities

    (2,545,000 )   (7,068,000 )

Reduction of the warrants exercised to intrinsic value included in the statement of comprehensive loss

        (1,770,256 )

Change in fair value included in the statement of comprehensive loss

    (661,000 )   3,757,000  

Balance, end of period

  $   $ 3,206,000  

 

 
  Year ended
December 31,
 
Warrant Derivative Liabilities—Stock Purchase Warrants
  2015   2014  

Balance, beginning of period

  $ 6,520,000   $  

Reclassification from liability classified warrants

    2,545,000     7,068,000  

Change in fair value included in the statement of comprehensive loss

    (1,202,000 )   (548,000 )

Balance, end of period

  $ 7,863,000   $ 6,520,000  

        The value of the liability classified warrants , the value of warrant derivative liability and the change in fair value of the liability classified warrants and warrant derivative liability were determined using a Binomial Monte-Carlo Cliquet (aka Ratchet) Option Pricing Model. The model is similar to traditional Black-Scholes-type option pricing models except that the exercise price resets at certain dates in the future. The values as of December 31, 2015, December 31, 2014, December 31, 2013 and the initial value as of September 11, 2013 were calculated based on the following assumptions:

 
  December 31,
2015
  December 31,
2014
  December 31,
2013
  Initial
Value
 

Stock price

  $ 4.70   $ 4.90   $ 3.60   $ 3.60  

Risk-free interest rate

    1.23 %   1.38 %   1.75 %   1.72 %

Expected volatility (peer group)

    64.10 %   71.50 %   63.20 %   72.40 %

Expected life (in years)

    2.70     3.70     4.70     5.00  

Expected dividend yield

                 

Number outstanding

    3,320,501     3,320,501     3,320,501     3,320,501  

Balance, end of period:

                         

Liability classified warrants

  $   $ 3,206,000   $ 6,517,000   $ 7,541,000  

Warrant derivative liabilities

  $ 7,863,000   $ 6,520,000   $   $  

F-17


Table of Contents


Emmaus Life Sciences, Inc.

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)

NOTE 2—SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (Continued)

        Debt and Related Party Debt —The Company accounts for the proceeds from the issuance of convertible notes payable with detachable stock purchase warrants and embedded conversion features in accordance with FASB ASC 470- 20, Debt with Conversion and Other Options . Under FASB ASC 470-20, the proceeds from the issuance of a debt instrument with detachable stock purchase warrants shall be allocated to the two elements based on the relative fair values of the debt instrument without the warrants and of the warrants themselves at the time of issuance. The portion of the proceeds allocated to the warrants is accounted for as additional paid-in capital and the remaining proceeds are allocated to the debt instrument, which results in a discount to debt that is amortized and charged as interest expense over the term of the note agreement. Additionally, pursuant to FASB ASC 470-20, the intrinsic value of the embedded conversion feature of the convertible notes payable is included in the discount to debt and amortized and charged to interest expense over the term of the note agreement. The following table presents the effective interest rates on the original loan principal amount for loans originated in the respective periods that either had a beneficial conversion interest or an attached warrant:

Type of Loan
  Term of
Loan
  Stated
Annual
Interest
Rate
  Original
Loan
Principal
Amount
  Conversion
Rate
  Beneficial
Conversion
Discount
Amount
  Warrants
Issued
with
Notes
  Exercise
Price
  Warrant
FMV
Discount
Amount
  Effective
Interest
Rate
Including
Discounts

2014 convertible notes payable

  6 mo. ~ 2 years     10 % $ 3,096,266   $3.05 ~ $3.60   $ 1,392,387     50,000   $ 3.50   $ 126,732   28% ~ 100%

2015 convertible notes payable

  Due on demand ~ 2 years     10 %   4,051,022   $3.50 ~ $4.50     1,388,201     110,417   $ 4.90     220,071   14% ~ 109%

Total

            $ 7,147,288       $ 2,780,588     160,417         $ 346,803    

        Related party notes are disclosed as separate line items in the Company's balance sheet presentation.

        Net loss per share —In accordance with FASB ASC Topic 260, "Earnings per Share, " the basic loss per common share is computed by dividing net loss available to common stockholders by the weighted average number of common shares outstanding. Dilutive loss per share is computed in a manner similar to the basic loss per common share except that the denominator is increased to include the number of additional common shares that would have been outstanding if the potential common shares had been issued and if the additional common shares were dilutive. As of December 31, 2015 and 2014, there were 11,453,596 and 13,197,858 shares of potentially dilutive securities outstanding, respectively. As the Company reported a net loss, none of the potentially dilutive securities were included in the calculation of diluted loss per share since their effect would be anti-dilutive for all periods presented.

        Recent accounting pronouncements —In April 2015, FASB issued Accounting Standards Update ("ASU") No. 2015-03, Interest—Imputation of Interest (Subtopic 835-30): Simplifying the Presentation of Debt Issuance Costs . To simplify presentation of debt issuance costs, the amendments in this Update require that debt issuance costs related to a recognized debt liability be presented in the balance sheet as a direct deduction from the carrying amount of that debt liability, consistent with debt discounts, instead of as an asset. The recognition and measurement guidance for debt issuance costs are not affected by the amendments in this Update. The amendments in this Update are effective for fiscal years, and interim periods within those fiscal years, beginning after December 15, 2015. A reporting entity must apply the amendments on a retrospective basis wherein the balance sheet of each individual period presented should be adjusted to reflect the period-specific effects of applying the new guidance.

F-18


Table of Contents


Emmaus Life Sciences, Inc.

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)

NOTE 2—SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (Continued)

Upon transition, an entity is required to comply with the applicable disclosures for a change in an accounting principle. These disclosures include the nature of and reason for the change in accounting principle, the transition method, a description of the prior-period information that has been retrospectively adjusted, and the effect of the change on the financial statement line items (that is, the debt issuance cost asset and the debt liability). The adoption of the amendments in this Update is not expected to have material impact on the Company's consolidated financial position or results of operations.

        In July 2015, the FASB issued ASU No. 2015-11, Simplifying the Measurement of Inventory , to simplify the measurement of inventory, redefining measurement from lower of cost or market to lower of cost and net realizable value. The amendments in this Update require an entity using the first-in, first-out (FIFO) or average cost method of measuring inventory to measure inventory at the lower of cost and net realizable value, defined as the estimated selling prices in the ordinary course of business less reasonably predictable costs of completion, disposal, and transportation. The amendments in this Update should be applied prospectively, and are effective for the Company for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2016, including interim periods within those years. The adoption of the amendments in this Update is not expected to have material impact on the Company's consolidated financial position or results of operations.

        In January 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-01, Recognition and Measurement of Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities . The amendments applicable to the Company in this Update (1) supersede the guidance to classify equity securities, except equity method securities, with readily determinable fair values into trading or available-for-sale categories and require equity securities to be measured at fair value with changes in the fair value recognized through net income, (2) allow equity investments that do not have readily determinable fair values to be remeasured at fair value either upon the occurrence of an observable price change or upon identification of an impairment, (3) require assessment for impairment of equity investments without readily determinable fair values qualitatively at each reporting period, (4) eliminate the requirement to disclose the methods and significant assumptions used in calculating the fair value of financial instruments required to be disclosed for financial instruments measured at amortized cost on the balance sheet, (5) require public business entities to use the exit price notion when measuring the fair value of financial instruments for disclosure purposes, (6) require separate presentation of financial assets and financial liabilities by measurement category and form of financial asset (that is, securities or loans and receivables) on the balance sheet or the accompanying notes to the financial statements, (7) clarify that an entity should evaluate the need for a valuation allowance on a deferred tax asset related to available-for-sale securities in combination with the entity's other deferred tax assets. The amendments in this Update are effective for the Company for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim periods within those years. The amendments should be applied by means of a cumulative-effect adjustment to the balance sheet as of the beginning of the fiscal year of adoption. The amendments related to equity securities without readily determinable fair values (including disclosure requirements) should be applied prospectively to equity investments that exist as of the date of adoption of the Update. The impact of the adoption of the amendments in this Update will depend on the amount of equity securities and financial instruments subject to the amendments in this Update held by the Company at the time of adoption.

        In February 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-02, Leases. The amendments in this Update require a lessee to recognize in the statement of financial position a liability to make lease payments

F-19


Table of Contents


Emmaus Life Sciences, Inc.

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)

NOTE 2—SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (Continued)

(the lease liability) and a right-of-use asset representing its right to use the underlying asset for the lease term for all leases with terms greater than twelve months. For leases less than twelve months, an entity is permitted to make an accounting policy election by class of underlying asset not to recognize lease assets and lease liabilities. If a lessee makes this election, it should recognize lease expense for such leases generally on a straight-line basis over the lease term. The amendments in this Update are effective for the Company for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018, including interim periods within those years, with early adoption permitted. The Company is currently in the process of evaluating the impact of adoption of the amendments in this Update on the Company's consolidated financial position and results of operations; however, adoption of the amendments in this Update are expected to be material for most entities who have a material lease with a term of greater than twelve months.

        In March 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-09, Compensation—Stock Compensation (Topic 718): Improvements to Employee Share-Based Payment Accounting . The amendments in this Update simplify the accounting for share-based payment award transactions including: income tax consequences, classification of awards as either equity or liabilities and classification on the statement of cash flows. This Update is effective for annual periods beginning after December 15, 2016, including interim periods within those annual periods. Early adoption is permitted. The Company is currently in the process of evaluating this Update.

