Item 1A.  Risk Factors

The Company is in a market environment that cannot be predicted and that involves significant risks, many of which are beyond our control. Before making a decision to invest in, hold or sell our common stock, stockholders and potential stockholders should carefully consider the risks and uncertainties described below, in addition to the other information contained in this report, as well as the other information we file with the SEC. If any of the following risks are realized, our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects could be materially and adversely affected. In that case, the value of our common stock could decline and stockholders may lose all or part of their investment. Furthermore, additional risks and uncertainties of which we are currently unaware, or which we currently consider to be immaterial, could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition or results of operations.

Risks Related to Our Financial Condition and Capital Requirements

We are an emerging growth company with a history of net losses; we expect to incur net losses in the future and may never achieve profitability.

We have historically incurred substantial net losses in each year since our inception, including net losses of $19.7 million for the twelve months ended December 31, 2019. As of December 31, 2019, we had an accumulated deficit of $91.1 million.

We expect our losses to continue as a result of costs relating to ongoing R&D and for increased sales and marketing costs for existing and planned products. These losses have had, and will continue to have, an adverse effect on our working capital, total assets, and stockholders’ equity. Because of the numerous risks and uncertainties associated with our commercialization efforts, we are unable to predict when we will become profitable, and we may never become profitable. Even if we achieve profitability, we may not be able to sustain or increase profitability on a quarterly or annual basis. Our inability to achieve and then maintain profitability would negatively affect our business, financial condition, results of operations, and cash flows.

We have a limited operating history and we expect a number of factors to cause our operating results to fluctuate on a quarterly and annual basis, which may make our future performance difficult to predict.

We are an emerging molecular diagnostics company with a limited operating history. Our operations to date have been primarily focused on developing and market testing our technology. We have not obtained regulatory approvals from FDA for any of our tests as we operate a clinical laboratory under the CLIA guidelines and believe our tests are laboratory developed tests, or LDTs, that are not currently being regulated by the Food and Drug Administration, or FDA. Consequently, if regulatory approval is determined to be necessary, any predictions made about our future success or viability may not be as accurate as they could be if we had a longer operating history or more commercialized products. Our financial condition and operating results have varied significantly in the past and will continue to fluctuate from quarter-to-quarter or year-to-year due to a variety of factors, many of which are beyond our control. Factors relating to our business that may contribute to these fluctuations include other factors described elsewhere in this report and also include:

27

Table of Contents

Accordingly, the results of any quarterly or annual periods should not be relied upon as indications of future operating performance.

We expect to continue to incur increased costs as a result of operating as a public company and our management will be required to devote substantial time to compliance initiatives and corporate governance practices.

As a public company, we incur and expect to continue to incur additional significant legal, accounting and other expenses in relation to our status as a public reporting company. We expect that these expenses will further increase after we are no longer an “emerging growth company.” We may need to hire additional accounting, finance and other personnel in connection with our continuing efforts to comply with the requirements of being a public company, and our management and other personnel will need to continue to devote a substantial amount of time towards maintaining compliance with these requirements. In addition, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and rules subsequently implemented by the SEC and The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC have imposed various requirements on public companies, including establishment and maintenance of effective disclosure and financial controls and corporate governance practices. Our management and other personnel will need to devote a substantial amount of time to these compliance initiatives. Moreover, these rules and regulations will increase our legal and financial compliance costs and will make some activities more time-consuming and costly.

Pursuant to Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, or Section 404, we will be required to furnish a report by our management on our internal controls over financial reporting, including an attestation report on internal control over financial reporting issued by our independent registered public accounting firm. However, while we remain an “emerging growth company,” we will not be required to include an attestation report on internal control over financial reporting issued by our independent registered public accounting firm. To achieve compliance with Section 404 within the prescribed period, we will be engaged in a process to document and evaluate our internal control over financial reporting, which is both costly and challenging. In this regard, we will need to continue to dedicate internal resources, potentially engage outside consultants and adopt a detailed work plan to assess and document the adequacy of internal control over financial reporting, continue steps to improve control processes as appropriate, validate through testing that controls are functioning as documented and implement a continuous reporting and improvement process for internal control over financial reporting. If we identify one or more material weaknesses, this could result in an adverse reaction in the financial markets due to a loss of confidence in the reliability of our consolidated financial statements.

Our commercial success could be compromised if customers do not pay our invoices or if third-party payors, including managed care organizations and Medicare, do not provide coverage and reimbursement, breach, rescind, or modify their contracts or reimbursement policies, reimburse at a low rate, or delay payments for our current tests and our planned future tests.

