ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS

An investment in the Company’s Common Stock involves a high degree of risk. You should carefully consider the risks described below as well as other information provided to you in this report, including information in the section of this document entitled “Forward Looking Statements.” The risks and uncertainties described below are not the only ones facing us. Additional risks and uncertainties not presently known to us or that we currently believe are immaterial may also impair our business operations. If any of the following risks actually occur, our business, financial condition or results of operations could be materially adversely affected, the value of our Common Stock could decline, and you may lose all or part of your investment.

In addition to the other information contained in this report, the following risk factors should be considered carefully in evaluating an investment in us and in analyzing our forward-looking statements.

Risks Related to Our Business

Our revenues and operating results could fluctuate significantly

Our revenues and operating results may vary significantly from year-to-year and quarter-to-quarter as well as in comparison to the corresponding quarter of the preceding year. Variations my result from one or more factors, including, without limitation:

We have a relatively limited operating history, which makes it difficult to evaluate our future prospects.

Although we have been in operation since 1990, we have a relatively short operating history and limited financial data upon which you may evaluate our business and prospects. In addition, our business model is likely to continue to evolve as we attempt to expand our product offerings and our presence in the generic pharmaceutical market. As a result, our potential for future profitability must be considered in view of the risks, uncertainties, expenses, and difficulties frequently encountered by companies that are attempting to move into new markets and continuing to innovate with new and unproven technologies. Some of these risks relate to our potential inability to:

If we do not effectively address the risks we face, our business model may become unworkable and we may not achieve or sustain profitability or successfully develop any products.

We have not been profitable and expect future losses.

To date, we have not been profitable and we may never be profitable or, if we become profitable, we may be unable to sustain profitability. We have sustained losses from operations in each year since our incorporation in 1990. During the years ended March 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015, we incurred net losses from operations of approximately $7.4 million, $8.3 million, and $16.5 million, respectively. We expect to continue to incur losses until we are able to generate sufficient revenues to support our operations and offset operating costs.

We may require additional financing to meet our business objectives

Although we believe that we have adequate financial resources on hand as of March 31, 2017 to support the anticipated commercial launch of SequestOx™ and also ensure operations through March 31, 2018, we cannot assure that we will not need additional funding to accomplish our plans to conduct the clinical development and commercialization of a range of multiple abuse resistant opioids on an accelerated pace.

As of March 31, 2017, we had cash on hand of approximately $10.6 million and a working capital surplus of $15.1 million, and, for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2017, we had losses from operations totaling $7.4 million, net other income totaling $9.3 million and net income of $3.8 million.

On May 1, 2017, we entered into another purchase agreement (the “2017 LPC Purchase Agreement”), together with a registration rights agreement (the “2017 LPC Registration Rights Agreement”), with Lincoln Park. Under the terms and subject to the conditions of the 2017 LPC Purchase Agreement, we have the right to sell to and Lincoln Park is obligated to purchase up to $40 million in shares of our common stock, subject to certain limitations, from time to time, over the 36-month period commencing on June 5, 2017.

The extent we rely on Lincoln Park as a source of funding will depend on a number of factors including, the prevailing market price of our common stock and the extent to which we are able to secure working capital from other sources. If obtaining sufficient funding from Lincoln Park were to prove unavailable or prohibitively dilutive, we will need to secure another source of funding in order to satisfy our working capital needs. Even if we sell all shares under the 2017 LPC Purchase Agreement, we may still need additional capital to fully implement our business, operating and development plans. For more information on the Lincoln Park Capital transaction, see Part II, Item 7 “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations; Liquidity and Capital Resources; Lincoln Park Capital”.

We are anticipating that, with the growth of the current generic product line consisting of generic phentermine tablets and capsules, hydromorphone, naltrexone, methadone, phendimetrazine, isradipine, hydroxyzine and immediate release Lodrane D®, combined with the successful transfer of manufacturing site and commercial launch of the six remaining approved generic products licensed to Epic Pharma LLC which have not yet been commercialized, profit splits earned from the commercial sale of Oxy-IR by Epic, pursuant to the Epic Strategic Alliance Agreement, profit splits earned from the commercial sale of products under the Epic Manufacturing and License Agreement, milestones, revenues and profit splits pursuant to the 2015 SequestOX™ License Agreement, profit splits earned from the commercial sale of Trimipramine pursuant to the Reddy’s Trimipramine Distribution Agreement, revenues and profits earned pursuant to the SunGen Agreement and other opportunities in our pipeline, Elite eventually could be profitable. However, there can be no assurances that we will be able to timely raise additional funds, if needed, on acceptable terms through the 2017 LPC Purchase Agreement or otherwise, that the sales of the current generic product line will continue, that the 12 approved generic products licensed to Epic Pharma LLC will be successfully commercialization and generate future revenues or that the other opportunities in our pipeline will be successfully commercialized. There can also be no assurances of Elite becoming profitable.

To sustain operations and meet our business objectives we must be able to commercialize our products and other products or pipeline opportunities. If we are unable to timely obtain additional financing, if necessary, and/or we are unable to timely generate greater revenues from our operations, we will be required to reduce and, possibly, cease operations and liquidate our assets. No assurance can be given that we will be able to commercialize the new opportunities, or consummate such other financing or strategic alternative in the time necessary to avoid the cessation of our operations and liquidation of our assets.

Furthermore, the capital and credit markets have experienced extreme volatility. Disruptions in the credit markets make it harder and more expensive to obtain funding. In the event current resources do not satisfy our needs, we may have to seek additional financing. The availability of additional financing will depend on a variety of factors such as market conditions and the general availability of credit. Future debt financing may not be available to us when required or may not be available on acceptable terms, and as a result we may be unable to grow our business, take advantage of business opportunities, or respond to competitive pressures .

We depend on a limited number of customers and any reduction, delay or cancellation of an order from these customers or the loss of any of these customers could cause our revenue to decline.

Each year we have had one or a few customers that have accounted for a large percentage of our limited revenues therefore the termination of a contract with a customer may result in the loss of substantially all of our revenues. We are constantly working to develop new relationships with existing or new customers, but despite these efforts we may not, at the time that any of our current contracts expire, have other contracts in place generating similar or material revenue. We have agreements with Epic, Ascend and Precision Dose for the sales and distribution of products that we manufacture. We receive revenues to manufacture these products and also receive a profit split or royalties based on in-market sales of the products.

In addition, since a significant portion of our revenues is derived from a relatively few customers, any financial difficulties experienced by any one of these customers, or any delay in receiving payments from any one of these customers, could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition, and cash flows.

A notice of default was issued by the New Jersey Economic Development Authority in relation to prior obligations of our tax-exempt bonds. Although we are current in our payments under these bonds, if the principal balances due under these bonds are accelerated pursuant to the notice of default, our ability to operate in the future will be materially and adversely affected.

Although we are current in our payments under the NJEDA Bonds, we previously were in default and a notice of default was issued in March 2009. Should the principal balances due under the NJEDA Bonds be accelerated pursuant to such notice of default, our ability to operate in the future will be materially and adversely affected.

For more information on the NJEDA Bonds, see Part II, Item 7 “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations; Liquidity and Capital Resources; NJEDA Bonds”.

Elite’s pipeline consists of products in various stages of development, including products in early development.

Elite’s product pipeline, including its abuse deterrent opioid products, are in various stages of development. Prior to commercialization, product development must be completed that could include scale-up, clinical studies, regulatory filing, regulatory review, approval by the FDA, and/or other development steps. Additionally, Elite has 6 approved generic products for which a site transfer must be completed prior to product launches. For these generic products, Elite must complete site transfer studies, file change being effective in 30 days (“CBE 30”) and await FDA review and approval. Development is subject to risks. We cannot assure you that development will be successful, or that during development unexpected delays might occur or additional costs might be incurred.

The pharmaceutical industry is heavily regulated, which creates uncertainty about our ability to bring new products to market and imposes substantial compliance costs on our business in relation to product development as well as commercial operations.

Governmental authorities such as the FDA impose substantial requirements on the development, manufacture, holding, labeling, marketing, advertising, promotion, distribution and sale of therapeutic pharmaceutical products through lengthy and detailed laboratory and clinical testing and other costly and time-consuming procedures. In addition, before obtaining regulatory approvals for certain generic products, we must conduct limited bioequivalence studies and other research to show comparability to the branded products. A failure to obtain satisfactory results in required pre-marketing trials may prevent us from obtaining required regulatory approvals. The FDA may also require companies to conduct post-approval studies and post-approval surveillance regarding their drug products and to report adverse events.

Before obtaining regulatory approvals for the sale of any of our new product candidates, we must demonstrate through preclinical studies and clinical trials that the product is safe and effective for each intended use. Preclinical and clinical studies may fail to demonstrate the safety and effectiveness of a product. Likewise, we may not be able to demonstrate through clinical trials that a product candidate’s therapeutic benefits outweigh its risks. Even promising results from preclinical and early clinical studies do not always accurately predict results in later, large scale trials. A failure to demonstrate safety and efficacy could or would result in our failure to obtain regulatory approvals. Clinical trials can be delayed for reasons outside of our control, which can lead to increased development costs and delays in regulatory approval. For example, due to competition to enroll patients in clinical trials, there have been instances of delays in clinical development of our products in the past, as a result of patients not enrolling in clinical trials at the rate expected, or patients dropping out of trials after enrolling, at rates that were higher than expected. In addition, we rely on collaboration partners and third party subject matter experts that may recommend changes in trial protocol and design enhancements that are put into effect, or encounter clinical trial compliance-related issues, which may also delay clinical trials. Product supplies may be delayed or be insufficient to treat the patients participating in the clinical trials, or manufacturers or suppliers may not meet the requirements of the FDA or foreign regulatory authorities, such as those relating to Current Good Manufacturing Practices. We also may experience delays in obtaining, or we may not obtain, required initial and continuing approval of our clinical trials from institutional review boards. We cannot confirm to you that we will not experience delays or undesired results in these or any other of our clinical trials.

We cannot confirm to you that the FDA will approve, clear for marketing or certify any products developed by us or that such approval will not subject the marketing of our products to certain limits on indicated use. The FDA may not agree with our assessment of the clinical data or they may interpret it differently. Such regulatory authorities may require additional or expanded clinical trials. Any limitation on use imposed by the FDA or delay in or failure to obtain FDA approvals or clearances of products developed by us would adversely affect the marketing of these products and our ability to generate product revenue, which would adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations.

In addition, with respect specifically to pharmaceutical products, the submission of a New Drug Application (NDA), such as SequestOx™, or ANDA to the FDA with supporting clinical safety and efficacy data, for example, does not guarantee that the FDA will grant approval to market the product. Meeting the FDA’s regulatory requirements to obtain approval to market a drug product, which varies substantially based on the type, complexity and novelty of the pharmaceutical product, typically takes years and is subject to uncertainty.

Additional delays may result if an FDA Advisory Committee or other regulatory authority recommends non-approval or restrictions on approval. Although the FDA is not required to follow the recommendations of its Advisory Committees, it usually does. A negative Advisory Committee meeting could signal a lower likelihood of approval, although the FDA may still end up approving our application. Regardless of an Advisory Committee meeting outcome or the FDA’s final approval decision, public presentation of our data may shed positive or negative light on our application.