NOTE 3—PROPERTY AND EQUIPMENT

        Property and equipment consisted of the following at:

 
  December 31,
2015
  December 31,
2014
 

Equipment

  $ 164,931   $ 160,201  

Leasehold improvements

    30,579     30,579  

Furniture and fixtures

    74,682     74,683  

    270,192     265,463  

Less: accumulated depreciation

    (211,965 )   (193,072 )

Total

  $ 58,227   $ 72,391  

        During the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, depreciation expense was $18,893 and $16,620, respectively.

NOTE 4—INTANGIBLE ASSETS

        Intangible assets consist of license fees and patent filing costs associated with NutreStore® L-glutamine powder for oral solution as a treatment for SBS and the Company's exclusive right to manufacture, sell, market and distribute Cultured Autologous Oral Mucosal Epithelial Cell-Sheet ("CAOMECS") under agreements with CellSeed, described in further detail below.

        In April 2011, the Company entered into that certain Joint Research and Development Agreement dated as of April 8, 2011 (the "Research Agreement") as well as that certain Individual Agreement dated as of April 8, 2011 (the "Individual Agreement") with CellSeed and, in August 2011, entered into an addendum to the Research Agreement. Pursuant to the Individual Agreement, CellSeed

F-20


Table of Contents


Emmaus Life Sciences, Inc.

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)

NOTE 4—INTANGIBLE ASSETS (Continued)

granted the Company the exclusive right to manufacture, sell, market and distribute CAOMECS for the cornea in the United States and agreed to disclose to the Company its accumulated information package for the joint development of CAOMECS. Under the Individual Agreement, the Company agreed to pay CellSeed $1.5 million, which it paid in February 2012. The technology acquired under the Individual Agreement is being used to support an ongoing research and development project and management believes the technology has alternative future uses in other future development initiatives.

        Pursuant to the Research Agreement, the Company and CellSeed formed a relationship regarding the future research and development of cell sheet engineering regenerative medicine products. Under the Research Agreement, as supplemented by the addendum, the Company agreed to pay CellSeed $8.5 million within 30 days after the completion of all of the following: (i) the execution of the Research Agreement; (ii) the execution of the Individual Agreement; and (iii) CellSeed's delivery of the accumulated information package, as defined in the Research Agreement, to the Company and the Company providing written confirmation of its acceptance of the complete Package, which has not yet been completed as of December 31, 2015.

        During the fourth quarter of 2015, CellSeed disclosed to the Company that its exclusive license to CAOMECS was not truly exclusive, since CellSeed had granted another company a license to CAOMECS in the U.S. prior to its license to the Company. On December 29, 2015, the Company and CellSeed terminated the Research Agreement and the Individual Agreement. The Company no longer has an obligation to pay the $8.5 million or any other unpaid amount under the terminated agreements. As a result of the disclosure of the pre-existing license and the termination of the Research Agreement and the Individual Agreement, and uncertainty surrounding the recoverability of the intangible asset associated with CAOMECS license fees paid, during the year ended December 31, 2015, the Company recorded an impairment loss of $678,571, which represents the remaining carrying value of the intangible asset associated with CAOMECS license fees paid.

        The Company had previously estimated the economic life of the CAOMECS produced in connection with the CellSeed Research and Individual Agreement at seven years. The determination of this life was based in part on the Company's estimate of economic useful life and the time period in which the Company may enjoy an advantage over competing technologies and techniques. Key reasons for a useful life shorter than the life of a patent include: (i) the patents related to this technology are yet to be approved, (ii) potential redundancy with similar medication/device due to changes in market preferences, (iii) uncertainty of regulatory approval and (iv) potential development of new treatments for the same disease.

        Intangible assets, net consisted of the following at:

 
  December 31,
2015
  December 31,
2014
 

License fees and patent filing costs

  $ 2,000,000   $ 2,000,000  

Less: accumulated amortization

    (1,321,429 )   (1,107,143 )

Impairment loss

    (678,571 )    

Intangible assets, net

  $   $ 892,857  

        During the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, amortization expense was $214,286.

F-21


Table of Contents


Emmaus Life Sciences, Inc.

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)

NOTE 5—ACCOUNTS PAYABLE AND ACCRUED EXPENSES

        Accounts payable and accrued expenses consisted of the following at:

 
  December 31,
2015
  December 31,
2014
 

Accounts payable

             

Clinical and regulatory expenses

  $ 322,193   $ 266,537  

Legal expenses

    242,384     176,691  

Other vendors

    959,333     774,444  

Subtotal

    1,523,910     1,217,672  

Accrued interest payable, related parties

    176,940     110,200  

Accrued interest payable

    1,586,472     761,682  

Accrued expenses

    201,506     220,200  

Deferred salary

    291,666     291,666  

Total accounts payable and accrued expenses

  $ 3,780,494   $ 2,601,420  

F-22


Table of Contents

Emmaus Life Sciences, Inc.

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)

NOTE 6—NOTES PAYABLE

        Notes payable consisted of the following at December 31, 2015:

Year
Issued
  Interest
Rate Range
  Term of Notes   Conversion
Price
  Principal
Outstanding
December 31,
2015
  Discount
Amount
December 31,
2015
  Carrying
Amount
December 31
2015
  Shares
Underlying
Notes
December 31,
2015
  Principal
Outstanding
December 31,
2014
  Discount
Amount
December 31,
2014
  Carrying
Amount
December 31,
2014
  Shares
Underlying
Notes
December 31,
2014
 
Notes payable  

2013

 

10%

 

Due on demand

 


 

$

830,000

 

$


 

$

830,000

 

 


 

$

1,030,000

 

$


 

$

1,030,000

 

 


 
2014   11%   Due on
demand ~ 2 years
      1,446,950         1,446,950         1,446,950         1,446,950      
2015   11%   Due on
demand ~ 2 years
      2,379,799         2,379,799                      
                $ 4,656,749       $ 4,656,749       $ 2,476,950   $   $ 2,476,950      
        Current       $ 4,656,749   $   $ 4,656,749       $ 1,643,615   $   $ 1,643,615      
        Long-term       $   $   $       $ 833,335   $   $ 833,335      

Notes payable—related party

 

2012

 

8% ~ 10%

 

Due on demand

 


 

$

626,730

 

$


 

$

626,730

 

 


 

$

656,730

 

$


 

$

656,730

 

 


 
2013   8%   Due on demand       50,000         50,000         50,000         50,000      
2014   11%   Due on
demand ~ 2 years
      240,308         240,308         252,165         252,165      
2015   10% ~ 11%   Due on
demand ~ 2 years
      1,849,266         1,849,266                      
                $ 2,766,304   $   $ 2,766,304       $ 958,895   $   $ 958,895      
        Current       $ 2,766,304   $   $ 2,766,304       $ 825,562   $   $ 825,562      
        Long-term       $   $   $       $ 133,333   $   $ 133,333      

Convertible notes payable

 

2010

 

6%

 

5 years

 

$3.05

 

$

2,000

 

$


 

$

2,000

 

 

656

 

$

74,000

 

$

3,195

 

$

70,805

 

 

24,248

 
2011   10%   5 years   $3.05     500,000         500,000     163,809     500,000         500,000     163,809  
2013   10%   2 years   $3.60     525,257         525,257     185,553     2,463,299     18,750     2,444,549     834,667  
2014   10%   Due on
demand ~ 2 years
  $3.05 ~$7.00     4,378,563     353,700     4,024,863     1,120,470     4,939,773     846,613     4,093,160     1,241,241  
2015   10%   Due on
demand ~ 2 years
  $3.50 ~$7.00     5,681,166     526,066     5,155,100     1,517,996                  
                $ 11,086,986   $ 879,766   $ 10,207,220     2,988,484   $ 7,977,072   $ 868,558   $ 7,108,514     2,263,965  
        Current       $ 6,358,698   $ 358,351   $ 6,000,347     1,762,849   $ 3,478,904   $ 21,945   $ 3,456,959     1,156,050  
        Long-term       $ 4,728,288   $ 521,415   $ 4,206,873     1,225,635   $ 4,498,168   $ 846,613   $ 3,651,555     1,107,915  

Convertible notes payable—related party

 

2012

 

10%

 

Due on demand

 

$3.30

 

$

298,000

 

$


 

$

298,000

 

 

108,505

 

$

373,000

 

$


 

$

373,000

 

 

121,461

 
2014   10%   2 years   $7.00                     200,000         200,000     30,187  
2015   10%   2 years   $4.50     320,000         320,000     72,354                  
                $ 618,000   $   $ 618,000     180,859   $ 573,000   $   $ 573,000     151,648  
        Current       $ 298,000   $   $ 298,000     108,505   $ 373,000   $   $ 373,000     121,461  
        Long-term       $ 320,000   $   $ 320,000     72,354   $ 200,000   $   $ 200,000     30,187  
        Grand Total       $ 19,128,039   $ 879,766   $ 18,248,273     3,169,343   $ 11,985,917   $ 868,558   $ 11,117,359     2,415,613  

F-23


Table of Contents


Emmaus Life Sciences, Inc.