Physicians, including dermatologists, may not order our PLA, our Nevome test, or our planned tests unless third-party payors, such as managed care organizations and government payors (e.g., Medicare and Medicaid), pay a substantial portion of the test price. Coverage and reimbursement by a third-party payor may depend on a number of factors, including a payor’s determination that tests using our technologies are:

28

Table of Contents

Uncertainty surrounds third-party payor reimbursement of any test incorporating new technology, including tests developed using our technologies. Technology assessments of new medical tests conducted by research centers and other entities may be disseminated to interested parties for informational purposes. Third-party payors and health care providers may use such technology assessments as grounds to deny coverage for a test or procedure. Technology assessments can include evaluation of clinical utility studies, which define how a test is used in a particular clinical setting or situation. In March 2019, the Draft LCD proposed coverage for the PLA. In late October 2019, the AMA provided us with the PLA Code. Pricing of $760 for the PLA Code was published on December 24, 2019 as part of the CLFS for 2020. The Final LCD was made available on December 26, 2019 and our PLA became eligible for Medicare reimbursement on February 10, 2020. Medicare does not currently cover our Nevome test.

Because each payor generally determines for its own enrollees or insured patients whether to cover or otherwise establish a policy to reimburse our tests, seeking payor approvals is a time-consuming and costly process. We cannot be certain that coverage for our current tests and our planned future tests will be provided in the future by additional third-party payors or that existing policy decisions or reimbursement levels will remain in place or be fulfilled under existing terms and provisions. In addition, the coding procedure used by all third-party payors with respect to establishing payment rates for various procedures, including our tests, is complex, does not currently adapt well to the genetic tests we perform and may not enable coverage or adequate reimbursement rates for our tests. If we cannot obtain or maintain coverage and reimbursement from private and governmental payors such as Medicare and Medicaid for our current tests, or new tests or test enhancements that we may develop in the future, our ability to generate revenues could be limited, which may have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations, and cash flows. Measures have been undertaken to reduce payment rates for and decrease utilization of the clinical laboratory testing generally, including PAMA, which has resulted in reduced rates on the CLFS. These reductions may also impact our PLA and Nevome test and may also impact tests we develop in the future. Because of the cost-trimming trends, third-party payors that cover and provide reimbursement for our tests and our planned tests may suspend, revoke, or discontinue coverage at any time, or may reduce the reimbursement rates payable to us. Any such action could have a negative impact on our revenues, which may have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations, and cash flows. Additionally, if we are not able to obtain sufficient clinical information in support of our tests, third-party payors could designate our tests as experimental or investigational and decline to cover and reimburse our tests because of this designation. As a result of these factors, obtaining approvals from third-party payors to cover our tests and establishing adequate reimbursement levels is an unpredictable, challenging, time-consuming, and costly process, and we may never be successful. Further, we have experienced in the past, and will likely experience in the future, delays and interruptions in the receipt of payments from third-party payors due to missing documentation and/or other issues, which could cause delay in recognizing our revenue.

Additionally, we are currently considered a “non-contracted provider” or “out of network” by most private third-party payors because we have not entered into a specific contract to provide tests to their insured patients at specified rates of reimbursement. If we were to become a contracted provider with one or more payors in the future, the amount of overall reimbursement we receive would likely decrease because we could be reimbursed less money per test performed at a contracted rate than at a non-contracted rate, which could have a negative impact on our revenues. Further, we pursue payment of patient co-payments, co-insurance and deductibles, but we typically do not collect substantial payments from patients and therefore experience overall loss to revenue as a result.

Billing and collections processing for our tests is complex and time-consuming, and any delay in transmitting and collecting claims could have an adverse effect on our revenue.

Billing for our tests is complex, time-consuming, and expensive. Depending on the billing arrangement and applicable law, we bill, or plan to bill, various different parties for our tests, including Medicare, Medicaid, insurance companies, and patients, all of which may have different billing requirements. We may face increased risk in our collection efforts due to the complexities of these billing requirements, including long collection cycles and lower collection rates, which could adversely affect our business, results of operations and financial condition.

Several factors make the billing process complex, including:

29

Table of Contents

We are developing internal systems and procedures to handle these billing and collections functions and have engaged third parties to assist with some of these functions, but we will need to make significant efforts and expend substantial resources to further develop our systems and procedures to handle these aspects of our business. As a result, these billing complexities, along with the related uncertainty in obtaining payment for our tests, could negatively affect our revenue and cash flow, our ability to achieve or sustain profitability, and the consistency and comparability of our results of operations. In addition, if claims for our tests are not submitted to payors on a timely basis, or if we are required to switch to a different provider to handle our processing and collections functions, our revenue and business could be adversely affected.

We will need to raise additional capital to fund our existing operations, commercialize our products, and expand our operations.