Some drugs are available in the United States that are not the subject of an FDA-approved NDA. In 2011, the FDA’s Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (“CDER”) Office of Compliance modified its enforcement policy with regard to the marketing of such “unapproved” marketed drugs. Under CDER’s revised guidance, the FDA encourages manufacturers to obtain NDA approvals for such drugs by requiring unapproved versions to be removed from the market after an approved version has been introduced, subject to a grace period at the FDA’s discretion. This grace period is intended to allow an orderly transition of supply to the market and to mitigate any potential related drug shortage. Depending on the length of the grace period and the time it takes for subsequent applications to be approved, this may result in a period of de facto market exclusivity to the first manufacturer that has obtained an approved NDA for the previously unapproved marketed drug. We may seek FDA approval for certain unapproved marketed drug products through the 505(b)(2) regulatory pathway. Even if we receive approval for an NDA under Section 505(b)(2), the FDA may not take timely enforcement action against companies marketing unapproved versions of the drug; therefore, we cannot be sure that that we will receive the benefit of any de facto exclusive marketing period or that we will fully recoup the expenses incurred to obtain an approval. In addition, certain competitors and others have objected to the FDA’s interpretation of Section 505(b)(2). If the FDA’s interpretation of Section 505(b)(2) is successfully challenged, this could delay or even prevent the FDA from approving any NDA that we submit under Section 505(b)(2).

Moreover, even if our product candidates are approved under Section 505(b)(2), the approval may be subject to limitations on the indicated uses for which the products may be marketed or to other conditions of approval, or may contain requirements for costly post-marketing testing and surveillance to monitor the safety or efficacy of the products.

The ANDA approval process for a new product varies in time, is difficult to estimate and can vary significantly, from as little as 10 months from the date of application, to several years or more. Furthermore, ANDA approvals, if granted, may not include all indications for which the Company may seek to market each product.

Further, once a product is approved or cleared for marketing, failure to comply with applicable regulatory requirements can result in, among other things, suspensions or withdrawals of approvals or clearances, seizures or recalls of products, injunctions against the manufacture, holding, distribution, marketing and sale of a product, and civil and criminal sanctions. Furthermore, changes in existing regulations or the adoption of new regulations could prevent us from obtaining, or affect the timing of, future regulatory approvals or clearances. Meeting regulatory requirements and evolving government standards may delay marketing of our new products for a considerable period of time, impose costly procedures upon our activities and result in a competitive advantage to larger companies that compete against us.

Based on scientific developments, post-market experience, or other legislative or regulatory changes, the current FDA standards of review for approving new pharmaceutical products, or new indications or uses for approved or cleared products, are sometimes more stringent than those that were applied in the past.

Some new or evolving FDA review standards or conditions for approval or clearance were not applied to many established products currently on the market, including certain opioid products. As a result, the FDA does not have as extensive safety databases on these products as on some products developed more recently. Accordingly, we believe the FDA has expressed an intention to develop such databases for certain of these products, including many opioids. In particular, the FDA has expressed interest in specific chemical structures that may be present as impurities in a number of opioid narcotic active pharmaceutical ingredients, such as oxycodone, which based on certain structural characteristics and laboratory tests may indicate the potential for having mutagenic effects. FDA has required, and may continue to require, more stringent controls of the levels of these impurities in drug products for approval.

Also, the FDA may require labeling revisions, formulation, or manufacturing changes and/or product modifications for new or existing products containing such impurities. The FDA’s more stringent requirements, together with any additional testing or remedial measures that may be necessary, could result in increased costs for, or delays in, obtaining approval for certain of our products in development. Although we do not believe that the FDA would seek to remove a currently marketed product from the market unless such mutagenic effects are believed to indicate a significant risk to patient health, we cannot make any such assurance.

In May of 2016, an FDA advisory panel recommended mandatory training of all physicians who prescribe opioids on the risks of prescription opioids. In 2016, the CDC also issued a guideline for prescribing opioids for chronic pain that provides recommendations for primary care clinicians who are prescribing opioids for chronic pain outside of active cancer treatment, palliative care, and end-of-life care. In addition, state health departments and boards of pharmacy have authority to regulate distribution and may modify their regulations with respect to prescription narcotics in an attempt to curb abuse. In either case, any such new regulations or requirements may be difficult and expensive for us to comply with, may delay our introduction of new products, may adversely affect our total revenues, and may have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and cash flows.

The FDA has the authority to require companies to undertake additional post-approval studies to assess known or signaled safety risks and to make any labeling changes to address those risks. The FDA also can require companies to formulate approved Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategies (REMS) to confirm a drug’s benefits outweigh its risks.

The FDA’s exercise of its authority under the FFDCA could result in delays or increased costs during product development, clinical trials and regulatory review, increased costs to comply with additional post-approval regulatory requirements and potential restrictions on sales of approved products. Foreign regulatory agencies often have similar authority and may impose comparable requirements and costs. Post-marketing studies and other emerging data about marketed products, such as adverse event reports, may also adversely affect sales of our products. Furthermore, the discovery of significant safety or efficacy concerns or problems with a product in the same therapeutic class as one of our products that implicate or appear to implicate the entire class of products could have an adverse effect on sales of our product or, in some cases, result in product withdrawals. The FDA has continuing authority over the approval of an NDA or ANDA and may withdraw approval if, among other reasons, post-marketing clinical or other experience, tests, or data show that a drug is unsafe for use under the conditions upon which it was approved, or if FDA determines that there is a lack of substantial evidence of the drug’s efficacy under the conditions described in its labeling. Furthermore, new data and information, including information about product misuse or abuse at the user level, may lead government agencies, professional societies, practice management groups or patient or trade organizations to recommend or publish guidance or guidelines related to the use of our products, which may lead to reduced sales of our products.

The FDA and the DEA have important and complementary responsibilities with respect to our business. The FDA administers an application and post-approval monitoring process to confirm that products that are available in the market are safe, effective, and consistently of uniform, high quality. The DEA administers registration, drug allotment and accountability systems to satisfy against loss and diversion of controlled substances. Both agencies have trained investigators that routinely, or for cause, conduct inspections, and both have authority to seek to enforce their statutory authority and regulations through administrative remedies as well as civil and criminal enforcement actions. The FDA regulates and monitors the quality of drug clinical trials to provide human subject protection and to support marketing applications. The FDA may place a hold on a clinical trial and may cause a suspension or withdrawal of product approvals if regulatory standards are not maintained. The FDA also regulates the facilities, processes, and procedures used to manufacture and market pharmaceutical products in the U.S. Manufacturing facilities must be registered with the FDA and all products made in such facilities must be manufactured in accordance with the latest cGMP regulations, which are enforced by the FDA. Compliance with clinical trial requirements and cGMP regulations requires the dedication of substantial resources and requires significant expenditures. In the event an approved manufacturing facility for a particular drug is required by the FDA to curtail or cease operations, or otherwise becomes inoperable, or a third-party contract manufacturing facility faces manufacturing problems, obtaining the required FDA authorization to manufacture at the same or a different manufacturing site could result in production delays, which could adversely affect our business, results of operations, financial condition, and cash flow.

The FDA is authorized to perform inspections of U.S. and foreign facilities under the FFDCA. At the end of such an inspection, FDA could issue a Form 483 Notice of Inspectional Observations, which could cause us to modify certain activities identified during the inspection. Following such inspections, the FDA may issue an untitled letter as an initial correspondence that cites violations that do not meet the threshold of regulatory significance of a Warning Letter. FDA guidelines also provide for the issuance of Warning Letters for violations of “regulatory significance” for which the failure to adequately and promptly achieve correction may be expected to result in an enforcement action. FDA also may issue Warning Letters and untitled letters in connection with events or circumstances unrelated to an FDA inspection.

Similar to other pharmaceutical companies, during Fiscal 2017, our facilities were subject to routine and new-product related inspections by the FDA. These inspections resulted in FDA Form 483 observations and a warning letter regarding postmarketing adverse drug experience reporting. We have responded to all inspection observations within the required time frame and have implemented, or are continuing to implement, the corrective action plans as agreed with the relevant regulatory agencies. Please also see the risk factor titled “We received a Warning Letter from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration regarding Postmarketing Adverse Drug Experience reporting. The Warning Letter does not restrict the production or shipment of any of the Company’s products, or the sale or marketing of the Company’s products, however, unless and until the Company is able to correct the outstanding issues identified, to the FDA’s satisfaction, the FDA may withhold approval of pending drug applications or take other actions that would have a material adverse impact on the Company” .

Many of our products contain controlled substances. The stringent DEA regulations on our use of controlled substances include restrictions on their use in research, manufacture, distribution, and storage. A breach of these regulations could result in imposition of civil penalties, refusal to renew or action to revoke necessary registrations, or other restrictions on operations involving controlled substances. In addition, failure to comply with applicable legal requirements subjects the manufacturing facilities of our subsidiaries and manufacturing partners to possible legal or regulatory action, including shutdown. Any such shutdown may adversely affect their ability to supply us with product and thus, our ability to market affected products. This could have a negative impact on our business, results of operations, financial condition, cash flows and competitive position. See also the risk described under the caption “The DEA limits the availability of the active ingredients used in many of our current products and products in development, as well as the production of these products, and, as a result, our procurement and production quotas may not be sufficient to meet commercial demand or complete clinical trials.” In addition, we are subject to the Federal Drug Supply Chain Security Act (DSCSA). The U.S. government has enacted DSCSA which requires development of an electronic pedigree to track and trace each prescription drug at the salable unit level through the distribution system, which will be effective incrementally over a 10-year period. Compliance with DSCSA and future U.S. federal or state electronic pedigree requirements may increase our operational expenses and impose significant administrative burdens.

We cannot determine what effect changes in regulations or legal interpretations or requirements by the FDA or the courts, when and if promulgated or issued, may have on our business in the future. Changes could, among other things, require different labeling, monitoring of patients, interaction with physicians, education programs for patients or physicians, curtailment of necessary supplies, or limitations on product distribution. These changes, or others required by the FDA or DEA could have an adverse effect on the sales of these products. The evolving and complex nature of regulatory science and regulatory requirements, the broad authority and discretion of the FDA and the generally high level of regulatory oversight results in a continuing possibility that, from time to time, we will be adversely affected by regulatory actions despite our ongoing efforts and commitment to achieve and maintain full compliance with all regulatory requirements.

Furthermore, once a product receives marketing approval, the manufacturing, distribution, processing, formulation, packaging, labeling, promotion and sale of our products are subject to extensive regulation by federal agencies, including, without limitation, the FDA, DEA, FTC, Consumer Product Safety Commission, and Environmental Protection Agency, among others. We are also subject to state and local laws, regulations, and agencies in New Jersey and elsewhere. Such regulations are also subject to change by the relevant federal, state and local agencies. For instance, beginning from January 1, 2015, manufacturers, wholesale distributors, and repackagers of certain prescription drugs are required to provide and capture certain product tracing information under the Drug Quality and Security Act (“DQSA”). Title II of the DQSA, referred to as the Drug Supply Chain Security Act, requires companies in certain prescription drugs’ chain of distribution to build electronic, interoperable systems to identify and trace the products as they are distributed in the United States. Compliance with the DQSA or any future federal or state electronic pedigree requirements may increase the Company's operational expenses and impose significant administrative burdens.