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)

NOTE 6—NOTES PAYABLE (Continued)

        The average stated interest rate of notes payable for the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014 was 10% in each period. The average effective interest rate of notes payable for the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014 was 23% in each period, after giving effect to discounts relating to beneficial conversion features and the fair value of warrants issued in connection with these notes. The notes payable and convertible notes payable do not have restrictive financial covenants or acceleration clauses associated with a material adverse change event. The holders of the convertible notes have the option to convert their notes into the Company's common stock at the stated conversion price during the term of their convertible notes. Conversion prices on these convertible notes payable range from $3.05 to $3.60 per share. Certain notes with a $4.50 and a $7.00 stated conversion price in the second year of their two-year term are subject to automatic conversion into shares of the Company's common stock at a conversion price equal to 80% of the initial public offering price at the time of a qualified public offering. All due on demand notes are treated as current liabilities.

Contractual principal payments due on notes payable are as follows:

Year Ending
  at December 31,
2015
 

2016

  $ 14,079,751  

2017

    5,048,288  

Total

  $ 19,128,039  

        The Company estimated the total fair value of any beneficial conversion feature and accompanying warrants in allocating the debt proceeds. The proceeds allocated to the beneficial conversion feature were determined by taking the estimated fair value of shares issuable under the convertible notes less the fair value of the number of shares that would be issued if the conversion rate equaled the fair value of the Company's common stock as of the date of issuance (see Note 2). The fair value of the warrants issued in conjunction with notes was determined using the Black-Scholes-Merton option pricing model with the following inputs for the years ended:

 
  2015   2014  

Stock price

  $ 4.50   $ 4.90  

Exercise price

  $ 4.90   $ 3.50  

Term

    5 years     5 years  

Risk-free interest rate

    1.57 %   1.66 %

Expected dividend yield

         

Expected volatility

    67.30 %   70.10 %

        In situations where the debt included both a beneficial conversion feature and a warrant, the proceeds were allocated to the warrants and beneficial conversion feature based on the pro-rata fair value.

NOTE 7—STOCKHOLDERS' DEFICIT

        Private Placement —On September 11, 2013, the Company issued an aggregate of 3,020,501 units at a price of $2.50 per unit (the "Private Placement"). Each unit consisted of one share of the Company's common stock and one common stock warrant for the purchase of an additional share of

F-24


Table of Contents


Emmaus Life Sciences, Inc.

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)

NOTE 7—STOCKHOLDERS' DEFICIT (Continued)

the Company's common stock. The aggregate purchase price for the units was $7,551,253. In addition, warrants for the purchase of 300,000 shares of the Company's common stock (the "Broker Warrants") were issued to a broker under the same terms as the Private Placement transaction.

        The warrants issued in the Private Placement and the Broker Warrants entitle the holders thereof to purchase, at any time on or prior to September 11, 2018, shares of common stock of the Company at an exercise price of $3.50 per share. The warrants contain non-standard anti-dilution protection and, consequently, are being accounted for as liabilities, were originally recorded at fair value, and are adjusted to fair market value each reporting period. Because the shares of common stock underlying the Private Placement warrants and Broker Warrants were not effectively registered for resale by September 11, 2014, the warrant holders have an option to exercise the warrants using a cashless exercise feature. The shares have not been registered for resale as of December 31, 2015. The availability to warrant holders of the cashless exercise feature as of September 11, 2014 caused the then-outstanding 2,225,036 Private Placement warrants and the 300,000 Broker Warrants with fair value of $7,068,000 to be reclassified from liability classified warrants to warrant derivative liabilities and to continue to be remeasured at fair value each reporting period.

        On June 10, 2014, certain warrant holders exercised 1,095,465 warrants issued in the Private Placement at an exercise price of $3.50 per share, resulting in the Company receiving aggregate exercise proceeds of $3.8 million and issuing 1,095,465 shares of common stock. Prior to exercise, these Private Placement warrants were accounted for at fair value as liability classified warrants. As of June 10, 2014, immediately prior to exercise, the carrying value of these Private Placement warrants was reduced to their fair value immediately prior to exercise of $1.8 million, representing their intrinsic value, with this adjusted carrying value of $1.8 million being transferred to additional paid-in capital. Also on June 10, 2014, based on an offer made to holders of Private Placement warrants in connection with such exercises, the Company issued an aggregate of 1,095,465 replacement warrants to holders exercising Private Placement warrants, which replacement warrants have terms that are generally the same as the exercised warrants, including an expiration date of September 11, 2018 and an exercise price of $3.50 per share. The replacement warrants are treated for accounting purposes as liability classified warrants, and their issuance gave rise to a $3.5 million warrant exercise inducement expense based on their fair value as of issuance as determined using a Binomial Monte-Carlo Cliquet (aka Ratchet) Option Pricing Model. Because the shares of common stock underlying the replacement warrants were not effectively registered for resale by June 10, 2015, the warrant holders have an option to exercise the warrants using a cashless exercise feature. The shares have not been registered for resale as of December 31, 2015. The availability to warrant holders of the cashless exercise feature as of June 10, 2015 caused the then-outstanding 1,095,465 replacement warrants with fair value of $2,545,000 to be reclassified from liability classified warrants to warrant derivative liabilities and to continue to be remeasured at fair value each reporting period.

        Stock cancellations —During the year ended December 31, 2014, the Company repurchased 500,000 shares of common stock outstanding held by Timothy Brasel for $377,500 in connection with settlement of litigation with Mr. Brasel. During the year ended December 31, 2015, the Company cancelled 2,504,249 shares of common stock outstanding held by AFH Holding and Advisory, LLC ("AFH Advisory") in connection with settlement of litigation with AFH Advisory (see Note 10).

        As of December 31, 2015, the fair value of these Private Placement warrants, replacement warrants, and Broker Warrants was $7,863,000 (see Note 2). For further details regarding registration

F-25


Table of Contents


Emmaus Life Sciences, Inc.

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)

NOTE 7—STOCKHOLDERS' DEFICIT (Continued)

rights associated with the Private Placement warrants, replacement warrants, and Broker Warrants, see the Registration Rights section below in this footnote.

        Stock warrants —During the year ended December 2014, the Company issued a five-year warrant in connection with the issuance of a convertible note to purchase 50,000 shares of common stock at an exercise price of $3.50 per share. During this period, the Company canceled warrants to purchase an aggregate of 1,068,690 shares of common stock including warrants to purchase 500,000 shares of common stock at an exercise price of $1.00 per share that had previously been issued to a director. During the year ended December 2015, in connection with the issuance of a convertible notes, the Company issued five-year warrants to purchase an aggregate of 110,417 shares of common stock of the Company at an exercise price of $4.90 per share. During this period, the Company canceled warrants to purchase an aggregate of 1,532,693 shares of common stock including warrants to purchase 1,000,000 shares of common stock at an exercise price of $2.50 per share that had previously been issued to an executive officer.

        Warrant exercises and issuance —On June 10, 2014, certain warrant holders exercised 1,095,465 warrants issued in the Private Placement for the exercise price of $3.50 per share, resulting in the Company receiving aggregate exercise proceeds of $3.8 million and issuing 1,095,465 shares of common stock. Prior to exercise, these Private Placement warrants were accounted for at fair value as liability classified warrants. As of June 10, 2014, immediately prior to exercise, the carrying value of these Private Placement warrants was reduced to their fair value immediately prior to exercise of $1.8 million, representing their intrinsic value, with this adjusted carrying value of $1.8 million being transferred to additional paid in capital. Also on June 10, 2014, based on an offer made to holders of Private Placement warrants in connection with such exercises, the Company issued an aggregate of 1,095,465 replacement warrants to holders exercising Private Placement warrants, which replacement warrants have terms that are generally the same as the exercised warrants, including an expiration date of September 11, 2018 and an exercise price of $3.50 per share. The replacement warrants are treated for accounting purposes as liability classified warrants, and their issuance gave rise to a $3.5 million warrant exercise inducement expense based on their fair value as of issuance as determined using a Binomial Monte-Carlo Cliquet (aka Ratchet) Option Pricing Model. If the shares of common stock underlying the replacement warrants are not effectively registered for resale by June 10, 2015, the warrant holders have an option to exercise the replacement warrants using a cashless exercise feature. For more details regarding registration rights associated with the replacement warrants, see Registration Rights, below.

        In addition to the above, during the year ended December 31, 2015, the Company issued 148,256 shares of common stock upon the exercise of warrants at exercise prices ranging from $1.00 to $3.05 per share, including 75,838 warrants exercised on a cashless basis.

F-26


Table of Contents


Emmaus Life Sciences, Inc.

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)

NOTE 7—STOCKHOLDERS' DEFICIT (Continued)

        A summary of outstanding warrants as of December 31, 2015 and 2014 is presented below.

 
  Year ended
December 31, 2015
  Year ended
December 31, 2014
 

Warrants outstanding, beginning of period

    5,101,450     6,279,296  

Granted

    110,417     1,145,465  

Exercised

    (148,256 )   (1,254,621 )

Cancelled, forfeited and expired

    (1,532,693 )   (1,068,690 )

Warrants outstanding, end of period

    3,530,918     5,101,450  

        A summary of outstanding warrants by year issued and exercise price as of December 31, 2015 is presented below.