As of December 31, 2019, our cash and cash equivalents totaled approximately $15.4 million. On February 28, 2020, we entered into a securities purchase agreement with certain institutional investors for a private placement, which closed on March 4, 2020, of our equity securities for aggregate gross proceeds of approximately $65.0 million, and net proceeds to the Company of approximately $60.0 million, after deducting estimated offering expenses payable by the Company. Based on our current business operations and the additional financing completed in March 2020, we believe our current cash and cash equivalents, will be sufficient to meet our anticipated cash requirements for at least the next twelve months. We intend to raise additional capital through equity offerings, debt financings, collaborations, or licensing arrangements in order to satisfy our anticipated liquidity requirements. We may also consider raising additional capital in the future to expand our business, to pursue strategic investments, to take advantage of financing opportunities, or for other reasons, including to:

Our present and future funding requirements will depend on many factors, including:

The various ways we could raise additional capital carry potential risks. If we raise funds by issuing equity securities, dilution to our stockholders could result. Any equity securities issued also could provide for rights, preferences, or privileges senior to those of holders of our common stock. If we raise funds by issuing debt securities, those debt securities would have rights, preferences, and privileges senior to those of holders of our common stock. The terms of debt securities issued or borrowings pursuant to a credit agreement could impose significant restrictions on our operations. If we raise funds through collaborations and licensing arrangements, we might be required to relinquish significant rights to our platform technologies or products, or grant licenses on terms that are not favorable to us. Additional equity or debt financing might not be available on reasonable terms, if at all. If we cannot secure additional funding when needed, we may have to delay, reduce the scope of, or eliminate one or more R&D programs or sales and marketing initiatives. In addition, we may have to work with a partner on one or more of our development programs, which could lower the economic value of those programs to us. We will also need to raise additional capital to expand our business to meet our long-term business objectives. Additional financing may be from the sale of equity or convertible or other debt securities in a public or private offering, from a credit facility or strategic partnership coupled with an investment in us, or a combination of both. For further discussion of our liquidity requirements as they relate to our long-term plans, see the section entitled “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Liquidity and Capital Resources.”

30

Table of Contents

If physicians, including dermatologists, decide not to order the PLA, the Nevome test, or our future tests, we may be unable to generate sufficient revenue to sustain our business.

To generate demand for our current tests and our planned tests, we will need to educate dermatologists and other health care professionals on the clinical utility, benefits, and value of the tests we provide through published papers, presentations at scientific conferences, educational programs, and one-on-one education sessions by members of our sales force. In addition, we need to assure dermatologists of their ability to obtain and maintain adequate reimbursement coverage from third-party payors for the adhesive patch sample collection method. Medical professionals are influenced by standard-setting bodies that influence and/or dictate the standard of care. If we are not successful in changing current guidelines from legacy standards to new molecular-based approaches our market adoption will suffer. If we cannot convince medical practitioners to order our current tests and our planned tests, we will likely be unable to create demand in sufficient volume for us to achieve profitability or meet our anticipated revenue projections.

We expect to continue to incur significant expenses to develop and market our tests, which could make it difficult for us to achieve and sustain profitability.

In recent years, we have incurred significant costs in connection with the development of our tests. For the twelve months ended December 31, 2019, our R&D expenses were $2.5 million, our sales and marketing expenses were $6.3 million and our general and administrative expenses were $8.9 million. For the year ended December 31, 2018, our R&D expenses were $2.1 million, our sales and marketing expenses were $2.8 million and our general and administrative expenses were $3.5 million. We expect our expenses to continue to increase for the foreseeable future as we conduct studies of our current tests and our planned other tests, grow our sales and marketing organization, drive adoption of and reimbursement for our tests, and develops new tests. As a result, we need to generate significant revenues in order to achieve profitability.

We may not be able to generate sufficient revenue from the commercialization of PLA or the Nevome test, or successfully develop and commercialize other tests to achieve or sustain profitability.

We launched the PLA assay during the first half of 2016. We launched the Nevome test, in 2018. We are in varying stages of R&D for other tests that we may offer in the future. We believe that our commercialization success is dependent upon our ability to significantly increase the number of customers who are using our tests. In addition, demand for our tests may not increase as quickly as planned and we may be unable to increase our revenue levels as expected. We are currently not profitable. Even if we succeed in increasing adoption of PLA or the Nevome test by dermatologists, in maintaining and creating relationships with our existing and new customers, and developing and commercializing additional molecular diagnostic testing products, we may not be able to generate sufficient revenue to achieve or sustain profitability.

If we are unable to execute our marketing strategy for PLA or the Nevome test and are unable to gain acceptance in the market, we may be unable to generate sufficient revenue to sustain our business.