Regulatory agencies such as the FDA regularly inspect our manufacturing facilities and the facilities of our third-party suppliers. The failure of the Northvale Facility, or a facility of one of our third-party suppliers, to comply with applicable laws and regulations may lead to breach of representations made to our customers or to regulatory or government action against us related to products made in that facility. We have in the past received and successfully resolved Form 483 observations from the FDA regarding certain operations within our manufacturing network. Although we remain committed to continuing to improve our quality control and manufacturing practices, we cannot be assured that the FDA will continue to be satisfied with our quality control and manufacturing systems and standards. If we receive any future FDA observations, we may be subject to regulatory action including, among others, monetary sanctions or penalties, product recalls or seizure, injunctions, total or partial suspension of production and/or distribution, and suspension or withdrawal of regulatory approvals. Further, other federal agencies, our customers and partners in our alliance, development, collaboration, and other partnership agreements with respect to our products and services may take any such Form 483 observations into account when considering the award of contracts or the continuation or extension of such partnership agreements. If we receive any future Form 483 observations or warning letters from the FDA, our business, consolidated results of operations and consolidated financial condition could be materially and adversely affected.

With respect to environmental, safety and health laws and regulations, we cannot accurately predict the outcome or timing of future expenditures that we may be required to make in order to comply with such laws as they apply to our operations and facilities. We are also subject to potential liability for the remediation of contamination associated with both present and past hazardous waste generation, handling, and disposal activities. We are subject periodically to environmental compliance reviews by environmental, safety, and health regulatory agencies. Environmental laws are subject to change and we may become subject to stricter environmental standards in the future and face larger capital expenditures in order to comply with environmental laws.

Compliance with federal and state and local law regulations, including compliance with any newly enacted regulations, requires substantial expenditures of time, money, and effort to ensure full technical compliance. Failure to comply with the FDA, DEA, EPA and other governmental regulations can result in fines, disgorgement, unanticipated compliance expenditures, recall or seizure of products, exposure to product liability claims, total or partial suspension of production or distribution, suspension of the FDA’s review of NDAs or ANDAs, enforcement actions, injunctions and civil or criminal prosecution, any of which could have a material and adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

Legislative or regulatory reform of the healthcare system in the United States may harm our future business.

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act, collectively commonly referred to as the “Affordable Care Act” may affect the operational results of companies in the pharmaceutical industry such as ours by imposing additional costs. Effective January 1, 2010, the Affordable Care Act, amongst other changes, increased the minimum Medicaid drug rebates for pharmaceutical companies and revised the definition of “average manufacturer price” for reporting purposes, which may affect the amount of Medicaid drug rebates to states related to the sales of our products, whether such sales are made directly by Company or by one of the Company’s licensees. Beginning in 2011, the law also imposed a significant annual fee on companies that manufacture or import branded prescription drug products.

The Affordable Care Act contemplates the promulgation of significant future regulatory action which may also further affect our business. The Affordable Care Act and any further changes to health care laws or regulatory framework that reduce our revenues or increase our costs could also have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

If we are unable to satisfy FDA regulatory requirements, we may not be able to commercialize our product candidates.

We need FDA approval prior to marketing our product candidates in the United States of America. If we fail to obtain FDA approval to market our product candidates, we will be unable to sell our product candidates in the United States of America and we will not generate any revenue from the sale of such products.

This regulatory review and approval process, which includes evaluation of preclinical studies and clinical trials of our product candidates, is lengthy, expensive, and uncertain. To receive approval, we must, among other things, demonstrate with substantial evidence from well-controlled clinical trials that our product candidates are both safe and effective for each indication where approval is sought. Satisfaction of these requirements typically takes several years and the time needed to satisfy them may vary substantially, based on the type, complexity, and novelty of the pharmaceutical product. We cannot predict if or when we might submit for regulatory approval any of our product candidates currently under development. Any approvals we may obtain may not cover all of the clinical indications for which we are seeking approval. Also, an approval might contain significant limitations in the form of narrow indications, warnings, precautions, or contra-indications with respect to conditions of use.

The FDA has substantial discretion in the approval process and may either refuse to accept an application for substantive review or may form the opinion after review of an application that the application is insufficient to allow approval of a product candidate. If the FDA does not accept our application for review or approve our application, it may require that we conduct additional clinical, preclinical or manufacturing validation studies and submit the data before it will reconsider our application. Depending on the extent of these or any other studies that might be required, approval of any applications that we submit may be delayed by several years, or we may be required to expend more resources than we have available. It is also possible that any such additional studies, if performed and completed, may not be considered sufficient by the FDA to make our applications approvable. If any of these outcomes occur, we may be forced to abandon our applications for approval.

We will also be subject to a wide variety of foreign regulations governing the development, manufacture and marketing of our products. Whether or not an FDA approval has been obtained, approval of a product by the comparable regulatory authorities of foreign countries must still be obtained prior to manufacturing or marketing the product in those countries. The approval process varies from country to country and the time needed to secure approval may be longer or shorter than that required for FDA approval. We cannot assure you that clinical trials conducted in one country will be accepted by other countries or that approval of our product in one country will result in approval in any other country.

Before we can obtain regulatory approval, we need to successfully complete clinical trials, outcomes of which are uncertain.

In order to obtain FDA approval to market a new drug product, we must demonstrate proof of safety and effectiveness in humans. To meet these requirements, we must conduct extensive preclinical testing and “adequate and well-controlled” clinical trials. Conducting clinical trials is a lengthy, time-consuming, and expensive process. Completion of necessary clinical trials may take several years or more. Delays associated with products for which we are directly conducting preclinical or clinical trials may cause us to incur additional operating expenses. The commencement and rate of completion of clinical trials may be delayed by many factors, including, without limitation, for example:

Even if we achieve positive interim results in clinical trials, these results do not necessarily predict final results, and positive results in early trials may not be indicative of success in later trials. A number of companies in the pharmaceutical industry have suffered significant setbacks in advanced clinical trials, even after achieving promising results in earlier trials. Negative or inconclusive results or adverse medical events during a clinical trial could cause us to repeat or terminate a clinical trial or require us to conduct additional trials. We do not know whether our existing or any future clinical trials will demonstrate safety and efficacy sufficiently to result in marketable products. Our clinical trials may be suspended at any time for a variety of reasons, including if the FDA or we believe the patients participating in our trials are exposed to unacceptable health risks or if the FDA finds deficiencies in the conduct of these trials.

Failures or perceived failures in our clinical trials will directly delay our product development and regulatory approval process, damage our business prospects, make it difficult for us to establish collaboration and partnership relationships, and negatively affect our reputation and competitive position in the pharmaceutical community.

Because of these risks, our research and development efforts may not result in any commercially viable products. Any delay in, or termination of, our preclinical or clinical trials will delay the filing of our drug applications with the FDA and, ultimately, our ability to commercialize our product candidates and generate product revenues. If a significant portion of these development efforts are not successfully completed, required regulatory approvals are not obtained, or any approved products are not commercially successful, our business, financial condition, and results of operations may be materially harmed.

If our collaboration or licensing arrangements are unsuccessful, our revenues and product development may be limited.

We have entered into several collaborations and licensing arrangements for the development of products. However, there can be no assurance that any of these agreements will result in FDA approvals, or that we will be able to market any such finished products at a profit. Collaboration and licensing arrangements pose the following risks:

If we are unable to protect our intellectual property rights or avoid claims that we infringed on the intellectual property rights of others, our ability to conduct business may be impaired.

Our success depends on our ability to protect our current and future products and to defend our intellectual property rights. If we fail to protect our intellectual property adequately, competitors may manufacture and market products similar to ours.

We currently hold eleven patents and we have four patent applications. We intend to file further patent applications in the future. We cannot be certain that our pending patent applications will result in the issuance of patents. If patents are issued, third parties may sue us to challenge our patent protection, and although we know of no reason why they should prevail, it is possible that they could. In addition to modification or revocation of patents in legal proceedings, issued patents may later be modified or revoked by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office or by analogous foreign offices. It is likewise possible that our patent rights may not prevent or limit our present and future competitors from developing, using or commercializing products that are similar or functionally equivalent to our products.

In addition, we may be required to obtain licenses to patents, or other proprietary rights of third parties, in connection with the development and use of our products and technologies as they relate to other persons’ technologies. At such time as we discover a need to obtain any such license, we will need to establish whether we will be able to obtain such a license on favorable terms, if at all. The failure to obtain the necessary licenses or other rights could preclude the sale, manufacture or distribution of our products.

We rely particularly on trade secrets, unpatented proprietary expertise and continuing innovation that we seek to protect, in part, by entering into confidentiality agreements with licensees, suppliers, employees, and consultants. We cannot provide assurance that these agreements will not be breached or circumvented. We also cannot be certain that there will be adequate remedies in the event of a breach. Disputes may arise concerning the ownership of intellectual property or the applicability of confidentiality agreements. We cannot be sure that our trade secrets and proprietary technology will not otherwise be obtained by other entities or become known, obtained, or independently developed by our competitors or by other entities. We also cannot be sure that, if patents are not issued with respect to products arising from research, we will be able to maintain the confidentiality of information relating to these products. In addition, efforts to ensure our intellectual property rights can be costly, time-consuming, and/or ultimately unsuccessful.

Litigation is common in the pharmaceutical industry, and can be protracted and expensive and could delay and/or prevent entry of our products into the market, which, in turn, could have a material adverse effect on our business.

Litigation concerning patents and proprietary rights can be protracted and expensive. Companies routinely bring litigation against applicants and allege patent infringement or other violations of intellectual property rights as the basis for filing suit against an applicant. Elite develops, owns, and/or manufactures generic and branded pharmaceutical products and such drug products may be subject to such litigation. Litigation often involves significant expense and can delay or prevent introduction or sale of our products.

There may also be situations where we use our business judgment and decide to market and sell products, notwithstanding the fact that allegations of patent infringement(s) have not been finally resolved by the courts. The risk involved in doing so can be substantial because the remedies available to the owner of a patent for infringement include, among other things, damages measured by the profits lost by the patent owner and not by the profits earned by the infringer. In the case of a willful infringement, the definition of which is subjective, such damages may be trebled. Moreover, because of the discount pricing typically involved with bioequivalent products, patented brand products generally realize a substantially higher profit margin than bioequivalent products. An adverse decision in a case such as this or in other similar litigation could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial position and results of operations and could cause the market value of our Common Stock to decline.

Please also see “Item 3. Legal Proceedings” below for further details.

The pharmaceutical industry is highly competitive and subject to rapid and significant technological change, which could impair our ability to implement our business model.

The pharmaceutical industry is highly competitive, and we may be unable to compete effectively. In addition, the pharmaceutical industry is undergoing rapid and significant technological change, and we expect competition to intensify as technical advances in each field are made and become more widely known. An increasing number of pharmaceutical companies have been or are becoming interested in the development and commercialization of products incorporating advanced or novel drug delivery systems. We expect that competition in the field of drug delivery will increase in the future as other specialized research and development companies begin to concentrate on this aspect of the business. Some of the major pharmaceutical companies have invested and are continuing to invest significant resources in the development of their own drug delivery systems and technologies and some have invested funds in specialized drug delivery companies. Many of our competitors have longer operating histories and greater financial, research and development, marketing, and other resources than we do. Such companies may develop new formulations and products, or may improve existing ones, more efficiently than we can. Our success, if any, will depend in part on our ability to keep pace with the changing technology in the fields in which we operate.

As we expand our presence in the generic pharmaceuticals market our product candidates may face intense competition from brand-name companies that have taken aggressive steps to thwart competition from generic companies. In particular, brand-name companies continue to sell or license their products directly or through licensing arrangements or strategic alliances with generic pharmaceutical companies (so-called “authorized generics”). No significant regulatory approvals are required for a brand-name company to sell directly or through a third party to the generic market, and brand-name companies do not face any other significant barriers to entry into such market. In addition, such companies continually seek to delay generic introductions and to decrease the impact of generic competition, using tactics which include, without limitation:

These strategies may increase the costs and risks associated with our efforts to introduce our generic products under development and may delay or prevent such introduction altogether.