 
  Outstanding   Exercisable  
Exercise Price
  Number of
Warrants
Issued
  Weighted
Average
Remaining
Contractual
Life
(Years)
  Weighted
Average
Exercise
Price
  Total   Weighted
Average
Exercise
Price
 

During 2013

                               

$3.30

    50,000     2.33   $ 3.30     50,000   $ 3.30  

$3.50

    2,225,036     2.70   $ 3.50     2,225,036   $ 3.50  

2013 total

    2,275,036                 2,275,036        

During 2014

   
 
   
 
   
 
   
 
   
 
 

$3.50

    1,145,465     2.73   $ 3.50     1,145,465   $ 3.50  

2014 total

    1,145,465                 1,145,465        

During 2015

   
 
   
 
   
 
   
 
   
 
 

$4.90

    110,417     4.18   $ 4.90     110,417   $ 4.90  

Total

    3,530,918                 3,530,918        

        Stock options —The 2011 Stock Incentive Plan, which is shareholder-approved, permits grants of incentive stock options to employees, including executive officers, and other share-based awards such as stock appreciation rights, restricted stock, stock units, stock bonus and unrestricted stock awards to employees, directors, and consultants for up to 9,000,000 shares of common stock. On February 28, 2013, the number of shares of common stock authorized for issuance under the 2011 Stock Incentive Plan was increased from 3,000,000 shares to 6,000,000 shares. On July 14, 2014, the number of shares of common stock authorized for issuance under the 2011 Stock Incentive Plan was increased from 6,000,000 shares to 9,000,000 shares. Options granted under the 2011 Stock Incentive Plan expire 10 years after grant. Options granted to directors vest in quarterly installments, and all other option grants vest over a minimum period of three years, all based on continuous service with the Company.

        Management has valued stock options at their date of grant utilizing the Black-Scholes-Merton Option pricing model. The fair value of the underlying shares was determined by the market value of stock of similar companies and recent arm's length transactions involving the sale of the Company's

F-27


Table of Contents


Emmaus Life Sciences, Inc.

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)

NOTE 7—STOCKHOLDERS' DEFICIT (Continued)

common stock. The expected volatility was calculated using the historical volatility of a similar public entity in the industry through August 2013 and a group of similar public entities thereafter. The following table presents the assumptions used on recent dates on which options were granted by the Board of Directors.

 
  July 17,
2014
  May 8,
2014
  February 26,
2014
 

Stock price

  $ 5.10   $ 4.90   $ 3.60  

Exercise price

  $ 5.10   $ 4.90   $ 3.60  

Term

    10 years     10 years     10 years  

Risk-Free Interest Rate

    2.47 %   2.61 %   2.67 %

Dividend Yield

    0.00 %   0.00 %   0.00 %

Volatility

    77.90 %   75.50 %   76.60 %

        In making the determination of fair value and finding similar companies, the Company considered the industry, stage of life cycle, size and financial leverage of such other entities. While the Company was initially able to identify only one similar public company using these criteria, based on the more advanced stage of development of the Company additional similar companies with enough historical data that met the industry criterion have now been identified. Accordingly, the Company has based its expected volatility on the historical stock prices of a group peer of companies since September 2013.

        The risk-free interest rate is based on the implied yield available on U.S. Treasury issues with an equivalent term approximating the expected life of the options depending on the date of the grant and expected life of the options.

        During the year ended December 31, 2015, no options were granted by the Company's Board of Directors. During the year ended December 31, 2014, the Company's Board of Directors granted 840,000 options to its directors, employees and consultants. In addition, 340,000 options that were approved by the Company's Board of Directors in April 2012 were deemed issued during the year ended December 31, 2014. The aggregate fair value of these tranches of options, including options granted or deemed issued in 2014 was approximately $3.0 million. As of December 31, 2015, there were 4,753,335 options outstanding under the 2011 Stock Incentive Plan.

F-28


Table of Contents


Emmaus Life Sciences, Inc.

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)

NOTE 7—STOCKHOLDERS' DEFICIT (Continued)

        A summary of the Company's stock option activity for the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014 is presented below.

 
  Prior Plan   December 31, 2015   December 31, 2014  
 
  Number of
Options
  Weighted-
Average
Exercise
Price
  Number of
Options
  Weighted-
Average
Exercise
Price
  Number of
Options
  Weighted-
Average
Exercise
Price
 

Options outstanding, beginning of period

    11,795   $ 3.05     5,669,000   $ 3.68     4,504,000   $ 3.58  

Granted or deemed issued

                    1,180,000   $ 4.06  

Exercised

            (2,000 ) $ 3.60          

Cancelled, forfeited and expired

    (11,795 ) $ 3.05     (913,665 ) $ 4.05     (15,000 ) $ 3.60  

Options outstanding, end of period

            4,753,335   $ 3.60     5,669,000   $ 3.68  

Options exercisable at end of year

            4,379,335   $ 3.60     2,855,251   $ 3.55  

Options available for future grant

            4,246,665         3,331,000      

        The weighted average grant-date fair value of options granted or deemed issued during the year ended December 31, 2014 was $2.58. The weighted average grant-date fair value of common shares underlying stock options granted or deemed issued during the year ended December 31, 2014 was $4.06.

        During the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, the Company recognized $3.7 million and $6.5 million of share-based compensation cost arising from stock option grants. As of December 31, 2015, there was $0.7 million of total unrecognized compensation cost related to unvested share-based compensation arrangements granted under the 2011 Stock Incentive Plan. That cost is expected to be recognized over the weighted average remaining period of 0.5 years.

        Registration Rights —Pursuant to the Subscription Agreements relating to the Private Placement and certain warrants, as well as pursuant to the replacement of certain warrants by the Company on June 10, 2014, the Company agreed to use its commercially reasonable best efforts to have on file with the SEC, by September 11, 2014 and at the Company's sole expense, a registration statement to permit the public resale of 4,115,966 shares of the Company's common stock and 3,320,501 shares of common stock underlying warrants (collectively, the "Registerable Securities"). In the event such registration statement includes securities to be offered and sold by the Company in a fully underwritten primary public offering pursuant to an effective registration under the Securities Act, and the Company is advised in good faith by any managing underwriter of securities being offered pursuant to such registration statement that the number of Registrable Securities proposed to be sold in such offering is greater than the number of such securities which can be included in such offering without materially adversely affecting such offering, the Company will include in such registration the following securities in the following order of priority: (i) any securities the Company proposes to sell, and (ii) the Registrable Securities, with any reductions in the number of Registrable Securities actually included in such registration to be allocated on a pro rata basis among the holders thereof. The registration rights described above apply until all Registerable Securities have been sold pursuant to Rule 144 under the Securities Act or may be sold without registration in reliance on Rule 144 under the Securities Act without limitation as to volume and without the requirement of any notice filing.

F-29


Table of Contents


Emmaus Life Sciences, Inc.

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)

NOTE 7—STOCKHOLDERS' DEFICIT (Continued)

        If the shares of common stock underlying warrants to purchase 2,225,036 shares are not registered for resale at the time of exercise or if the shares of common stock underlying warrants to purchase 1,095,465 shares are not registered for resale at the time of exercise, and in each such case the registration rights described above then apply with respect to the holder of such warrants, such holder may exercise such warrants on a cashless basis. In such a cashless exercise of all the shares covered by the warrant, the warrant holder would receive a number of shares equal to the quotient of (i) the difference between the fair market value of the common stock, as defined, and the $3.50 exercise price, as adjusted, multiplied by the number of shares exercisable under the warrant, divided by (ii) the fair market value of the common stock, as defined. As of December 31, 2015, based on a fair market value of a share of the Company's common stock of $4.70 and 3,320,501 warrants issued and outstanding and eligible for cashless exercise, the maximum number of shares the Company would be required to issue, if the warrant holders elected to exercise the cashless exercise feature with respect to all then eligible warrants, is 847,787 shares. If the fair market value of a share of the Company's common stock were to increase by $1.00 from $4.70 to $5.70, the maximum number of shares the Company would be required to issue, if the warrant holders elected to exercise the cashless exercise feature with respect to all then eligible warrants, would increase to 1,281,597 shares as of December 31, 2015.

        The Company has not yet filed a registration statement with respect to the resale of the Registrable Securities because doing so is not feasible prior to the completion by the Company of its initial public offering. As previously reported, the Company has filed a draft registration statement with the SEC with respect to its proposed initial public offering. The Company believes that it has used commercially reasonable efforts to pursue an initial public offering and, accordingly, considers itself to be in compliance with its registration rights obligations notwithstanding that it has not filed a registration statement with respect to the resale of the Registrable Securities and the deadline for doing so has passed without extension.

NOTE 8—INCOME TAXES

        The provision for income taxes consists of the following for the years ended December 31:

 
   
  2015   2014  

Current

 

U.S. 

  $ 2,400   $ 2,500  

 

International

    1,164     1,165  

Deferred

 

U.S. 

         

 

International

         

      $ 3,564   $ 3,665  

        A valuation allowance for the net deferred tax assets has been recorded as it is more likely than not that these benefits will not be realized through future operations.

F-30


Table of Contents


Emmaus Life Sciences, Inc.