Although we believe that our current tests and planned future tests represent a promising commercial opportunity, our tests may never gain significant acceptance in the marketplace and therefore may never generate substantial revenue or profits for us. We will need to establish a market for our tests and build that market through physician education, awareness programs, and the publication of clinical trial results. Gaining acceptance in medical communities requires publication in leading peer-reviewed journals of results from studies using our current tests and/or our planned future tests. The process of publication in leading medical journals is subject to a peer-review process, and peer-reviewers may not consider the results of our studies sufficiently novel or worthy of publication. Failure to have our studies published in peer-reviewed journals would limit the adoption of our current tests and our planned tests.

Our ability to successfully market the tests that we develop will depend on numerous factors, including:

Failure to achieve widespread market acceptance of our current tests and our planned future tests would materially harm our business, financial condition, and results of operations.

31

Table of Contents

If we cannot develop tests to keep pace with rapid advances in technology, medicine and science, our operating results and competitive position could be harmed.

In recent years, there have been numerous advances in technologies relating to the molecular diagnosis for cancer and other medical conditions. Several new cancer drugs have been approved, including several for melanoma, and a number of new drugs in clinical development may increase patient survival time. There have also been advances in methods used to identify patients likely to benefit from these drugs based on analysis of biomarkers. We must continuously develop new tests and enhance any existing tests to keep pace with evolving standards of care. Our current tests and our planned tests could become obsolete unless we continually innovate and expand them to demonstrate benefit in the diagnosis, monitoring, or prognosis of patients with cancer and other dermatologic conditions. If we cannot adequately demonstrate the applicability of our current tests and our planned future tests to new diagnostic and treatment developments, sales of our tests could decline, which would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

Our future success will depend in part upon our ability to enhance PLA and the Nevome test, and to develop, introduce, and commercialize other novel innovative and non-invasive diagnostics tests and services. New test development involves a lengthy and complex process and we may be unable to commercialize new or improved tests or any other products we may develop on a timely basis, or at all.

Our future success will depend in part upon our ability to enhance PLA and the Nevome test, and to develop new innovative products. Our failure to successfully develop new products on a timely basis could have a material adverse effect on our revenue, results of operations, and business.

The development of new or enhanced tests is a complex and uncertain process requiring precise technological execution. In addition, the successful development of new products may depend on the development of new technologies. We may be required to undertake time-consuming and costly development activities. We may experience difficulties that could delay or prevent the successful development, commercialization, and marketing of these new products. Before we can commercialize any new products, we will need to expend significant funds in order to conduct substantial R&D, including validation studies.

Our product development process involves a high degree of risk, and product development efforts may fail for many reasons, including a failure to demonstrate the performance of the product or an inability to obtain any required certification or regulatory approval, if required.

As we develop new test and other products, we will have to make significant investments in product development, as well as sales and marketing resources. In addition, competitors may develop and commercialize competing products faster than we are able to do so, which could have a material adverse effect on our revenue, results of operations and business.

We rely on a limited number of suppliers and, in some cases, a single supplier, for certain of our laboratory substances, equipment and other materials, and any delays or difficulties securing these materials could disrupt our laboratory operations and materially harm our business.

We rely on a limited number of suppliers for certain of our laboratory substances, including reagents, as well as for the sequencers and various other equipment and materials we use in our laboratory operations. In particular, we rely on Fisher Scientific and VWR for supplies and Adhesive Research for our adhesive tape material. We do not have long-term agreements with any of our suppliers and, as a result, they could cease supplying these materials and equipment to us at any time due to an inability to reach agreement with us on supply terms, disruptions in their operations, a determination to pursue other activities or lines of business, or for other reasons, or they could fail to provide us with sufficient quantities of materials that meet our specifications. Transitioning to a new supplier or locating a temporary substitute, if any are available, would be time-consuming and expensive, could result in interruptions in or otherwise affect the performance specifications of our laboratory operations, or could require that we revalidate our tests. In addition, the use of equipment or materials provided by a replacement supplier could require us to alter our laboratory operations and procedures. Moreover, we believe there are currently only a few manufacturers that are capable of supplying and servicing some of the equipment and other materials necessary for our laboratory operations, including sequencers and various associated reagents. As a result, replacement equipment and materials that meet our quality control and performance requirements may not be available on reasonable terms, in a timely manner or at all. If we encounter delays or difficulties securing, reconfiguring or revalidating the equipment, reagents and other materials we require for our tests, our operations could be materially disrupted and our business, financial condition, results of operations, and reputation could be adversely affected.

32

Table of Contents

Our tests employ a novel diagnostic platform and may never be accepted by their intended markets.