If our product candidates do not achieve market acceptance among physicians, patients, health care payors and the medical community, they will not be commercially successful and our business will be adversely affected.

The degree of market acceptance of any of our approved product candidates among physicians, patients, health care payors and the medical community will depend on a number of factors, including, without limitation:

If we are unable to achieve market acceptance for our product candidates, then such product candidates will not be commercially successful and our business will be adversely affected.

In addition, even if we are able to obtain regulatory approvals for our new products, the success of those products as well as the success of our previously approved products, is dependent upon market acceptance. Levels of market acceptance for our new products could be affected by several factors, including, without limitation:

Some of these factors are not within our control, and our products may not achieve expected levels of market acceptance. Additionally, continuing and increasingly sophisticated studies of the proper utilization, safety and efficacy of pharmaceutical products are being conducted by the industry, government agencies and others which can call into question the utilization, safety, and efficacy of previously marketed products. In some cases, studies have resulted, and may in the future result, in the discontinuance of product marketing or other risk management programs such as the need for a patient registry.

Legislative or regulatory programs that may influence prices of prescription drugs could have a material adverse effect on our business.

Current or future federal or state laws and regulations may influence the prices of drugs and, therefore, could adversely affect the prices that we receive for our products. Programs in existence in certain states seek to set prices of all drugs sold within those states through the regulation and administration of the sale of prescription drugs. Expansion of these programs, in particular, state Medicaid programs, or changes required in the way in which Medicaid rebates are calculated under such programs, could adversely affect the price we receive for our products and could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition. Further, prescription drug prices have been the focus of increased scrutiny by the government, including certain state attorneys general, members of congress and the U.S. Department of Justice. Decreases in health care reimbursements or prices of our prescription drugs could limit our ability to sell our products or decrease our revenues, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

We may experience pricing pressure on the price of our products due to social or political pressure to lower the cost of drugs, which would reduce our revenue and future profitability.

We may experience downward pricing pressure on the price of our products due to social or political pressure to lower the cost of drugs, which would reduce our revenue and future profitability. Recent events have resulted in increased public and governmental scrutiny of the cost of drugs, especially in connection with price increases following companies’ acquisition of the rights to certain drug products. In particular, U.S. federal prosecutors have issued subpoenas to pharmaceutical companies seeking information about drug pricing practices. In addition, the U.S. Senate is publicly investigating a number of pharmaceutical companies relating to drug-price increases and pricing practices. Our revenue and future profitability could be negatively affected if these inquiries were to result in legislative or regulatory proposals that limit our ability to increase the prices of our products.

In addition, in September 2016, a group of U.S. Senators introduced legislation that would require pharmaceutical manufacturers to justify price increases of more than 10% in a 12-month period, and a large number of individual States have introduced legislation aimed at drug pricing regulation, transparency or both. Our revenue and future profitability could be negatively affected by the passage of these laws or similar federal or state legislation. Pressure from social activist groups and future government regulations may also put downward pressure on the price of drugs, which could result in downward pressure on the prices of our products in the future.

We are dependent on a small number of suppliers for our raw materials and any delay or unavailability of raw materials can materially adversely affect our ability to produce products.

The FDA requires identification of raw material suppliers in applications for approval of drug products. If raw materials were unavailable from a specified supplier, FDA approval of a new supplier could delay the manufacture of the drug involved.

In addition, some materials used in our products are currently available from only one supplier or a limited number of suppliers and there is a risk of a sole approved supplier significantly raising prices. Please note that such an occurrence has taken place recently, wherein significant price increases from a sole supplier greatly reduced profit margins, sales, and delayed product launches. These occurrences were ultimately resolved by the successful FDA approval of an alternate supplier, with such approval process being lengthy and costly.

Further, a significant portion of our raw materials may be available only from foreign sources. Foreign sources can be subject to the special risks of doing business abroad, including, without limitation:

In addition, patent laws in certain foreign jurisdictions (primarily, but not necessarily, in Europe) may make it increasingly difficult to obtain raw materials for research and development prior to expiration of applicable United States or foreign patents. Any delay or inability to obtain raw materials on a timely basis, or any significant price increases that cannot be passed on to customers, can materially adversely affect our ability to produce products. This can materially adversely affect our business and operations.

Even after regulatory approval, we will be subject to ongoing significant regulatory obligations and oversight as evidenced by the FDA’s removal from the market of our Lodrane® extended release product line. In addition, although Lodrane D® is marketed under the Over-the-Counter Monograph and, accordingly, can be lawfully marketed in the US without prior regulatory approval, the FDA has revised its enforcement policies during the past few years, significantly limiting the circumstances under which unapproved products may be marketed.

Even if regulatory approval is obtained for a particular product candidate, the FDA and foreign regulatory authorities may, nevertheless, impose significant restrictions on the indicated uses or marketing of such products, or impose ongoing requirements for post-approval studies. Following any regulatory approval of our product candidates, we will be subject to continuing regulatory obligations, such as safety reporting requirements, and additional post-marketing obligations, including regulatory oversight of the promotion and marketing of our products. If we become aware of previously unknown problems with any of our product candidates here or overseas or at our contract manufacturers’ facilities, a regulatory agency may impose restrictions on our products, our contract manufacturers or on us, including requiring us to reformulate our products, conduct additional clinical trials, make changes in the labeling of our products, implement changes to or obtain re-approvals of our contract manufacturers’ facilities or withdraw the product from the market. In addition, we may experience a significant drop in the sales of the affected products, our reputation in the marketplace may suffer and we may become the target of lawsuits, including class action suits. Moreover, if we fail to comply with applicable regulatory requirements, we may be subject to fines, suspension or withdrawal of regulatory approvals, product recalls, seizure of products, operating restrictions, and criminal prosecution. Any of these events could harm or prevent sales of the affected products or could substantially increase the costs and expenses of commercializing and marketing these products.

On March 4, 2011, the FDA issued a directive removing from the market approximately 500 cough/cold and allergy products, including our Lodrane® extended release product line. The Lodrane® extended release products constituted approximately 97% of our revenues at the time of FDA’s directive.

Lodrane D® is marketed under the Over-the-Counter Monograph (the “OTC Monograph”) and accordingly, under the Code of Federal Regulations can be lawfully marketed in the US without prior approval. Under the Federal Food Drug and Cosmetic Act (“FDCA”), FDA regulations and statements of FDA policy, certain drug products are permitted to be marketed in the U.S. without prior approval. Within the past few years, the FDA has revised its enforcement policies, significantly limiting the circumstances under which these unapproved products may be marketed. If the FDA determines that a company is distributing an unapproved product that requires approval, the FDA may take enforcement action in a variety of ways, including, without limitation, product seizures and seeking a judicial injunction against distribution.

We depend on qualified scientific and technical employees and are increasingly dependent on our direct sales force, if key personnel were to leave us or if we are unsuccessful in attracting qualified personnel, our ability to develop products and grow our business could be materially harmed.

Because of the specialized scientific nature of our business, we are highly dependent upon our ability to continue to attract and retain qualified scientific and technical personnel. We are not aware of any pending, significant losses of scientific or technical personnel. Loss of the services of, or failure to recruit, key scientific and technical personnel, however, would be significantly detrimental to our product-development programs. As a result of our small size and limited financial and other resources, it may be difficult for us to attract and retain qualified officers and qualified scientific and technical personnel.

In addition, marketing of our branded product, SequestOx™ requires much greater use of a direct sales force compared to marketing of our generic products. Our ability to realize significant revenues from marketing and sales activities depends on our ability or the ability of our partners to attract and retain qualified sales personnel. Competition for qualified sales personnel is intense. Any failure to attract or retain qualified sales personnel could negatively impact our sales revenue and have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

We have entered into employment agreements with our executive officers and certain other key employees. We do not maintain “Key Man” life insurance on any executives.

If we were sued on a product liability claim, an award could exceed our insurance coverage and cost us significantly.

The design, development and manufacture of our products involve an inherent risk of product liability claims. We have procured product liability insurance; however, a successful claim against us in excess of the policy limits could be very expensive to us, damaging our financial position. The amount of our insurance coverage, which has been limited due to our limited financial resources, may be materially below the coverage maintained by many of the other companies engaged in similar activities. To the best of our knowledge, no product liability claim has been made against us as of the date hereof.

Our pipeline of products under development include products that would be filed as branded pharmaceuticals and if generic manufacturers use litigation and regulatory means to obtain approval for generic versions of one or more of such branded drugs, our sales may be adversely affected.

Under the Hatch-Waxman Act, the FDA can approve an ANDA for a generic bioequivalent version of a previously approved drug, without undertaking the full clinical testing necessary to obtain approval to market a new drug. In place of such clinical studies, an ANDA applicant usually needs only to submit data demonstrating that its generic product is bioequivalent to the branded product.

Our product development pipeline includes a range of abuse resistant opioid products, with full clinical testing activity being currently planned, in progress or successfully completed. In recent years, various generic manufacturers have filed ANDAs seeking FDA approval for generic versions of opioids and opioids with abuse resistant characteristics. In connection with our filings, these manufacturers may challenge the validity and/or enforceability of one or more of the underlying patents protecting our products. While it is the Company’s intention to vigorously defend, and pursue all available legal and regulatory avenues in defense of the intellectual property rights protecting our products, it must also be stressed that litigation is inherently uncertain and we cannot predict the timing or outcome of our efforts. There can also be no assurance that our efforts in defense of the intellectual property rights protecting our products will be successful.

If we are not successful in defending our intellectual property rights, or opt to settle, or if a product’s marketing exclusivity rights expire or become otherwise unenforceable, our competitors could ultimately launch generic versions of one or more of our branded products, after such products have been approved by the FDA, which could significantly decrease our revenues and could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial conditions, results of operations and cash flow. Furthermore, such a material adverse effect may result in a material adverse effect on our share price.

Agreements between branded pharmaceutical companies and generic pharmaceutical companies are facing increased government scrutiny in the United States and Internationally.

There are numerous and continuing litigation in which generic companies challenge the validity or enforceability of an innovator products patents and/or the applicability of such patents to a generic applicant’s products. Settlement of such litigation is a common outcome, with review of such agreements by the U.S. Federal Trade Commission (the “FTC”) and the Antitrust Division of the Department of Justice (the “DOJ”) being required by law. The FTC has stated publicly its view that some of these settlement agreements violate antitrust laws and has commenced actions against the branded and generic companies that are parties to these agreements. Accordingly, in the event of the Company being party to a settlement agreement, either as the branded, innovator product owner, or as the generic applicant, we may receive formal or informal requests from the FTC for information about a settlement agreement and there is a risk of the FTC alleging a violation of antitrust laws and commencing an action against us.

In addition, the United States Congress has proposed legislation that would limit the types of settlement agreements generic manufacturers can enter into with brand companies. In 2013, the Supreme Court, in FTC v. Actavis , determined that reverse payment patent settlements between generic and brand companies should be evaluated under the rule of reason, and provided limited guidance beyond the selection of this standard. Due to the court’s non-articulation of a precise rule of lawfulness for such settlements, there may be extensive litigation over what constitutes a reasonable and lawful patent settlement between and brand and generic company.

The impact of such future litigation, if any, legislative proposals, and potential future court decisions is uncertain, and there can be no assurances that such impact will not have an adverse effect on the Company’s business, its financial condition, results of operations, cash flows and its stock price.