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)

NOTE 8—INCOME TAXES (Continued)

        Deferred tax assets consist of the following as of December 31, 2015 and 2014:

 
  2015   2014  

Net operating loss carryforward

  $ 16,650,797   $ 14,354,064  

General business tax credit

    6,510,162     5,720,604  

Stock options

    6,271,690     4,843,871  

Charitable contribution

    79,944     81,434  

Accrued expenses

    290,083     171,325  

Deferred compensation

         

Other

    444,029     126,983  

Total gross deferred tax assets

    30,247,605     25,298,281  

Less valuation allowance

    (30,116,742 )   (25,184,004 )

Net deferred tax assets

  $ 130,863   $ 114,277  

        Deferred tax liabilities consist of the following as of December 31, 2015 and 2014:

 
  2015   2014  

Unrealized gain on foreign exchange translation and others

  $ (99,228 ) $ (98,825 )

Unrealized gain on securities available-for-sale

    (31,635 )   (15,452 )

Total deferred tax liability

  $ (130,863 ) $ (114,277 )

        During 2015 and 2014, the valuation allowance increased by $4,932,738 and $5,722,255, respectively.

        As of December 31, 2015 and 2014, the Company had net operating loss carryforwards for federal reporting purposes of approximately $42,909,000 and $36,673,000 which are available to offset future federal taxable income, if any, through 2034. In addition, the Company had net operating loss carryforwards for state income tax purposes of approximately $40,440,000 and $35,884,000 respectively, which expire in various years through 2035. The utilization of our net operating losses could be subject to an annual limitation as a result of certain past and future events, such as acquisition or other significant equity events, which may be deemed as a "change in ownership" under the provisions of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, and similar state provisions. The annual limitations could result in the expiration of net operating losses and tax credits before utilization. As of December 31, 2015 and 2014, the Company has general business tax credits of $6,510,000 and $5,721,000, respectively, for federal tax purposes. The tax credits are available to offset future tax liabilities, if any, through 2024.

F-31


Table of Contents


Emmaus Life Sciences, Inc.

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)

NOTE 8—INCOME TAXES (Continued)

        The income tax provision differs from that computed using the statutory federal tax rate of 34%, due to the following:

 
  2015   2014  

Tax benefit at statutory federal rate

  $ (4,295,120 ) $ (7,022,409 )

State taxes, net of federal tax benefit

    (469,692 )   (601,078 )

Increase in valuation allowance

    4,948,921     5,553,486  

Permanent items

    675,959     2,842,996  

General business tax credit

    (789,556 )   (983,127 )

Other

    (66,948 )   213,797  

  $ 3,564   $ 3,665  

        As of December 31, 2015 and 2014, the Company had no unrecognized tax benefits, and the Company had no positions which, in the opinion of management, would be reversed if challenged by a taxing authority. In the event the Company is assessed interest and/or penalties, such amounts will be classified as income tax expense in the financial statements. As of December 31, 2015, all federal tax returns since 2012 and state tax returns since 2011 are still subject to adjustment upon audit. No tax returns are currently being examined by taxing authorities.

NOTE 9—COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

        Distribution contract —Cardinal Health Specialty Pharmacy Services has been contracted to distribute NutreStore to other wholesale distributors and some independent pharmacies since April 2008. For these services, the Company pays a monthly commercialization management fee of $5,000.

        Operating leases —The Company leases its office space under operating leases with unrelated entities. The rent expense during the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014 amounted to $492,919 and $277,866, respectively.

        Future minimum lease payments under the agreements are as follows:

Year
  Amount  

2016

  $ 552,696  

2017

    522,555  

2018

    490,829  

2019

    123,875  

Total

  $ 1,689,955  

        License agreements —In April 2011, the Company licensed certain current and future technology from CellSeed (see Note 4 for further discussion). In December 2015, the license agreements have been terminated. The Company is currently negotiating the terms of new license agreements with CellSeed which have not been finalized as of this time. If the Company is not able to successfully negotiate these terms, its current development and commercialization plans with respect to any of these products would be materially adversely affected.

F-32


Table of Contents


Emmaus Life Sciences, Inc.

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)

NOTE 10—RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS

        The following table sets forth information relating to the Company's loans from related persons outstanding as of December 31, 2015.

Class
  Lender   Annual
Interest
Rate
  Date
of
Loan
  Term
of
Loan
  Principal
Amount
Outstanding
at
December 31,
2015
  Highest
Principal
Outstanding
  Amount
of
Principal
Repaid
  Amount
of
Interest
Paid
  Conversion
Rate
  Shares
Underlying
Notes at
December 31,
2015
 

Notes payable to related parties—current:

                                                     

  Hope Hospice(1)     8 %   1/17/2012   Due on demand   $ 200,000   $ 200,000   $   $ 8,000   $      

  Hope Hospice(1)     8 %   6/14/2012   Due on demand     200,000     200,000         8,000          

  Hope Hospice(1)     8 %   6/21/2012   Due on demand     100,000     100,000         4,000          

  Yutaka Niihara(2)(4)     10 %   12/5/2012   Due on demand     126,730     1,213,700     1,086,970     56,722          

  Hope Hospice(1)     8 %   2/11/2013   Due on demand     50,000     50,000         2,000          

  Lan T. Tran(2)     11 %   2/10/2014   2 years(3)     106,976     106,976                  

  Hideki & Eiko Uehara(5)     11 %   2/15/2014   2 years     133,333     133,333                  

  Hope Hospice(1)     10 %   1/7/2015   2 years(3)     100,000     100,000                  

  James Lee(5)     10 %   1/26/2015   2 years(3)     50,000     50,000                  

  Hope Hospice(1)     10 %   1/29/2015   2 years(3)     30,000     30,000                  

  Yutaka Niihara(2)(4)     10 %   1/29/2015   Due on demand         20,000     20,000     773              

  Lan T. Tran(2)     10 %   2/9/2015   2 years(3)     10,000     10,000                  

  Charles Stark(2)     10 %   2/10/2015   2 years(3)     10,000     10,000                  

  IRA Service Trust Co. FBO Peter B. Ludlum(2)     10 %   2/20/2015   2 years(3)     10,000     10,000                  

  Cuc T. Tran(5)     11 %   3/5/2015   1 year     13,161     13,161                  

  Yutaka Niihara(2)(4)     10 %   4/7/2015   2 years(3)     500,000     500,000                  

  Yutaka Niihara(2)(4)     10 %   5/21/2015   Due on demand     826,105     826,105                  

  Masaharu & Emiko Osato(4)     11 %   12/29/2015   Due on demand     300,000     300,000                  

                  Sub total   $ 2,766,304   $ 3,873,275   $ 1,106,970   $ 79,495   $      

Convertible notes payable to related parties—current:

                                                     

  Yasushi Nagasaki(2)     10 %   6/29/2012   Due on demand   $ 298,000   $ 388,800   $ 90,800   $   $ 3.30     108,505  

                  Sub total   $ 298,000   $ 388,800   $ 90,800   $   $     108,505  

Non-Current, convertible notes payable to related parties:

   
 
   
 
 

 

   
 
   
 
   
 
   
 
   
 
   
 
 

  Yutaka Niihara(2)(4)     10 %   9/29/2015   2 years   $ 100,000   $ 100,000   $   $   $ 4.50     22,794  

  Charles & Kimxa Stark(2)     10 %   10/1/2015   2 years     20,000     20,000                 4.50     4,556  

  Yutaka & Soomi Niihara(2)(4)     10 %   11/16/2015   2 years     200,000     200,000                 4.50     45,004  

                  Sub total     320,000     320,000   $   $   $     72,354  

                  Total   $ 3,384,304   $ 4,582,075   $ 1,197,770   $   $     180,859  

(1)
Dr. Niihara, who is the Company's CEO, is also the CEO of Hope Hospice.

(2)
Officer

(3)
Due on Demand

(4)
Director

(5)
Family of Officer/Director

F-33


Table of Contents


Emmaus Life Sciences, Inc.

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)

NOTE 10—RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS (Continued)

        The following table sets forth information relating to the Company's loans from related persons outstanding as of December 31, 2014.

Class
  Lender   Annual
Interest
Rate
  Date
of
loan
  Term
of
Loan
  Principal
Amount
Outstanding
at
December 31,
2014
  Highest
Principal
outstanding
  Amount
of
Principal
Repaid
  Amount
of
Interest
Paid
  Conversion
Rate
  Shares
Underlying
Notes at
December 31,
2014
 

Current, Promissory note payable to related parties:

                                                     

  Hope Hospice(1)     8 %   1/17/2012   Due on demand   $ 200,000   $ 200,000   $   $ 16,000          

  Hope Hospice(1)     8 %   6/14/2012   Due on demand     200,000     200,000         20,000          

  Hope Hospice(1)     8 %   6/21/2012   Due on demand     100,000     100,000         10,000          

  Yutaka Niihara(2)(4)     10 %   12/5/2012   Due on demand     156,730     1,213,700     1,056,970     60,851          

  Hope Hospice(1)     8 %   2/11/2013   Due on demand     50,000     50,000         4,000          

  Lan T. Tran(2)     11 %   2/10/2014   2 years(3)     106,976     106,976                  

  Cuc T. Tran(5)     11 %   3/5/2014   1 year     11,856     11,856                  

                  Sub total   $ 825,562   $ 1,882,532   $ 1,056,970   $ 110,851          

Current, Convertible notes payable to related parties:

                                                     

  Yasushi Nagasaki(2)     10 %   6/29/2012   Due on demand   $ 373,000   $ 388,800   $ 15,800   $ 67,680   $ 3.30     121,461  

                  Sub total   $ 373,000   $ 388,800   $ 15,800   $ 67,680         121,461  

Long-term, Promissory note payable to related parties:

                                                     

  Hideki & Eiko Uehara(5)     11 %   2/15/2014   2 years   $ 133,333   $ 133,333   $   $ 14,697          

                  Sub total   $ 133,333   $ 133,333   $   $ 14,697          

Long-term, Convertible notes payable to related parties:

   
 
   
 
 

 

   
 
   
 
   
 
   
 
   
 
   
 
 

  Phillip M. Satow(4)     10 %   6/6/2014   2 years   $ 100,000   $ 100,000   $   $   $ 7.00     15,103  

  Richard S. Pechter(5)     10 %   6/11/2014   2 years     100,000     100,000           $ 7.00     15,084  

                  Sub total   $ 200,000   $ 200,000   $   $         30,187  

                  Total   $ 1,531,895   $ 2,604,665   $ 1,072,770   $ 193,228         151,648  

(1)
Dr. Niihara, who is the Company's CEO, is also the CEO of Hope Hospice.