Our future success depends on our ability to successfully commercialize PLA and the Nevome test, as well as our ability to develop and market other tests that use our proprietary technology platform. The scientific discoveries that form the basis of our proprietary technology platform and our tests are relatively new. We are not aware of any other gene expression tests such as ours and there can be no assurance that physicians will be willing to use them. If we do not successfully develop and commercialize our tests based upon our technological approach, we may not become profitable and the value of our common stock may decline.

The novel nature of our tests also means that fewer people are trained in or experienced with products of this type, which may make it difficult to find, hire, and retain capable personnel for research, development, and clinical laboratory positions.

Further, our focus solely on gene expression tests, as opposed to multiple, more proven technologies for patient diagnosis, increases the risks associated with the ownership of our common stock. If we do not achieve market acceptance for our tests, we may be required to change the scope and direction of our product development activities. In that case, we may not be able to identify and implement successfully an alternative product development strategy.

If our current tests and our planned tests do not to perform as expected, as a result of human error or otherwise, it could have a material adverse effect on our operating results, reputation, and business.

Our success depends on the market’s confidence that we can provide reliable, high-quality diagnostic results. There is no guarantee that any accuracy we have demonstrated to date will continue, particularly as the number of tests using our assays increases and as the number of different tests that we develop and commercialize expands. We believe that our customers are likely to be particularly sensitive to test defects and errors. As a result, the failure of our current or planned tests to perform as expected could significantly impair our reputation and the public image of our tests. As a result, the failure or perceived failure of our products to perform as expected could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operation and cash flows.

We may be unable to manage our future growth effectively, which could make it difficult to execute our business strategy.

As part of our strategy, we expect to increase our number of employees as our business grows. This future growth could create strain on our organizational, administrative, and operational infrastructure, including laboratory operations, quality control, customer service, and sales and marketing. Our ability to manage our growth properly will require us to continue to improve our operational, financial, and management controls, as well as our reporting systems and procedures. If our current infrastructure is unable to handle our growth, we may need to further expand our infrastructure and staff and implement new reporting systems. The time and resources required to implement such expansion and systems could adversely affect our operations. Our expected future growth will impose significant added responsibilities on members of management, including the need to identify, recruit, maintain, and integrate additional employees. Our future financial performance and our ability to commercialize our products and to compete effectively will depend, in part, on our ability to manage this potential future growth effectively, without compromising quality.

If our sole laboratory facility becomes damaged or inoperable, or we are required to vacate the facility, our ability to sell and provide molecular tests and pursue our R&D efforts may be jeopardized.

We do not have any clinical reference laboratory facilities outside of our facility in La Jolla, California. Our facilities and equipment could be harmed or rendered inoperable by natural or man-made disasters, including fire, earthquake, flooding, and power outages, which may render it difficult or impossible for us to perform our diagnostic tests for some period of time. The inability to perform our current tests, our planned tests, or the backlog of tests that could develop if our facility is inoperable for even a short period of time may result in the loss of customers or harm to our reputation or relationships with scientific or clinical collaborators, and we may be unable to regain those customers or repair our reputation in the future. Furthermore, our facilities and the equipment we use to perform our R&D work could be costly and time-consuming to repair or replace.

The San Diego area has recently experienced serious fires and power outages, and is considered to lie in an area with earthquake risk.

Additionally, a key component of our R&D process involves using biological samples as the basis for the development of our diagnostic tests. In some cases, these samples are difficult to obtain. If the parts of our laboratory facility where we store these biological samples were damaged or compromised, our ability to pursue our R&D projects, as well as our reputation, could be jeopardized. We carry insurance for damage to our property and the disruption of our business, but this insurance may not be sufficient to cover all of our potential losses and may not continue to be available to us on acceptable terms, if at all.

33

Table of Contents

Further, if our CLIA certified laboratory became inoperable we may not be able to license or transfer our technology to another facility with the necessary state licensure and CLIA certification under which our current tests and our planned future tests could be performed. Even if we find a facility with such qualifications to perform our tests, it may not be available to us on commercially reasonable terms. In addition, the use of a third-party laboratory to perform our tests could affect their classification as LDTs and require us to seek FDA market authorization for the tests prior to the completion of such a transfer.

If we cannot compete successfully with our competitors, we may be unable to increase or sustain our revenues or achieve and sustain profitability.

Our principal competition comes from mainstream clinical diagnostic methods, used by dermatologists for many years, which focus on visual tumor tissue analysis. It may be difficult to change the methods or behavior of dermatologists to incorporate our PLA, Nevome test, and Adhesive Skin Sample Collection Kits into their practices in conjunction with, or instead of, tissue biopsies and analysis. In addition, companies offering capital equipment and kits or reagents to local dermatologists represent another source of potential competition. These tests are used directly by the dermatologists, which can facilitate adoption. We plan to focus our marketing and sales efforts on medical dermatologists rather than pathologists.