We may incur significant liability if it is determined that we are promoting or have in the past promoted the “off-label” use of drugs.

In jurisdictions including, without limitation, the United States, a company is not permitted to promote drugs for uses that are not described in the product’s labeling and that differ from those that were approved or cleared by the FDA. Such users are commonly referred to as “off-label uses”. Under what is known as the “practice of medicine”, physicians and other healthcare practitioners may prescribe drug products for off-label or unapproved uses. While the FDA does not regulate a physician’s choice of medications, treatments, or product uses, the Federal Food Drug and Cosmetic Act (“FFDC”) and FDA regulations significantly restrict permissible communications on the subject of off-label uses of drug products by pharmaceutical companies. The FDA, FTC, the Office of the Inspector General of the Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”), the DOJ and various state Attorneys General actively enforce laws and regulations that prohibit the promotion of off-label uses. A company that is found to have improperly promoted off-label uses may be subject to significant liability, including civil fines, criminal fines and penalties, civil damages, exclusion from federal funded healthcare programs and potential liability under the federal False Claims Act and any applicable state false claims act. Conduct giving rise to such liability could also form the basis for private civil litigation by third-party payers or other persons claiming to be harmed by such conduct.

Notwithstanding the regulatory restrictions on off-label promotion, the FDA’s regulations and judicial case law allows companies to engage in some forms of truthful, non-misleading and non-promotional speech concerning the off-label use of products. Elite believes it and its marketing partners comply with these restrictions.

Nonetheless, the FDA, HHS, DOJ, and/or state Attorneys General, and qui tam relators may take the position that the Company is not in compliance with such requirements, and if such non-compliance is proven, the consequences of such may have an adverse material effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, cash flows and stock price.

We have significant intangible assets on our balance sheet. Consequently, potential impairment of intangible assets may have an adverse material effect on our profitability.

Intangible assets represent a significant portion of our assets. As of March 31, 2017, intangible assets were approximately $6.4 million, or approximately 19% of our assets.

Generally accepted accounting principles in the United States (“GAAP”) requires that intangible assets be subject to regular impairment analysis to determine if changes in circumstances indicate that the value of the asset as recorded may not be recoverable. Such events or changes in circumstances are an inherent risk in the pharmaceutical industry and often cannot be predicted. However, should a change in circumstance occur, requiring the impairment of an intangible asset, the result of such an impairment may have an adverse material effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, cash flows and stock price.

Our products contain narcotic ingredients. As a result of reports of misuse or abuse of prescription narcotics, the sale of such drugs may be subject to increased litigation risk and new regulation, including the development of Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (“REMS”), which may prove difficult or expensive to comply with.

Many of our current products and products under development contain narcotics. Misuse or abuse of such drugs can lead to physical or other hard. The FDA and/or the DEA may impose new regulations concerning the manufacture, storage, transportation, distribution, and sale of prescription narcotics. Such regulations may include new labeling requirements, the development and implementation of a formal REMS, restrictions on prescription and sale of such products and mandatory reformulation in order to make abuse of such products more difficult. In 2007, Congress passed legislation authorizing the FDA to require companies to undertake post-approval studies in order to assess known or signaled potential serious safety risks and to make any labeling changes necessary to address safety risks. Congress also empowered the FDA to require companies to formulate REMS to confirm a drug’s benefits exceed its risks. In 2011, the FDA issued letters to manufacturers of long-acting and extended-release opioids requiring them to develop and submit to the FDA a post-market REMS plan to require that training is provided to prescribers of these products and that information is provided to prescribers that they can use in counseling patients on the risks and benefits of opioid drug use. Elite does not currently own a product that requires a REMS plan, but some of the products in our pipeline may require a REMS plan. The Obama administration has also released a comprehensive action plan to reduce prescription drug abuse, which may include proposed legislation to amended existing controlled substances laws to require healthcare practitioners who request DEA registration to prescribe controlled substances to receive training on opioid prescribing practices as a condition of registration. In addition, state health departments and boards of pharmacy have authority to regulate distribution and may modify their regulations with respect to prescription narcotics in an attempt to curb abuse.

Such new regulations or requirements may be difficult or cost prohibitive for us to comply with, resulting in delays in the commercialization of new products, and decreased profitability of existing and new products. Such occurrences may have material adverse effects on our business, financial condition, results of operations, cash flows and stock price.

The growth of Elite will depend on developing, commercializing and marketing new products.

Our future revenues and profitability is significantly dependent on our ability to successfully commercialize new branded and generic pharmaceutical products in a timely manner. Accordingly, we must continually develop, test, file, receive marketing authorization and manufacture new products. While we are currently developing products, and have plans in place for future products beyond those currently in development, there can be no assurances that any of these products will receive marketing authorization and achieve commercialization. In addition, even if a product receives marketing authorization, there can be no assurances that there will be future revenues or profits, or that any such future revenues or profits would be in amounts that provide adequate return on the significant investments made to secure the marketing authorization and create/support the infrastructure required for the commercial manufacture of such product.

We are engaged in the research and development of pharmaceutical products with the objective of achieving marketing authorizations that enable us to manufacture and sell pharmaceuticals in accordance with specific government regulations. Due to the inherent risk associated with pharmaceutical product research and development, particularly with respect to new/innovative drugs, our research and development expenditures and efforts may not result in a successful regulatory approval and commercialization of new products. Furthermore, after we submit a regulatory application, the relevant government authority may require that we conduct additional studies, resulting in an inability for us to reasonably predict the total research and development costs for a new product.

Circumstances in which the Company is unable to successfully commercialize new products in a timely manner, or circumstances in which the profitability of a new product is not sufficient with respect to the costs and investments required to develop such product may have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, cash flows and stock price.

If our manufacturing facilities are unable to manufacture our products or the manufacturing process is interrupted due to failure to comply with regulations or for other reasons, it could have a material adverse impact on our business.

If any of our manufacturing facilities, quality and regulatory operations and other business and commercial functions fail to comply with complex and numerous regulatory requirements or encounter other manufacturing difficulties, it could adversely affect our ability to supply products. All facilities and manufacturing processes used for the manufacture of pharmaceutical products must be operated in conformity with cGMP and, in the case of controlled substances, DEA regulations. Compliance with the FDA’s cGMP and DEA requirements applies to both drug products seeking regulatory approval and to approved drug products. In complying with cGMP requirements, pharmaceutical manufacturing facilities must continually expend significant time, money and effort in production, record-keeping and quality assurance and control so that their products meet applicable specifications and other requirements product safety, efficacy, and quality. Failure to comply with applicable legal requirements subjects our manufacturing facilities to possible legal or regulatory action, including, without limitation, shutdown, which may adversely affect our ability to manufacture product. Were we not able to manufacture products at our manufacturing facilities because of regulatory, business or any other reason, the manufacture and marketing of these products would be interrupted. This could have a material adverse impact on our business, results of operations, financial condition, cash flows, competitive position, and stock price.

The DEA limits the availability of the active ingredients used in many of our current products and products in development, as well as the production and distribution of these products, and, as a result, our procurement, production, and distribution quotas may not be sufficient to meet commercial demand or complete clinical trials.

The DEA regulates chemical compounds as Schedule I, II, III, IV or V substances, with Schedule I substances considered to present the highest risk of substance abuse and Schedule V substances the lowest risk. The active ingredients in some of our current products and products in development, including, without limitation, hydromorphone, methadone, phentermine, phendimetrazine and oxycodone, are listed by the DEA as Scheduled substances under the Controlled Substances Act of 1970. Consequently, their manufacture, shipment, storage, sale, and use are subject to a high degree of regulation. Furthermore, the DEA limits the availability of the active ingredients used in many of our current products and products in development and we and/or our contract customers and suppliers, must annually apply to the DEA for procurement quotas in order to obtain and distribute these substances. As a result, our procurement and production quotas may not be sufficient to meet commercial demand or to complete clinical trials. Moreover, the DEA may adjust these quotas from time to time during the year, although the DEA has substantial discretion in whether or not to make such adjustments. Any delay or refusal by the DEA in establishing our quotas, or modification of our quotas, for controlled substances could delay or result in the stoppage of our clinical trials or product launches, or could cause trade inventory disruptions for those products that already been launched, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial position, cash flows and stock price.

Sales of our products may be adversely affected by the continuing consolidation within the retail and wholesale pharmaceutical markets.

Our products, whether sold directly by the Company or through third parties that are licensed to market and distribute our products are sold in large part to a market that is comprised of a relatively few retail drug chains, wholesalers, and managed care organizations, with such entities continuing to undergo consolidation. Such consolidation may provide these customers or our products with additional purchasing leverage, and consequently, may increase the pricing pressures faced by us. Additionally, the emergence of large buying groups representing independent retail pharmacies, and the prevalence and influence of managed care organizations and similar institutions, enable those groups to extract price discounts on our products.

In addition, our revenues and quarterly results comparisons may also be affected by fluctuations in the buying patterns of retail chains, major distributors, and other trade buyers.

Any delays or unanticipated expenses in connection with the operation of our limited number of facilities could have a material adverse effect on our business.

All of our manufacturing operations are conducted at the Northvale Facility. A significant disruption at this facility, even on a short-term basis, whether due to, without limitation, an adverse quality or compliance observation, including a total or partial suspension of production and/or distribution by regulatory authorities, an act of God, civil or political unrest, force majeure situation or other events could impair our ability to produce and ship products on a timely basis, and could, among other consequences, subject us to exposure to claims from customers. Any of these events could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition, and cash flows.

Our business is dependent on market perceptions of us and the safety and efficacy or our products. Negative publicity relating to us or our products could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition, and cash flows.

Market perceptions or our business are important to us, especially market perceptions of the safety and quality of our products. If any of our products or similar products that other companies distribute are subject to market withdrawal, recall, or are proven to be, or are claimed to be, harmful to consumers, then this could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition, and cash flows. Furthermore, due to the importance of market perceptions, negative publicity associated with product quality, illness or other adverse effects resulting from, or perceived to be resulting from, our products, or similar products made by other companies, could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition, and cash flows.

We may discontinue the manufacture and distribution of certain existing products, which may adversely affect our business, results of operations, financial condition, and cash flows.

As part of regular evaluations of product performance, we may determine that it is in our best interest to discontinue the manufacture and distribution of certain of our products. We cannot guarantee that we have correctly forecasted, or will correctly forecast in the future, the appropriate products to discontinue or that a decision to discontinue various products is prudent if market conditions change. In addition, there can be no assurances that the discontinuance of products will reduce operating expense or no cause the incurrence of material charges associated with such a decision. Furthermore, the discontinuance of existing products, entails various risks, including, without limitation, the ability to find a purchaser for such products, if there is a decision to sell the product, as well as the risk that the purchase price obtained will not be equal to at least the book value of the net assets relating to such products. Other risks associated with a product discontinuance, include, without limitation, managing the expectations of and maintaining good relations with our customers who previously purchased a discontinued product from us, and the effects such would have on future sales to these customers. We may also incur significant liabilities and costs associated with our product discontinuance. All of the foregoing could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition, and cash flows.

The time necessary to develop generic drugs may adversely affect whether, and the extent to which, we receive a return on our capital.