(2)
Officer

(3)
Due on Demand

(4)
Director

(5)
Family of Officer/Director

        Litigation with AFH Advisory —From July 2012 until May 2015, the Company was engaged in litigation with AFH Advisory, which was the sole stockholder of AFH Acquisition IV, Inc. immediately prior to its combination with Emmaus Medical pursuant to the Merger in May 2011. On June 27, 2013, the Superior Court of the State of Delaware issued an order implementing a partial summary judgment in favor of the Company which led to the cancellation of 2,504,249 shares of the Company held by AFH Advisory and related parties. While the partial summary judgment in favor of the Company in this litigation noted above led to the cancellation of 2,504,249 shares of the Company by the transfer agent on June 28, 2013, the Company continued to present these shares in its financial statements as outstanding until the right of appeal lapsed and all contingencies were resolved. On May 4, 2015, a settlement was entered with the Superior Court of the State of Delaware dismissing all remaining claims in the case with prejudice, thus removing any right to appeal. The settlement called for the exchange of documents and financial records, and for AFH Advisory to assign and transfer to the Company 150,000 shares of stock of Targeted Medical. During the year ended December 31, 2015, the Company recorded a gain on derecognition of accounts payable and settlement of litigation of $394,446 from the extinguishment of accounts payable to AFH Advisory in the same amount and reflected the cancellation of the 2,504,249 shares in stockholders' deficit (Note 7). In addition, the parties to the

F-34


Table of Contents


Emmaus Life Sciences, Inc.

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)

NOTE 10—RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS (Continued)

litigation dismissed all remaining claims with prejudice. The Parties agree that there are no further obligations due under any of the Letters of Intent. The Letters of Intent are considered rescinded, nulled, and voided.

        L-glutamine Therapy for SCD and Thalassemia Patent License —On March 1, 2001, the Company became the exclusive worldwide licensee under U.S. Patent No. 5,693,671, entitled "L-glutamine Therapy for SCD and Thalassemia" issued on December 2, 1997 to Niihara et al., (the "SCD Patent"), to develop a treatment approach for SCD and thalassemia using L-glutamine pursuant to a license agreement. The Company's Chief Executive Officer is one of the licensors of the SCD Patent. The license agreement is effective until the expiration of the SCD Patent in May 2016. Pursuant to the license agreement, the Company acquired the exclusive right to test, gain governmental approval of, make, have made, use, distribute and sell products designed for use in carrying out methods covered under the SCD Patent, ("Licensed Methods"), and/or incorporating technical information provided by the licensor or by any of certain doctors affiliated with the licensor ("Licensed Products"). Pursuant to an addendum to the license agreement, the Company agreed to pay royalties to the licensor during the term of the agreement equal to 4.5% of net sales of Licensed Products in the United States until lifetime royalty payments made to the licensor total $100,000, at which time the royalty rate will decrease to 2.5% of net sales of the Licensed Products. No royalties are paid to the licensor for Licensed Products sold or distributed, or Licensed Methods practiced, on a non-profit basis. Royalty payments are due within 45 days after the end of each fiscal quarter, with the last payment due 45 days after the termination of the agreement. Any payments not made when due accrue interest on and after the due date at a rate equal to the prime interest rate quoted by the Bank of America on the date the payment is due, with interest being compounded on the last day of each calendar quarter. Since the SCD Patent will expire in May 2016 and the Licensed Products have yet to be commercialized, the Company does not anticipate that any amounts will be payable pursuant to the SCD Patent license agreement.

NOTE 11—GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION

        For the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, the Company earned revenue from countries outside of the United States as outlined in the table below. The Company did not have any significant currency translation or foreign transaction adjustments during the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014.

Country
  Sales year ended
December 31, 2015
  % of Total Revenue
year ended
December 31, 2015
  Sales year ended
December 31, 2014
  % of Total Revenue
year ended
December 31, 2014
 

Japan

  $ 194,142     33 % $ 179,570     36 %

Taiwan

    277,637     47 %   193,552     39 %

South Korea

    39,660     7 %   45,312     9 %

        The Company did not have any significant currency translation or foreign transaction adjustments during the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014.

F-35


Table of Contents


Emmaus Life Sciences, Inc.

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)

NOTE 12—SUBSEQUENT EVENTS

        Subsequent to the year ended December 31, 2015, the Company issued the following:

Notes Issued after December 31, 2015
  Principal
Amounts
  Annual
Interest Rate
  Term of Notes   Conversion
Price
 

Convertible notes(1)

  $ 749,009   10%   Due on Demand up to 2 Years   $ 3.60  

Convertible notes(2)

    490,110   10%   2 years   $ 4.50  

Promissory note

    250,000   11%   6 months      

Promissory note(1)

    833,335   11%   Due on Demand      

Promissory notes—related party(1)

    263,843   11%   Due on Demand      

Promissory notes—related party

    529,700   10%~11%   Due on Demand up to 2 Years      

Total

  $ 3,115,997                

(1)
Refinancings of prior notes already outstanding.

(2)
Includes mandatory conversion at the time of an initial public offering at a conversion price equal to 80% of the initial public offering price.

        Subsequent to the year ended December 31, 2015, the Company issued the following:

Common Shares Issued after
December 31, 2015
  Principal
Amounts
  Number of
Shares Issued
 

Common shares

  $ 1,700,000     377,778  

Common shares—related party

    99,999     22,222  

Total

  $ 1,799,999     400,000  

 

Secured Loans after December 31, 2015
  Principal
Amounts
  Annual
Interest
Rate
  Term of Loans

Secured loans

  $ 1,295,000     10 % Earlier of closing of new debt financing or May 1, 2017

Total

  $ 1,295,000          

        On May 1, 2016, the SCD Patent expired and subsequently, the license agreement has terminated. Since the SCD Patent is expired, competitors with more resources than us may develop similar products which may subject our product to greater competition than we expect and reduce our ability to generate revenue from our product candidate, possibly materially. These circumstances may also impair our ability to obtain license partners or other international commercialization opportunities on terms acceptable to us, if at all.

        Although the SCD patent is expired, we will continue to seek market exclusivity protection for the SCD treatment by way of our orphan designation which, if the product is approved, will grant us seven years market exclusivity. In addition, under the Title I of the Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Resolution Act or the Hatch/Waxman Act, we may be eligible for three-year period market exclusivity if approved by the FDA. The FDA may not agree that our product is entitled to data exclusivity under

F-36


Table of Contents


Emmaus Life Sciences, Inc.

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)

NOTE 12—SUBSEQUENT EVENTS (Continued)

the Hatch/Waxman Act and, if granted, data exclusivity protection under the Hatch/Waxman Act will expire three years after our product is approved.

        With the termination of the license agreement, we will no longer be bound by the terms of the agreement which include but are not limited to paying royalties. The royalties were equal to 4.5% of net sales of Licensed Products in the United States until lifetime royalty payments made to the licensor total $100,000, at which time the royalty rate will decrease to 2.5% of net sales of the Licensed Products.

F-37




Exhibit 4.45

 

THIS CONVERTIBLE PROMISSORY NOTE AND THE SECURITIES INTO WHICH IT MAY BE CONVERTED HAVE NOT BEEN REGISTERED UNDER THE SECURITIES ACT OF 1933, AS AMENDED (THE “ACT”). NO SALE OR DISPOSITION MAY BE AFFECTED EXCEPT IN COMPLIANCE WITH RULE 144 UNDER SAID ACT OR AN EFFECTIVE REGISTRATION STATEMENT RELATED THERETO OR AN APPLICABLE EXEMPTION THEREFROM.

 

EMMAUS LIFE SCIENCES , INC.

Convertible Promissory Note

 

Principal Amount:

 

 

Loan Date:

 

 

 

 

 

 

Currency:

U.S. Dollars

 

Term:

Two Years

 

 

 

 

 

Interest Rate:

10%

 

Loan Due Date:

 

 

Interest Payment Period:  Interest is accrued and paid upon Loan Due Date

 

Lender:

 

FOR VALUE RECEIVED, Emmaus Life Sciences, Inc., a Delaware corporation, located at 21250 Hawthorne Blvd., Suite 800, Torrance, CA  90503 (“Borrower”) hereby promises to pay to the order of Lender the sum of the Principal Amount in the stated Currency, together with any accrued interest at the stated Interest Rate, under the following terms and conditions of this Convertible Promissory Note (“Note”).