We also face competition from companies that offer device products or are conducting research to develop device products for analysis of pigmented lesions. In particular, MELA Sciences, Inc., used to market its MelaFind^® device to dermatologists, but we believe they no longer actively market this product. Scibase AB and Verisante Technology, Inc. have devices under development and may market their medical products directly to dermatologists if and when they obtain FDA approval. In addition to these companies, our competitors also include other device companies selling photographic technologies, whole body photography services, dermatoscopes, or confocal microscopy, such as Fotofinder, Molemate, Canfield Scientific, MedX, and Caliber I.D. Many of these groups, in addition to operating R&D laboratories, are selling equipment and devices.

In addition to these device companies, Myriad Genetics, Inc., offers an expression test for melanoma that is used on surgical biopsy specimens. Myriad Genetics, Inc. could also try and market their test as a biopsy aid at the point-of-care. Gene expression testing is a relatively new area of science, especially in dermatology and we cannot predict what tests others will develop that may compete with or provide results similar or superior to the results we are able to achieve with the tests we develop. There are a number of companies that are focused on the oncology diagnostic market and expression tests including Exact Sciences Corporation, Veracyte, Inc., Genomic Health, Inc. and others.

Additionally, projects related to cancer diagnostics and particularly genomics have received increased government funding, both in the United States and internationally. As more information regarding cancer genomics becomes available to the public, we anticipate that more products aimed at analyzing pigmented lesions and identifying melanoma may be developed and that these products may compete with ours. In addition, competitors may develop their own versions of our current or planned tests in countries where we did not apply for patents or where our patents have not issued or have expired and may compete with us in those countries, including encouraging the use of their test by physicians or patients in other countries. In addition, one or more competitors may seek to invalidate or render unenforceable any of our patents in a court of competent jurisdiction or at the United States Patent and Trademark Office, or USPTO. If any such proceeding were to be successful and result in the invalidation or unenforceability of one or more patents in our intellectual property portfolio, we may be unable to prevent unlicensed third-party competition in the marketplace with respect to our current and planned future tests.

Some of our present and potential competitors have widespread brand recognition and substantially greater financial and technical resources and development, production, and marketing capabilities than we do. Others may develop lower-priced, less complex tests that payors and dermatologists could view as functionally equivalent to our current or planned tests, which could force us to lower the list price of our tests and impact our operating margins and ability to achieve and maintain profitability. In addition, technological innovations that result in the creation of enhanced diagnostic tools that are more sensitive or specific than ours may enable other clinical laboratories, hospitals, physicians, or medical providers to provide specialized diagnostic tests similar to ours in a more patient-friendly, efficient, or cost-effective manner than is currently possible. If we cannot compete successfully against current or future competitors, we may be unable to increase or create market acceptance and sales of our current or planned tests, which could prevent us from increasing or sustaining our revenues or achieving or sustaining profitability.

Our competitors may be able to respond more quickly and effectively than we can to new or changing opportunities, technologies, standards, or customer requirements. We anticipate that we will face increased competition in the future as existing companies and competitors develop new or improved products and distribution strategies and as new companies enter the market with new technologies and distribution strategies. We may not be able to compete effectively against these organizations. Our ability to compete successfully and to increase our market share is dependent upon our reputation for providing responsive, professional, and high-quality products and services and achieving strong customer satisfaction. Increased competition in the future could adversely affect our revenue, revenue growth rate, if any, margins and market share.

34

Table of Contents

If we are unable to identify collaborators willing to work with us to conduct clinical utility studies, or the results of those studies do not demonstrate that a test provides clinically meaningful information and value, commercial adoption of our tests may be slow, which would negatively impact our business.

We believe clinical utility studies will show how the PLA and the Nevome test changes the decision-making of the dermatologist toward making a surgical biopsy decision, particularly to avoid performing a surgical biopsy when the test is negative. Clinical utility studies also show the impact of the test results on patient care and management. Clinical utility studies are typically performed with collaborating dermatologists at medical centers and hospitals, analogous to a clinical trial, and generally result in peer-reviewed publications.

We are currently conducting a variety of clinical trials for the PLA and other non-melanoma tests with investigators at multiple sites in the U.S. We will need to conduct additional studies for these tests, as well as other tests we may offer in the future, to drive test adoption in the marketplace and reimbursement. Should we not be able to perform these studies, or should their results not provide clinically meaningful data and value for physicians, including dermatologists and oncologists, adoption of our tests could be impaired and we may not be able to obtain reimbursement for them.

We are undergoing a management transition.