The development process for branded and generic products, including, without limitation, drug formulation, testing, and FDA review and approval, often takes three or more years. This process requires that we expend considerable capital to pursue activities that do not yield an immediate or near-term return. Also, because of the significant time necessary to develop a product, the actual market for a product at the time it is available for sale may be significantly less than the originally projected market for the product. If this were to occur, our potential return on our investment in developing the product, if approved for marketing by the FDA, would be adversely affected and we may never receive a return on our investment in the product. It is also possible for the manufacturer of the brand-name product for which we are developing a generic drug to obtain approvals from the FDA to switch the brand-name drug from the prescription market to the OTC market. If this were to occur, we would be prohibited from marketing our product other than as an OTC drug, in which case revenues could be substantially less than we anticipated.

Research and development efforts invested in our branded pharmaceutical products may not achieve expected results.

The development of branded products requires significant resources from the Company, as well as the potential for resources being acquired through collaborations, in-licensing, or third party product acquisitions. The development of proprietary branded drugs involves processes and expertise that is different from that required by the development of generic products, resulting in an increased risk profile for branded development. For example, the time frame from discovery to commercial launch of a branded product can be more than 10 years, involving multiple stages which may consist of intensive preclinical and clinical testing and a highly complex, lengthy, and expensive approval process. The longer time frames and increased costs adds increasing risk of achieving product approvals, and if approved, our ability to recover development costs and generate profits.

During each development stage, we may encounter obstacles that delay the process or approval and increase expenses, leading to significant risks that we will not achieve our goals and may be forced to abandon a potential product in which we have invested substantial amounts of time and money. These obstacles may include: preclinical failures; difficulty enrolling patients in clinical trials; delays in completing formulation and other work needed to support an application for approval; adverse reactions or other safety concerns arising during clinical testing; insufficient clinical trial data to support the safety or efficacy of the product candidate; and failure to obtain, or delays in obtaining, the required regulatory approvals for the product candidate or the facilities in which it is manufactured. As a result of the obstacles noted above, our investment in research and development of branded products can involve significant costs with no assurances of future revenues or profits.

Approvals for our new generic drug products may be delayed or become more difficult to obtain if the FDA institutes changes to its approval requirements.

The FDA may institute changes to its ANDA approval requirements, which may make it more difficult or expensive for us to obtain approval for our new generic products. For instance, in July 2012, the Generic Drug Fee User Amendments of 2012 (“GDUFA”) was enacted into law. The GDUFA legislation implemented fees for new ANDAs, Drug Master Files, product and establishment fees and a one-time fee for back-logged ANDAs pending approval as of October 1, 2012. In return, the program is intended to provide faster and more predictable ANDA reviews by the FDA and increased inspections of drug facilities. Under GDUFA, generic product companies face significant penalties for failure to pay the new user fees, including rendering an ANDA not “substantially complete” until the fee is paid. Any failure by us or our suppliers to pay the fees or to comply with the other provisions of GDFUA may impact or delay our ability to file ANDAs, obtain approvals for new generic products, generate revenues and thus may have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

In addition to the implementation of new fees and review procedures by the FDA, the FDA may also implement other changes that may directly affect some of our ANDA filings pending approval from the FDA, such as changes to guidance from the FDA regarding bioequivalency requirements for particular drugs. Such changes may cause our development of such generic drugs to be significantly more difficult or result in delays in FDA approval or result in our decision to abandon or terminate certain projects. Any changes in FDA requirements may make it more difficult for us to file ANDAs or obtain approval of our ANDAs and generate revenues and thus have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

The risks and uncertainties inherent in conducting clinical trials could delay or prevent the development and commercialization of our own branded products, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

With respect to our branded products which do not qualify for the FDA’s abbreviated application procedures, we must demonstrate through clinical trials that these products are safe and effective for use. We have only limited experience in conducting and supervising clinical trials. The process of completing clinical trials and preparing an NDA may take several years and requires substantial resources. Our studies and filings may not result in FDA approval to market our new drug products and, if the FDA grants approval, we cannot predict the timing of any approval. There are substantial filing fees for NDAs, often in excess of $1 million in addition to the cost of product development and clinical trials, that are not refundable if FDA approval is not obtained.

There are a number of risks and uncertainties associated with clinical trials. The results of clinical trials may not be indicative of results that would be obtained from large scale testing. Clinical trials are often conducted with patients having advanced stages of disease and, as a result, during the course of treatment these patients can die or suffer adverse medical effects for reasons that may not be related to the pharmaceutical agents being tested, but which nevertheless affect the clinical trial results. In addition, side effects experienced by the patients may cause delay of approval or limit the profile of an approved product. Moreover, our clinical trials may not demonstrate sufficient safety and efficacy to obtain approval from the FDA or foreign regulatory authorities. The FDA or foreign regulatory authorities may not agree with our assessment of the clinical data or they may interpret it differently. Such regulatory authorities may require additional or expanded clinical trials. Even if the FDA or foreign regulatory authorities approve certain products developed by us, there is no assurance that such regulatory authorities will not subject marketing of such products to certain limits on indicated use.

Failure can occur at any time during the clinical trial process and, in addition, the results from early clinical trials may not be predictive of results obtained in later and larger clinical trials, and product candidates in later clinical trials may fail to show the desired safety or efficacy despite having progressed successfully through earlier clinical testing.

Completion of clinical trials for our product candidates may be delayed or halted for the reasons noted above in addition to many other reasons, including, without limitation:

In addition, our product candidates could be subject to competition for clinical study sites and patients from other therapies under development which may delay the enrollment in or initiation of our clinical trials.

The FDA or other relevant regulatory authorities may require us to conduct unanticipated additional clinical trials, which could result in additional expense and delays in bringing our product candidates to market. Any failure or delay in completing clinical trials for our product candidates would prevent or delay the commercialization of our product candidates. We cannot assure that our expenses related to clinical trials will lead to the development of brand-name drugs that will generate revenues in the near future. Delays or failure in the development and commercialization of our own branded products could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

We rely on third parties to conduct clinical trials and testing for our product candidates, and if they do not properly and successfully perform their legal and regulatory obligations, as well as their contractual obligations to us, we may not be able to obtain regulatory approvals for our product candidates.

We design the clinical trials for our product candidates, but rely on contract research organizations and other third parties to assist us in managing, monitoring and otherwise carrying out these trials, including, without limitation, with respect to site selection, contract negotiation, analytical testing, and data management. We do not control these third parties and, as a result, delays may occur as a result of the priorities and operations of these third parties differing from those which we may feel would be most optimal to the completion of such activities in the most efficient manner possible.

Although we rely on third parties to conduct our clinical trials and related activities, we are responsible for confirming that each of our clinical trials is conducted in accordance with our general investigational plan and protocol. Moreover, the FDA and other relevant regulatory agencies require us to comply with regulations and standards, commonly referred to as good clinical practices and good laboratory practices, for conducting, recording, and reporting the results of clinical trials to ensure that the data and results are credible and accurate and that the trial participants are adequately protected. Our reliance on third parties does not relieve us of these responsibilities and requirements. The FDA enforces good clinical practices and good laboratory practices through periodic inspections of trial sponsors, principal investigators, and trial sites. If we, our contract research organizations, or our study sites fail to comply with applicable good clinical practices and good laboratory practices, the clinical data generated in our clinical trials may be deemed unreliable and the FDA may require us to perform additional clinical trials before approving our marketing applications. We cannot assure you that, upon inspection, the FDA will determine that any of our clinical trials comply with good clinical practices and good laboratory practices. In addition, our clinical trials must be conducted with product manufactured under the FDA’s current Good Manufacturing Practices, or cGMP, regulations. Our failure or the failure of our contract manufacturers if any are involved in the process, to comply with these regulations may require us to repeat clinical trials, which would delay the regulatory approval process.

If third parties do not successfully carry out their duties under their agreements with us, if the quality or accuracy of the data they obtain is compromised due to failure to adhere to our clinical protocols or regulatory requirements, or if they otherwise fail to comply with clinical trial protocols or meet expected deadlines, our clinical trials may not meet regulatory requirements. If our clinical trials do not meet regulatory requirements or if these third parties need to be replaced, our clinical trials may be extended, delayed, suspended, or terminated. If any of these events occur, we may not be able to obtain regulatory approval of our product candidates, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

The illegal distribution and sale by third parties of counterfeit versions of our products or of stolen products could have a negative impact on our reputation and a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

Third parties could illegally distribute and sell counterfeit versions of our products, which do not meet the rigorous manufacturing and testing standards that our products undergo. Counterfeit products are frequently unsafe or ineffective, and can be life-threatening. Counterfeit medicines may contain harmful substances, the wrong dose of the active pharmaceutical ingredient or no active pharmaceutical ingredients at all. However, to distributors and users, counterfeit products may be visually indistinguishable from the authentic version.

Reports of adverse reactions to counterfeit drugs or increased levels of counterfeiting could materially affect patient confidence in the authentic product. It is possible that adverse events caused by unsafe counterfeit products will mistakenly be attributed to the authentic product. In addition, thefts of inventory at warehouses, plants or while in-transit, which are not properly stored and which are sold through unauthorized channels could adversely impact patient safety, our reputation, and our business.

Public loss of confidence in the integrity of pharmaceutical products as a result of counterfeiting or theft could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

Policies regarding returns, rebates, allowances and chargebacks, and marketing programs adopted by wholesalers may reduce our revenues in future fiscal periods.

Based on industry practice, generic drug manufacturers have liberal return policies and have been willing to give customers post-sale inventory allowances. Such industry practices apply to the current sales of our products by our marketing partners, which in turn effect profit splits and license fees received, and they will also effect prospective future sales made directly by Company.

Under these arrangements, from time to time, customers are given credits on our generic products that are held by them in inventory after there is a decrease in the market prices of the same generic products due to competitive pricing. Therefore, if new competitors enter the marketplace and significantly lower the prices of any of their competing products, the price of our products would also likely be reduced. As a result, we, or are marketing partners, would be obligated to provide credits to our customers who are then holding inventories of such products, which could reduce sales revenue, profit splits, license fees and gross margin for the period the credit is provided. Like most competitors in this market, our marketing partners, or us in the case of prospective direct sales made by the Company, also give credits for chargebacks to wholesalers that have contracts with our marketing partners, or us, prospectively, for their sales to hospitals, group purchasing organizations, pharmacies, or other customers. A chargeback is the difference between the price the wholesaler pays and the price that the wholesaler’s end-customer pays for a product. Although, our marketing partners establish, and prospectively we would also establish reserves based on prior experience and best estimates of the impact that these policies may have in subsequent periods, we cannot ensure that such reserves established are adequate or that actual product returns, rebates, allowances, and chargebacks will not exceed estimates.

Unstable economic conditions may adversely affect our industry, business, results of operations and financial condition.

The global economy has undergone a period of significant volatility which has led to diminished credit availability, declines in consumer confidence, and increases in unemployment rates. There remains caution about the stability of the U.S. economy, and we cannot assure that further deterioration in the financial markets will not occur. These economic conditions have resulted in, and could lead to further, reduced consumer spending related to healthcare in general and pharmaceutical products in particular.

In addition, we have exposure to many different industries and counterparties, including our partners under our alliance and collaboration agreements, suppliers of raw chemical materials, drug wholesalers and other customers that may be affected by an unstable economic environment. Any economic instability may affect these parties’ ability to fulfill their respective contractual obligations to us, cause them to limit or place burdensome conditions upon future transactions with us or drive us and our competitors to decrease prices, each of which could materially and adversely affect our business, results of operations and financial condition.