 

1. Terms of Repayment (Balloon Payment) : The entire unpaid Principal Amount and any accrued interest shall become immediately due and payable upon the stated Loan Due Date. Simple interest at the stated Interest Rate will accrue on the outstanding Principal Amount commencing on the Loan Date of this Note and the Borrower shall make payments of interest only as per the stated Interest Payment Period.

 

2. Prepayment : This Note may be prepaid in whole or in part at any time after six months from the Loan Date without premium or penalty upon ten days advance written notice by Borrower to Lender. In the event such notice provides for prepayment on a date at or after the first anniversary of the Loan Date, Lender shall be permitted to exercise its conversion rights, if any, pursuant to Section 4(c) hereof at any time or from time to time prior to the expiration of such ten-day period. All prepayments shall first be applied to interest, and then to principal payments.

 

3. Place of Payment: All payments due under this Note shall be sent to the Lender’s address, as noted in Attachment 1 hereto, or at such other place as the Lender or subsequently assigned holder (“Holder”) of this Note may designate in writing in the future.

 



 

4. Conversion:

 

(a)                                  Mandatory Conversion :   Upon the first closing of the sale of shares of common stock of the Borrower (“Common Stock”) in a Qualifying Public Offering (as hereinafter defined), (i) the entire outstanding Principal Amount of this Note shall automatically be converted into a number of shares of Common Stock determined by dividing (x) the outstanding Principal Amount of this Note by (y) an amount equal to the product obtained by multiplying (A) the Qualifying Public Offering Price Per Share and (B) 0.80.  Within thirty days of such closing, all accrued and unpaid interest on the Note will be paid to the Holder in cash.  “Qualifying Public Offering” means a firm commitment public offering of shares of Common Stock pursuant to an effective registration statement under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, which results in aggregate cash proceeds to the Borrower of not less than $20,000,000; provided that in connection therewith the Common Stock is listed for trading on a national securities exchange; and provided further that the quoted market price per share of the Common Stock is at least $5.00 at the time of such listing. “Qualifying Public Offering Price Per Share” means the initial public offering price per share of Common Stock in such Qualifying Public Offering.

 

The Borrower shall notify the holder of this Note at least seven (7) calendar days prior to the initial closing of a Qualifying Public Offering. At the time of the initial closing of such Qualifying Public Offering, the holder of this Note shall deliver this Note to the Borrower and, as soon as reasonably practicable thereafter, the Borrower shall issue and deliver to the holder of this Note a certificate or certificates for the number of full shares of Common Stock issuable upon the conversion of this Note, and provision shall be made for any fraction of a share as provided in Section 4(b) below.  At the time of the initial closing of the Qualifying Public Offering, and provided that the Borrower has complied fully with all of its obligations under this Section 4(a), the holder of this Note shall not have any further rights under this Note (including the right to receive payment of principal or interest hereunder) other than those rights set forth in this Section 4.

 

Lender agrees, if requested by the managing underwriter of such Qualifying Public Offering, to enter into an agreement not to sell or transfer any shares of Common Stock of the Company (excluding shares acquired in or following the Qualifying Public Offering), for a period of up to 180 days, plus such additional necessary to comply with applicable regulatory requirements, following the Qualifying Public Offering (provided all directors and officers of the Borrower agree to the same restrictions).

 

(b)                                  Fractional Shares :  No fractional shares or scrip shall be issued upon conversion of this Note.  The number of full shares of Common Stock issuable upon conversion of this Note shall be computed on the basis of the aggregate value of outstanding principal of and, as applicable in accordance with the terms of this Section 4, accrued interest on this Note so surrendered.  The value of any fractional shares of Common Stock shall be paid in cash.

 

(c)                                   Conversion at the Election of the Holder :  At or after the first anniversary of the Loan Date, Lender may by giving written Notice of Conversion to the Borrower in the form attached hereto as Exhibit A, elect to convert some or all of the unpaid Principal Amount, including up to all the interest accrued and unpaid thereon, into a number of shares of Common Stock determined by dividing (x) the outstanding Principal Amount of this Note by (y) the Conversion Price Per Share. As used in this Section 4(c), “Conversion Price Per Share” means

 



 

$4.50 per share of Common Stock (subject to appropriate adjustment in the event of any stock splits, stock dividends, recapitalizations and similar transactions with respect to the capital stock of Borrower). Within two weeks following receipt of such Notice of Conversion, Borrower shall deliver to Lender one or more original stock certificates representing the full number of shares of Common Stock issuable upon such conversion, and provision shall be made for any fraction of a share as provided in Section 4(b) above. Upon such conversion, and provided that the Borrower has complied fully with all of its obligations under this Section 4(c), the holder of this Note shall not have any further rights under this Note (including the right to receive payment of principal or interest hereunder) other than those rights set forth in this Section 4.

 

5 . Default: In the event of default, the Borrower agrees to pay all costs and expenses incurred by the Lender, including all reasonable attorney fees as permitted by law for the collection of this Note upon default.

 

6 . Acceleration of Debt: If the Borrower (i) fails to make any payment due under the terms

 

of this Note or seeks relief under the U.S. Bankruptcy Code, (ii) fails to deliver shares to the Lender by the deadline set forth in Section 4 hereof, (iii) suffers an involuntary petition in bankruptcy or receivership that is not vacated within thirty (30) days, (iv) consents to the appointment of a receiver, trustee, assignee, liquidator or similar official or such appointment is not discharged or stayed within 30 days, (v) makes a general assignment for the benefit of its creditors or (vi) admits in writing that it is generally unable to pay its debts as they become due, the entire balance of this Note and any interest accrued thereon shall be immediately due and payable to the holder of this Note.

 

7 . Modification: No modification or waiver of any of the terms of this Note shall be allowed unless by written agreement signed by the Borrower and the Lender. No waiver of any breach or default hereunder shall be deemed a waiver of any subsequent breach or default of the same or similar nature.

 

8. Complete Note: This Note is the complete and exclusive statement of agreement of the Borrower and Lender with respect to matters in this Note. This Note replaces and supersedes all prior written or oral agreements or statements by and among the Borrower and Lender with respect to the matters covered by it. No representation, statement, condition or warranty not contained in this Note is binding on either the Borrower or Lender. Each Holder of this Note, by its acceptance hereof, agrees to be bound by, and shall be entitled to the benefits of, the terms set forth herein.

 

9 . Transfer of the Note:

 

(a)  Subject to Section 9(b) hereof, t his Note may be transferred, in whole or in part, at any time or from time to time, by the Lender. The Borrower hereby agrees to remain bound by the terms of this Note subsequent to any such transfer, and agrees that the terms of this Note may be fully enforced by any subsequent holder of this Note. If this Note is to be transferred, the Lender shall surrender this Note to the Borrower, together with such additional documentation as the Lender may reasonably request, whereupon the Borrower will forthwith issue and deliver upon the order of the Lender a new Note registered as the Lender may request, representing the outstanding Principal Amount being transferred by the Lender and, if less then the entire outstanding Principal

 



 

Amount is being transferred, a new Note to the Lender representing the outstanding Principal Amount not being transferred. The person in whose name this Note or any new Note issued in replacement hereof shall be registered shall be deemed and treated as the owner and holder thereof, and the Borrower shall not be affected by any notice or knowledge to the contrary except as provided in this Section 9(a). This Note may not be transferred by the Borrower, by operation of law or otherwise, without the prior written consent of the Lender.

 

(b)                                  Lender acknowledges and agrees that this Note has been acquired for investment and has not been registered under the securities laws of the United States of America or any state thereof.  Accordingly, notwithstanding Section 9(a), neither this Note nor any interest thereon may be offered for sale, sold or transferred in the absence of registration under applicable federal and state securities laws or an opinion of counsel of the Holder reasonably satisfactory to the Borrower that such registration is not required.

 

10. Lost, Stolen or Mutilated Note:   Upon receipt by the Borrower of evidence reasonably satisfactory to the Borrower of the loss, theft, destruction or mutilation of this Note, and, in the case of loss, theft or destruction, of any indemnification undertaking by the Lender to the Borrower in customary form and, in the case of mutilation, upon surrender and cancellation of this Note, the Borrower shall execute and deliver to the Lender a new Note representing the outstanding Principal Amount and accrued and unpaid interest thereon.

 

11 . Remedies:   The remedies provided in this Note shall be cumulative and in addition to all other remedies available under this Note at law or in equity (including a decree of specific performance and/or other injunctive relief), and nothing herein shall limit the Lender’s right to pursue actual and consequential damages for any failure by the Borrower to comply with the terms of this Note.

 

12 . Severability of Provisions : If any portion of this Note is deemed unenforceable, all other provisions of this Note shall remain in full force and effect.

 

13 . Reservation of Shares :   The Borrower shall at all times at and after the first anniversary of the Loan Date and, as applicable, at the time of closing of Qualifying Public Offering reserve and keep available, free from preemptive rights, out of its authorized and unissued Common Stock the full number of shares of Common Stock then issuable upon the conversion in full of this Note.

 

14 . Choice of Law: All terms and conditions of this Note shall be interpreted under the laws of California, U.S.A., without regard to conflict of law principles.

 

 

Signed Under Penalty of Perjury, this         day of      ,       

 

Emmaus Life Sciences, Inc.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

By:

 

 



 

ATTACHMENT 1

 

Lender’s Name:

 

Lender’s Address:

 



 

EXHIBIT A

 

NOTICE OF CONVERSION

 

(To be executed by the Lender in order to convert the Note)

 

TO:  Emmaus Life Sciences, Inc.