We have recently added new executives including a Chief Commercial Officer, Chief Financial Officer, Chief Operating Officer and Senior Vice President of Payor Access. Our management reporting structure may continue to change. Such a management transition subjects us to a number of risks, including risks pertaining to coordination of responsibilities and tasks, creation of new management systems and processes, differences in management style, effects on corporate culture, and the need for transfer of historical knowledge. In addition, our operations will be adversely affected if our management does not work together harmoniously, efficiently allocate responsibilities between themselves, or implement and abide by effective controls.

The loss of key members of our executive management team could adversely affect our business.

Our success in implementing our business strategy depends largely on the skills, experience, and performance of key members of our executive management team and others in key management positions, including John Dobak, M.D., the Company’s Chief Executive Officer. The collective efforts of our executive management team are critical to us as we continue to develop our technologies, tests, and R&D and sales programs. As a result of the difficulty in locating qualified new management, the loss or incapacity of existing members of our executive management team could adversely affect our operations. If we were to lose one or more of these key employees, we could experience difficulties in finding qualified successors, competing effectively, developing our technologies, and implementing our business strategy. Our Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer, Chief Operating Officer, Chief Commercial Officer, Chief Medical Officer, and Chief Scientific Officer have employment agreements; however, the existence of an employment agreement does not guarantee retention of members of our executive management team and we may not be able to retain those individuals for the duration of or beyond the end of their respective terms. We do not maintain “key person” life insurance on any of our employees.

In addition, we rely on collaborators, consultants, and advisors, including scientific and clinical advisors, to assist us in formulating our R&D commercialization strategy. Our collaborators, consultants, and advisors are generally employed by employers other than us and may have commitments under agreements with other entities that may limit their availability to us.

The loss of a key employee, the failure of a key employee to perform in his or her current position, or our inability to attract and retain skilled employees could result in our inability to continue to grow our business or to implement our business strategy.

Most of our management has limited experience in operating a public company.

Most of our management team has limited experience in the management of a publicly traded company. Our management team may not successfully or effectively manage our transition to operating as a public company that is subject to significant regulatory oversight and reporting obligations under federal securities laws. Our limited experience in dealing with the increasingly complex laws pertaining to public companies could be a significant disadvantage in that it is likely that an increasing amount of our time may be devoted to these activities which will result in less time being devoted to the management and growth of the Company. It is possible that we will be required to expand our employee base and hire additional employees to support our operations as a public company which will increase our operating costs in future periods.

35

Table of Contents

There is a scarcity of experienced professionals in our industry. If we are not able to retain and recruit personnel with the requisite technical skills, we may be unable to successfully execute our business strategy.

The specialized nature of our industry results in an inherent scarcity of experienced personnel in the field. Our future success depends upon our ability to attract and retain highly skilled personnel, including scientific, technical, laboratory, sales, marketing, business, regulatory, and administrative personnel necessary to support our anticipated growth, develop our business, and perform certain contractual obligations. Given the scarcity of professionals with the scientific knowledge that we require and the competition for qualified personnel among life science businesses, we may not succeed in attracting or retaining the personnel we require to continue and grow our operations.

Our inability to attract, hire, and retain a sufficient number of qualified sales professionals would hamper our ability to launch and increase demand for our PLA, to expand geographically, and to successfully commercialize any other tests or products we may develop.

To succeed in selling our PLA, and any other tests or products that we are able to develop, we must expand our sales force in the United States and/or internationally by recruiting sales representatives with extensive experience in dermatology and close relationships with medical dermatologists, dermatopathologists, and other hospital personnel. To achieve our marketing and sales goals, we will need to substantially build our sales and commercial infrastructure, with which to date we have had little experience. Sales professionals with the necessary technical and business qualifications are in high demand, and there is a risk that we may be unable to attract, hire, and retain the number of sales professionals with the right qualifications, scientific backgrounds, and relationships with decision-makers and potential customers needed to achieve our sales goals. We expect to face competition from other companies in our industry, some of whom are much larger than us and who can pay greater compensation and benefits than we can, in seeking to attract and retain qualified sales and marketing employees. If we are unable to hire and retain qualified sales and marketing personnel, our business will suffer.

We may encounter manufacturing problems or delays that could result in lost revenue.

The Adhesive Skin Sample Collection Kits we distribute are manufactured by a third-party supplier. This manufacturer assembles several components, including the key adhesive patch trifold, into a finished product, then labels, stores, and ships this finished product. The adhesive tape subcomponent of the adhesive patches is provided by a single-source third party. This tape is assembled into the individual adhesive patches by another third-party supplier.