We received a Complete Response Letter from the FDA that indicated that our SequestOx™ NDA is not ready for approval in its present form. While we plan on proceeding with our application for SequestOx™, we cannot assure if or whether our efforts will be successful. If we are unable to obtain approval for SequestOx™ or if we incur significant costs or delays in obtaining such approval, our ability to commercialize SequestOx™ may be materially adversely affected.

In July 2016, the FDA issued a Complete Response Letter, or CRL, regarding the NDA. The CRL stated that the review cycle for the SequestOx NDA is complete and the application is not ready for approval in its present form. On December 21, 2016, we met with the FDA for an end-of-review meeting to discuss steps that we could take to obtain approval of SequestOx. Based on the FDA response, we believe there is a path forward to address the issues cited in the CRL, with such path forward including modification of the SequestOx formulation, and the successful completion of in vitro and in vivo studies. If we are unable to modify the formulation or if we are unable to successfully complete the required studies, we will not meet the requirements specified by the FDA for resubmission of the NDA. Furthermore, there can be no assurances given that the FDA will eventually approve our NDA. If we are unable to obtain approval for SequestOx, or if we incur significant costs or delays in obtaining such approval, our ability to commercialize SequestOx may be materially adversely affected. Furthermore, in the event that the Company does receive marketing approval for SequestOx™, there can be no assurances of the Company realizing future revenues or profits related to this product, or that any such future revenues and profits would be in amounts that provide adequate return on the significant investments made to secure this marketing authorization.

We received a Warning Letter from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) regarding Postmarketing Adverse Drug Experience reporting. The Warning Letter does not restrict the production or shipment of any of the Company’s products, or the sale or marketing of the Company’s products, however, unless and until the Company is able to correct the outstanding issues identified, to the FDA’s satisfaction, the FDA may withhold approval of pending drug applications or take other actions that would have a material adverse impact on the Company.

On August 26, 2016, Elite received a Warning Letter from the FDA regarding Postmarketing Adverse Drug Experience (PADE) reporting. The Warning Letter relates to certain observations that the FDA believes were inadequately addressed by the Company’s response to a Form 483 issued by the FDA from a recent inspection at its facility. The Warning Letter cites that Elite’s Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) do not adequately address how to monitor and receive adverse drug experiences (ADEs). While Elite has a contract with an external service provider for follow-up to ADEs, Elite remains responsible for ensuring the ADEs are appropriately investigated and that follow-up information is submitted in a timely manner to the FDA. The FDA believes that Elite does not have adequate SOPS for ADEs, and failed to investigate, evaluate, and timely report ADEs.

Elite takes the matters identified in the Warning Letter seriously and is currently addressing the deficiencies cited in the letter. The Company has been cooperating with the FDA to resolve any outstanding issues. The Warning Letter does not restrict the production or shipment of any of the Elite’s products, or the sale or marketing of the Company’s products, however unless and until the Company is able to correct outstanding issues to the FDA’s satisfaction, the FDA may withhold approval of pending drug applications or take other actions that would have a material adverse impact on the Company. Please note that there can be no assurances that the Company will correct outstanding issues to the FDA’s satisfaction, nor can there be any assurances of the FDA granting approval of pending drug applications in the event of the Company’s successful resolution, to the satisfaction of the FDA of the issues identified in the Warning Letter.

Our operations could be disrupted if our information systems fail, if we are unsuccessful in implementing necessary upgrades or if we are subject to cyber-attacks.

Our business depends on the efficient and uninterrupted operation of our computer and communications systems and networks, hardware and software systems and our other information technology. We collect and maintain information, which includes confidential and proprietary information as well as personal information regarding our customers and employees, in digital form. Data maintained in digital form is subject to risk of cyber-attacks, which are increasing in frequency and sophistication. Cyber-attacks could include the deployment of harmful malware, viruses, worms, and other means to affect service reliability and threaten data confidentiality, integrity and availability. Despite our efforts to monitor and safeguard our systems to prevent data compromise, the possibility of a future data compromise cannot be eliminated entirely, and risks associated with intrusion, tampering, and theft remain. In addition, we do not have insurance coverage with respect to system failures or cyber- attacks. A failure of our systems, or an inability to successfully expand the capacity of these systems, or an inability to successfully integrate new technologies into our existing systems could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition, and cash flows.

We also have outsourced significant elements of our information technology infrastructure to third parties, some of which may be outside the U.S. Accordingly, significant elements of our information technology infrastructure, require our management of multiple independent vendor relationships with third parties who may or could have access to our confidential information. The size and complexity of our information technology systems, and those of our third-party vendors with whom we contract, make such systems potentially vulnerable to service interruptions. The size and complexity of our and our vendors’ systems and the large amounts of confidential information that is present on them also makes them potentially vulnerable to security breaches from inadvertent or intentional actions by our employees, partners, or vendors, or from attacks by malicious third parties.

The Company and its vendors’ sophisticated information technology operations are spread across multiple, sometimes inconsistent, platforms, which pose difficulties in maintaining data integrity across systems. The ever-increasing use and evolution of technology, including cloud-based computing, creates opportunities for the unintentional or improper dissemination or destruction of confidential information stored in the Company’s systems.

Risk Related to Our Common Stock

Our stock price has been volatile and may fluctuate in the future.

The market price for the publicly traded stock of pharmaceutical companies is generally characterized by high volatility. There has been significant volatility in the market prices for our Common Stock. For the twelve months ended March 31, 2017, the closing sale price on the OTC Bulletin Board (“OTC-BB”) of our Common Stock fluctuated from a high of $0.38 per share to a low of $0.13 per share. The price per share of our Common Stock may not exceed or even remain at current levels in the future. The market price of our Common Stock may be affected by a number of factors, including, without limitation:

The sale or issuance of our common stock to Lincoln Park or upon conversion of outstanding preferred stock or exercise of outstanding warrants and options may cause dilution and the sale of the shares of common stock acquired by Lincoln Park or the issuance of shares upon conversion or exercise of outstanding preferred stock and warrants, or the perception that such sales and issuances may occur, could cause the price of our common stock to fall.

On May 1, 2017, we entered into the Purchase Agreement with Lincoln Park, pursuant to which Lincoln Park has committed to purchase up to $40,000,000 of our common stock. Concurrently with the execution of the Purchase Agreement, we issued 5,540,550 shares of our common stock to Lincoln Park as an initial fee for its commitment to purchase shares of our common stock under the Purchase Agreement. Furthermore, for each additional purchase by Lincoln Park, additional commitment shares in commensurate amounts up to a total of 5,540,550 shares will be issued based upon the relative proportion of the aggregate amount of $40,000,000 purchased by Lincoln Park. The purchase shares that may be sold pursuant to the Purchase Agreement may be sold by us to Lincoln Park at our discretion from time to time over a 36-month period commencing after June 5, 2017. The purchase price for the shares that we may sell to Lincoln Park under the Purchase Agreement will fluctuate based on the price of our common stock. Depending on market liquidity at the time, sales of such shares may cause the trading price of our common stock to fall.

We generally have the right to control the timing and amount of any sales of our shares to Lincoln Park. Additional sales of our common stock, if any, to Lincoln Park will depend upon market conditions and other factors to be determined by us. Lincoln Park may ultimately purchase all, some, or none of the shares of our common stock that may be sold pursuant to the Purchase Agreement and, after it has acquired shares, Lincoln Park may sell all, some or none of those shares.

In addition, as of June 7, 2017, there were outstanding shares of preferred stock convertible into approximately 158 million shares of Common Stock and warrants to purchase an aggregate of approximately 88.4 million shares of Common Stock at exercise prices of $0.0625 to $0.1521 per share, vested options to purchase an aggregate of approximately 4.9 million shares at a weighted average exercise price of $0.19. Additional shares of Common Stock may be issuable as a result of anti-dilution provisions in the outstanding preferred stock and warrants.

As a result of the above discussed potential issuance of securities, such issuances by us could result in substantial dilution to the interests of other holders of our common stock. Additionally, the sale of a substantial number of shares of our common stock to Lincoln Park or pursuant to the conversion or exercise of outstanding shares of preferred stock and warrants, or the anticipation of such issuances, could make it more difficult for us to sell equity or equity-related securities in the future at a time and at a price that we might otherwise wish to effect sales.

The issuance of our common stock to Directors, Employees, and Consultants in payment of fees and salaries cause dilution and the sale of these shares of common stock so issued, or the perception that sales of these shares so issued may occur, could cause the price of our common stock to fall.

Pursuant to the Company’s policies relating to the compensation of Directors, all director fees are paid via the issuance of shares of Common Stock, with such shares being valued at the simple average of the closing price of the Company’s Common Stock for each day in the period for which the director fees were incurred. In addition, members of the Company’s management, certain employees and consultants receive a portion of their salaries or compensation via the issuance of shares Common Stock, with such shares being valued by the same method as that used for the shares issued in payment of director fees.

The issuance of these shares is dilutive to holders of our Common Stock, and the subsequent sale of these shares, or the perception that the sale of these shares may occur, could cause the price of our common stock to fall.

Raising of additional funding through sales of our securities could cause existing holders of our Common Stock to experience substantial dilution.

Any additional financing that involves the further sale of our securities could cause existing holders of our Common Stock to experience substantial dilution. On the other hand, if we incurred debt, we would be subject to risks associated with indebtedness, including the risk that interest rates might fluctuate and cash flow would be insufficient to pay principal and interest on such indebtedness.

The issuance of additional shares of our Common Stock or our preferred stock could make a change of control more difficult to achieve.

The issuance of additional shares of our Common Stock, including those shares issued pursuant to conversion of convertible preferred shares, or the issuance of shares of an additional series of preferred stock could be used to make a change of control of us more difficult and expensive. Under certain circumstances, such shares could be used to create impediments to, or frustrate persons seeking to cause, a takeover or to gain control of us. Such shares could be sold to purchasers who might side with our Board of Directors in opposing a takeover bid that the Board of Directors determines not to be in the best interests of our shareholders. It might also have the effect of discouraging an attempt by another person or entity through the acquisition of a substantial number of shares of our Common Stock to acquire control of us with a view to consummating a merger, sale of all or part of our assets, or a similar transaction, since the issuance of new shares could be used to dilute the stock ownership of such person or entity.

Provisions of our Articles of Incorporation and By-Laws could defer a change of our Management which could discourage or delay offers to acquire us.

Provisions of our Articles of Incorporation and By-Laws law may make it more difficult for someone to acquire control of us or for our shareholders to remove existing management, and might discourage a third party from offering to acquire us, even if a change in control or in Management would be beneficial to our shareholders. For example, as discussed above, our Articles of Incorporation allows us to issue shares of preferred stock without any vote or further action by our shareholders. Our Board of Directors has the authority to fix and determine the relative rights and preferences of preferred stock. Our Board of Directors also has the authority to issue preferred stock without further shareholder approval. As a result, our Board of Directors could authorize the issuance of a series of preferred stock that would grant to holders the preferred right to our assets upon liquidation, the right to receive dividend payments before dividends are distributed to the holders of common stock and the right to the redemption of the shares, together with a premium, prior to the redemption of our common stock. In this regard, on November 15, 2013, we entered into a Shareholder Rights Plan and, under the Rights Plan, our Board of Directors declared a dividend distribution of one Right for each outstanding share of our common stock and one right for each share of Common Stock into which any of our outstanding Preferred Stock is convertible, to shareholders of record at the close of business on that date. Each Right entitles the registered holder to purchase from us one “Unit” consisting of one one-millionth (1/1,000,000) of a share of Series H Junior Participating preferred stock, at a purchase price of $2.10 per Unit, subject to adjustment, and may be redeemed prior to November 15, 2023, the expiration date, at $0.000001 per Right, unless earlier redeemed by the Company. The Rights generally are not transferable apart from the common stock and will not be exercisable unless and until a person or group acquires or commences a tender or exchange offer to acquire, beneficial ownership of 15% or more of our common stock. However, for Mr. Hakim, our Chief Executive Officer, the Rights Plan’s the 15% threshold excludes shares beneficially owned by him as of November 15, 2013 and all shares issuable to him pursuant to his employment agreement and the Mikah Note. Our By-Laws provide for the classification of our Board of Directors into three classes.