 

The undersigned hereby irrevocably elects to convert $                                  of the principal amount of the Note issued to the Lender by Emmaus Life Sciences, Inc. (the “Company”) into shares of Common Stock of the Company according to the conditions stated therein, as of the Conversion Date written below.

 

Conversion Date:

 

Applicable Conversion Price:

 

Signature:

 

Name:

 

Address:

 

Amount to be converted:

$

Amount of Note unconverted:

$

Number of shares of Common Stock to be issued:

 

Please issue the shares of Common Stock in the following name and to the following address:

 

Address:

 

Address:

 

Phone Number:

 

 



 

[INFORMATION FOR PURPOSES OF FILING WITH THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION]

 

SCHEDULE A

 

NOTEHOLDERS

 

Lender

 

Annual
Interest
Rate

 

Date of
loan

 

Term of
Loan

 

Loan Due
Date

 

Principal Loan
Amount

 

Interest Payment
Period

 

Conversion
Price

 

Jung Soo Kim

 

10.0%

 

10/01/2015

 

2 years

 

10/01/2017

 

$

700,000

 

Paid upon loan due date

 

$

4.50

 

Charles & Kimxa Stark

 

10.0%

 

10/01/2015

 

2 years

 

10/01/2017

 

$

20,000

 

Paid upon loan due date

 

$

4.50

 

Yutaka & Soomi Niihara

 

10.0%

 

11/16/2015

 

2 years

 

11/16/2017

 

$

200,000

 

Paid upon loan due date

 

$

4.50

 

Yoshikazu Nemoto

 

10.0%

 

11/27/2015

 

2 years

 

11/27/2017

 

$

30,145

 

Paid upon loan due date

 

$

4.50

 

Takayasu Takemoto

 

10.0%

 

12/09/2015

 

2 years

 

12/09/2017

 

$

82,305

 

Paid upon loan due date

 

$

4.50

 

Tamiko Matsuo

 

10.0%

 

12/09/2015

 

2 years

 

12/09/2017

 

$

57,613

 

Paid upon loan due date

 

$

4.50

 

Yuki Takemoto

 

10.0%

 

12/09/2015

 

2 years

 

12/09/2017

 

$

41,152

 

Paid upon loan due date

 

$

4.50

 

 




Exhibit 10.30

 

EMMAUS LIFE SCIENCES , INC.

Promissory Note

 

Principal Amount:

US$300,000

Loan Date:

12/29/2015

 

 

 

 

Currency:

US dollars

Term:

Two years

 

 

 

 

Interest Rate:

11.0% per year

Loan Due Date:

Due on demand

 

Interest Payment Period:  Interest is payable annually

 

Lender:  Masaharu & Emiko Osato

 

FOR VALUE RECEIVED, Emmaus Life Sciences, Inc., a Delaware corporation, located at 21250 Hawthorne Blvd., Suite 800, Torrance, CA  90503 (“Borrower”) agrees to pay to Lender the sum of the Principal Amount in the stated Currency, together with any accrued interest at the stated Interest Rate, under the following terms and conditions of this this Promissory Note (“Note”).

 

1. Terms of Repayment (Balloon Payment) : The entire unpaid Principal Amount and any accrued interest shall become immediately due and payable upon the stated Loan Due Date. Simple interest at the stated Interest Rate will accrue on the outstanding Principal Amount commencing on the Loan Date of this Note and the Borrower shall make payments of interest only as per the stated Interest Payment Period.

 

2. Prepayment : This Note may be prepaid in whole or in part at any time after six months of the Loan Date without premium or penalty. All prepayments shall first be applied to interest, and then to principal payments.

 

3. Place of Payment: All payments due under this Note shall be sent to the Lender’s address, as noted in Attachment 1 hereto, or at such other place as the Lender or subsequently assigned holder of this Note may designate in writing in the future.

 

4 . Default: In the event of default, the Borrower agrees to pay all costs and expenses incurred by the Lender, including all reasonable attorney fees as permitted by law for the collection of this Note upon default.

 

5. Additional Guarantor: Lender understands and acknowledges that Emmaus Life Sciences, Inc. is the borrower of this Note.  However, for added security to lender, this note is guaranteed by Yutaka Niihara, President and CEO.

 

6. Acceleration of Debt: If the Borrower (i) fails to make any payment due under the terms of this Note or seeks relief under the U.S. Bankruptcy Code, (ii) fails to deliver shares to the Lender by the deadline set forth in Section 4 hereof, (iii) suffers an involuntary petition in

 



 

bankruptcy or receivership that is not vacated within thirty (30) days, (iv) consents to the appointment of a receiver, trustee, assignee, liquidator or similar official or such appointment is not discharged or stayed within 30 days, (v) makes a general assignment for the benefit of its creditors or (vi) admits in writing that it is generally unable to pay its debts as they become due, the entire balance of this Note and any interest accrued thereon shall be immediately due and payable to the holder of this Note.

 

7. Modification: No modification or waiver of any of the terms of this Note shall be allowed unless by written agreement signed by the parties. No waiver of any breach or default hereunder shall be deemed a waiver of any subsequent breach or default of the same or similar nature.

 

8. Complete Note: This Note is the complete and exclusive statement of agreement of the parties with respect to matters in this Note. This Note replaces and supersedes all prior written or oral agreements or statements by and among the parties with respect to the matters covered by it. No representation, statement, condition or warranty not contained in this Note is binding on the parties.

 

9. Transfer of the Note: This Note may be transferred, in whole or in part, at any time or from time to time, by the Lender. The Borrower hereby waives any notice of the transfer of this Note by the Lender or by any subsequent holder of this Note, agrees to remain bound by the terms of this Note subsequent to any transfer, and agrees that the terms of this Note may be fully enforced by any subsequent holder of this Note. If this Note is to be transferred, the Lender shall surrender this Note to the Borrower, whereupon the Borrower will forthwith issue and deliver upon the order of the Lender a new Note registered as the Lender may request, representing the outstanding Principal Amount being transferred by the Lender and, if less then the entire outstanding Principal Amount is being transferred, a new Note to the Lender representing the outstanding Principal Amount not being transferred. This Note may not be transferred by the Borrower, by operation of law or otherwise, without the prior written consent of the Lender.

 

10. Lost, Stolen or Mutilated Note:   Upon receipt by the Borrower of evidence reasonably satisfactory to the Borrower of the loss, theft, destruction or mutilation of this Note, and, in the case of loss, theft or destruction, of any indemnification undertaking by the Lender to the Borrower in customary form and, in the case of mutilation, upon surrender and cancellation of this Note, the Borrower shall execute and deliver to the Lender a new Note representing the outstanding Principal Amount and accrued and unpaid interest thereon.

 

11 . Remedies:   The remedies provided in this Note shall be cumulative and in addition to all other remedies available under this Note at law or in equity (including a decree of specific performance and/or other injunctive relief), and nothing herein shall limit the Lender’s right to pursue actual and consequential damages for any failure by the Borrower to comply with the terms of this Note.

 

12 . Severability of Provisions : If any portion of this Note is deemed unenforceable, all other provisions of this Note shall remain in full force and effect.

 

13 . Choice of Law: All terms and conditions of this Note shall be interpreted under the laws of California, U.S.A., without regard to conflict of law principles.

 



 

Signed Under Penalty of Perjury, this 29th day of December, 2015

 

Emmaus Life Sciences, Inc.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

By: Yutaka Niihara, MD, President and CEO

 

 



 

ATTACHMENT 1

 

Lender’s Name:

 

Lender’s Address:

 




QuickLinks -- Click here to rapidly navigate through this document


Exhibit 31.1

Certification of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Item 601(b)(31) of Regulation S-K,
as adopted pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

I, Yutaka Niihara, certify that:

1.
I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Emmaus Life Sciences, Inc.;

2.
Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3.
Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4.
The registrant's other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and have:
5.
The registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

/s/ YUTAKA NIIHARA

Yutaka Niihara
Chief Executive Officer
(Principal Executive Officer)

Date: May 20, 2016
   



QuickLinks

Certification of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Item 601(b)(31) of Regulation S-K, as adopted pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

QuickLinks -- Click here to rapidly navigate through this document


Exhibit 31.2

Certification of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Item 601(b)(31) of Regulation S-K,
as adopted pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

I, Steve Lee, certify that:

1.
I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Emmaus Life Sciences, Inc.;

2.
Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3.
Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4.
The registrant's other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and have:
5.
The registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

/s/ STEVE LEE

Steve Lee
Interim Chief Financial Officer
(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)

Date: May 20, 2016
   



QuickLinks

Certification of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Item 601(b)(31) of Regulation S-K, as adopted pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

QuickLinks -- Click here to rapidly navigate through this document


Exhibit 32.1

Certification of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

        In connection with the annual report of Emmaus Life Sciences, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the year ending December 31, 2015, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), each of the undersigned, in the capacities and on the date indicated below, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to his knowledge:

/s/ YUTAKA NIIHARA

Yutaka Niihara
Chief Executive Officer
(Principal Executive Officer)

May 20, 2016
   

/s/ STEVE LEE

Steve Lee
Interim Chief Financial Officer
(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)

May 20, 2016

 

 



QuickLinks

Certification of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002