There are inherent uncertainties involved in estimates, judgments and assumptions used in the preparation of financial statements in accordance with GAAP. Any future changes in estimates, judgments and assumptions used or necessary revisions to prior estimates, judgments or assumptions could lead to a restatement of our results.

The consolidated financial statements included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K are prepared in accordance with GAAP. This involves making estimates, judgments and assumptions that affect reported amounts of assets (including intangible assets), liabilities, mezzanine equity, stockholders’ equity, operating revenues, costs of sales, operating expenses, other income, and other expenses. Estimates, judgments, and assumptions are inherently subject to change in the future and any necessary revisions to prior estimates, judgments or assumptions could lead to a restatement. Any such changes could result in corresponding changes to the amounts of assets (including goodwill and other intangible assets), liabilities, mezzanine equity, stockholders’ equity, operating revenues, costs of sales, operating expenses, other income and other expenses.

The restatement of our previously issued unaudited quarterly financial statements has been time-consuming and expensive and could expose us to additional risks that could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, cash flows and results of operations and could cause the market value of our common shares to decline.

We have restated our previously issued unaudited financial statements for the three months ended June 30, 2015 included in the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2015 and the unaudited financial statements for the three and six months ended September 30, 2015 included in the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2015. In addition, these restated financial statements include corrections of errors in accounting that were made in previously issued audited annual and unaudited interim periods, that we did not consider material pursuant to guidance provided by SEC Staff Accounting Bulletin 99, Materiality (“SAB 99”) and SEC Staff Accounting Bulletin 108, Considering the Effects of Prior Year Misstatements when Quantifying Misstatements in Current Year Financial Statements (“SAB 108”), and accordingly reflected on the restated financial statements on a prospective basis.

This restatement (including the review of the errors in accounting that made such restatement necessary) has been time consuming and expensive, requiring the incurrence of substantial and unanticipated expenses and costs, including, without limitation, audit, legal, consulting, research and other professional fees in connection to the identification and correction of errors in accounting, restatement of previously issued financial statements and the remediation of material weaknesses in our system of internal controls over financial reporting. In an event of and to the extent that the actions taken to remediate the weaknesses in our system controls over financial reporting are not successful, we could be forced to incur additional time and expense. Furthermore, there is generally an increased risk of shareholder, governmental, or other actions in connection with the restatement of financial statements, with any such proceedings, regardless of outcome, usually consuming a significant amount of management’s time and attention as well as related legal, accounting and other costs. In situations of a company not prevailing in any such proceedings, there is the possibility of substantial damages or settlement costs being required of the company that did not prevail.

We have previously identified material weaknesses in our internal control over financial reporting which could adversely affect our ability to report our financial condition, cash flows and results of operations in a timely and accurate manner and/or increase the risk of future misstatements, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, cash flows and results of operations and could cause the market value of our common shares and/or debt securities to decline.

Our management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over our financial reporting, as defined in Rule 13a-15(f) under the Exchange Act. Based on reviews conducted by management, our Independent Auditors and specific guidance from subject matter experts engaged by us, we have concluded that material weaknesses in our internal controls over financial reporting existed that contributed to the errors in accounting that necessitated the restatement of previously issued financial statements. A material weakness is a deficiency, or a combination of deficiencies, in internal controls over financial reporting such that there is a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement of our annual or interim financial statements will not be prevented or detected on a timely basis.

Management determined that we did not maintain effective internal controls over financial reporting as of the fiscal year ended March 31, 2016 due to the existence of the following material weaknesses identified by management: We did not maintain adequate segregation of duties in our accounting and financial reporting process. We have not appropriately restricted access to our accounting applications to appropriate users and we do not have processes in place that ensure that appropriate segregation of duties is maintained. Certain personnel have access to financial applications, programs, and data beyond that needed to perform their individual job responsibilities and without independent monitoring. This allows for the creation, review and processing of certain financial data without independent review and authorization. There are also certain financial personnel that have incompatible duties, including in the areas of cash disbursements, payroll, and journal entry reviews. We have not yet completed the process of assigning different people the responsibilities of authorizing transactions, recording transactions, and maintaining custody of assets to sufficiently reduce the opportunities to allow any person to be in a position to both perpetrate and conceal errors or fraud in the normal course of the person’s duties. Particularly in the areas of purchases, cash disbursements, journal entry review and payroll, certain individuals have incompatible duties that limit our ability to identify and detect errors or fraud that may occur.

We identified and implemented remediation actions. The Company’s management assessed the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting as of March 31, 2017, with such assessment being pursuant to the criteria set forth by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (“COSO”) in Internal Control-Integrated Framework (2013) . Based on our assessment, we determined that, based on those criteria, as of March 31, 2017, the Company’s internal control over financial reporting is effective.

We regularly review and evaluate internal controls systems to allow management to report on the effectiveness of our internal controls over financial reporting, and there can be no assurances of Management’s continued assertion of effective internal controls over financial reporting. We may discover additional weaknesses in our internal controls over financial reporting or disclosure controls and procedures, or may determine that existing controls are no longer effective. The next time we evaluate our internal controls over financial reporting and disclosure controls and procedures, if we identify one or more new material weaknesses or have been unable to timely remediate our existing material weaknesses, we would be unable to conclude that our internal controls over financial reporting or disclosure controls and procedures are effective. If we are unable to conclude that our internal controls over financial reporting or our disclosure controls and procedures are effective, or if our independent registered public accounting firm expresses an opinion that our internal controls over financial reporting is ineffective, we may not be able to report our financial condition and results of operations in a timely and accurate manner, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, cash flows and results of operations and could cause the market value of our common shares to decline. In addition, any potential future restatements could subject us to additional adverse consequences, including sanctions by the SEC, shareholder litigation and other adverse actions. Moreover, we may be the subject of further negative publicity focusing on such financial statement adjustments and resulting restatement and negative reactions from our shareholders, creditors, or others with whom we do business. The occurrence of any of the foregoing could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, cash flows and results of operations and could cause the market value of our common shares to decline.

Our Common Stock is considered a “penny stock”. The application of the “penny stock” rules to our Common Stock could limit the trading and liquidity of our Common Stock, adversely affect the market price of our Common Stock, and increase the transaction costs to sell shares of our Common Stock.

Our common stock is a “low-priced” security or “penny stock” under rules promulgated under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. In accordance with these rules, broker-dealers participating in transactions in low-priced securities must first deliver a risk disclosure document which describes the risks associated with such stocks, the broker-dealer’s duties in selling the stock, the customer’s rights and remedies and certain market and other information. Furthermore, the broker-dealer must make a suitability determination approving the customer for low-priced stock transactions based on the customer’s financial situation, investment experience and objectives. Broker-dealers must also disclose these restrictions in writing to the customer, obtain specific written consent from the customer, and provide monthly account statements to the customer. The effect of these restrictions will likely decrease the willingness of broker-dealers to make a market in our Common Stock, will decrease liquidity of our Common Stock and will increase transaction costs for sales and purchases of our Common Stock as compared to other securities.

Our Common Stock is quoted on the Over-the-Counter Bulletin Board. The Over-the-Counter Bulletin Board is a quotation system, not an issuer listing service, market, or exchange, therefore, buying and selling stock on the Over-the-Counter Bulletin Board is not as efficient as buying and selling stock through an exchange. As a result, it may be difficult to sell our Common Stock for an optimum trading price or at all.

The Over-the-Counter Bulletin Board (the “OTCBB”) is a regulated quotation service that displays real-time quotes, last sale prices and volume limitations in over-the-counter securities. Because trades and quotations on the OTCBB involve a manual process, the market information for such securities cannot be guaranteed. In addition, quote information, or even firm quotes, may not be available. The manual execution process may delay order processing and intervening price fluctuations may result in the failure of a limit order to execute or the execution of a market order at a significantly different price. Execution of trades, execution reporting and the delivery of legal trade confirmations may be delayed significantly. Consequently, one may not be able to sell shares of our Common Stock at the optimum trading prices.

When fewer shares of a security are being traded on the OTCBB, volatility of prices may increase and price movement may outpace the ability to deliver accurate quote information. Lower trading volumes in a security may result in a lower likelihood of an individual’s orders being executed, and current prices may differ significantly from the price one was quoted by the OTCBB at the time of the order entry. Orders for OTCBB securities may be canceled or edited like orders for other securities. All requests to change or cancel an order must be submitted to, received, and processed by the OTCBB. Due to the manual order processing involved in handling OTCBB trades, order processing and reporting may be delayed, and an individual may not be able to cancel or edit his order. Consequently, one may not be able to sell shares of Common Stock at the optimum trading prices.

The dealer’s spread (the difference between the bid and ask prices) may be large and may result in substantial losses to the seller of securities on the OTCBB if the Common Stock or other security must be sold immediately. Further, purchasers of securities may incur an immediate “paper” loss due to the price spread. Moreover, dealers trading on the OTCBB may not have a bid price for securities bought and sold through the OTCBB. Due to the foregoing, demand for securities that are traded through the OTCBB may be decreased or eliminated.

The Series J Convertible Preferred Stock includes a provision for the payment of an annual dividend equal to twenty percent of the stated value of outstanding shares, beginning four years subsequent to the date of issuance of share of Series J Convertible Preferred if the Company is unable to obtain shareholder approval of an increase in authorized shares of Common Stock. These dividends may require expenditure of Company resources in the future, and they may make it difficult to sell our Common Stock for an optimum trading price or at all.

The Company issued 23.0344 shares of Series J Convertible Preferred Stock (“Series J Preferred”) in April 2017, with such shares having an aggregate stated value of $23.0 million and are convertible, four years subsequent to their date of issue, into 158.0 million shares of Common Stock. The Company does not have sufficient unissued and unreserved shares in its currently authorized share capital, and would require shareholder approval to increase the number of authorized shares to an amount that is sufficient to allow the issuance of Common Stock pursuant to a future conversion of Series J Preferred (the “Shareholder Approval”). In the event that such an increase in authorized shares is not approved by the shareholders on or before four years of the issuance of the Series J Preferred shares, holders of Series J Preferred shares are entitled to an annual dividend equal to twenty percent of the stated value of Series J Preferred shares held, with such dividends accruing from the date that is 4 years subsequent to the date of issuance of each share of Series J Preferred. This dividend is payable in cash, if such is legally available for the payment of this dividend, or payable by the issuance of additional shares of Series J Preferred. Accordingly, in the event that dividends become payable on Series J Preferred because the Company did not timely obtain Shareholder Approval, the Company will be required to use its cash resources to pay these dividends, if such cash is legally available for the payment of dividends, or will issue additional shares of Series J Preferred, which are convertible into additional shares of Common Stock, which in turn would require shareholder approval of a further increase in authorized shares. Both potential scenarios could result in the expenditure of Company resources, or a difficulty in the ability to sell our Common Stock for an optimum trading price or at all, or both, in the event that dividends become due and owing on shares of Series J Preferred.