We believe we have arranged for adequate manufacturing capacity for the Adhesive Skin Sample Collection Kits through our third-party manufacturer. If demand for our current tests and our planned future tests increases significantly, we will need to either expand manufacturing capabilities through our third-party manufacturer or outsource to other manufacturers. If our third-party or other manufacturers engaged by us fail to manufacture and deliver the Adhesive Skin Sample Collection Kits or certain reagents in a timely manner, or they are unable to fulfil our orders due to regulatory non-compliance or other quality-related issues, our relationships with our customers could be seriously harmed. We cannot assure you that manufacturing or quality control problems will not arise as we attempt to increase the production of the Adhesive Skin Sample Collection Kit or that we can increase our manufacturing capabilities and maintain quality control in a timely manner or at commercially reasonable costs. If we cannot have the Adhesive Skin Sample Collection Kits manufactured consistently on a timely basis because of these or other factors, it could have a significant negative impact on our ability to perform tests and generate revenues.

If we cannot support demand for our current tests and our planned future tests, including successfully managing the evolution of our technology and manufacturing platforms, our business could suffer.

As our test volume grows, we will need to increase our testing capacity, implement automation, increase our scale and related processing, customer service, billing, collection, and systems process improvements, and expand our internal quality assurance program and technology to support testing on a larger scale. We will also need additional technicians, certified laboratory scientists, and other scientific and technical personnel to process these additional tests. Any increases in scale, related improvements and quality assurance may not be successfully implemented and appropriate personnel may not be available. As additional tests are commercialized, we may need to implement new equipment, systems, technology, controls and procedures, and hire personnel with different qualifications. Failure to implement necessary procedures or to hire the necessary personnel could result in a higher cost of processing or an inability to meet market demand. We cannot assure you that we will be able to perform tests on a timely basis at a level consistent with demand, that our efforts to scale our commercial operations will not negatively affect the quality of our test results or that we will respond successfully to the growing complexity of our testing operations. If we encounter difficulty meeting market demand or quality standards for our current tests and our planned future tests, our reputation could be harmed and our future prospects and business could suffer, which may have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations, and cash flows.

36

Table of Contents

If we were to be sued for product liability or professional liability, we could face substantial liabilities that exceed our resources.

The marketing, sale, and use of our current tests and our planned future diagnostic tests could lead to the filing of product liability claims against us if someone alleges that our tests failed to perform as designed. We may also be subject to liability for errors in the test results we provide to physicians or for a misunderstanding of, or inappropriate reliance upon, the information we provide. A product liability or professional liability claim could result in substantial damages and be costly and time-consuming for us to defend.

Although we believe that our existing product and professional liability insurance is adequate, our insurance may not fully protect us from the financial impact of defending against product liability or professional liability claims. Any product liability or professional liability claim brought against us, with or without merit, could increase our insurance rates or prevent us from securing insurance coverage in the future. Additionally, any product liability lawsuit could damage our reputation, result in the recall of tests, or cause current partners to terminate existing agreements and potential partners to seek other partners, any of which could impact our results of operations.

If we use biological and hazardous materials in a manner that causes injury or violates laws or regulations, we could be liable for damages or subject to enforcement actions.

Our activities currently require the controlled use of potentially harmful biological and hazardous materials and chemicals. We cannot eliminate the risk of accidental contamination or injury to employees or third parties from the use, storage, handling or disposal of these materials. In the event of contamination or injury, we could be held liable for any resulting damages, and any liability could exceed our resources or any applicable insurance coverage we may have. Additionally, we are subject to, on an ongoing basis, federal, state, and local laws and regulations governing the use, storage, handling, and disposal of these materials and specified waste products. The cost of compliance with these laws and regulations may become significant and could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. In the event of an accident or if we otherwise fail to comply with applicable regulations, we could lose our permits or approvals or be held liable for damages or penalized with fines.

We may acquire other businesses, form joint ventures, or make investments in other companies or technologies that could harm our operating results, dilute our stockholders’ ownership, increase our debt, or cause us to incur significant expense.

As part of our business strategy, we may pursue acquisitions of businesses and assets. We also may pursue strategic alliances and joint ventures that leverage our core technology and industry experience to expand our offerings or distribution. We have no experience with acquiring other companies and limited experience with forming strategic alliances and joint ventures. We may not be able to find suitable partners or acquisition candidates, and we may not be able to complete such transactions on favorable terms, if at all. If we make any acquisitions, we may not be able to integrate these acquisitions successfully into our existing business, and we could assume unknown or contingent liabilities. Any future acquisitions also could result in significant write-offs or the incurrence of debt and contingent liabilities, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. Integration of an acquired company also may disrupt ongoing operations and require management resources that would otherwise focus on developing our existing business. We may experience losses related to investments in other companies, which could have a material negative effect on our results of operations. We may not identify or complete these transactions in a timely manner, on a cost-effective basis, or at all, and we may not realize the anticipated benefits of any acquisition, technology license, strategic alliance, or joint venture.

To finance any acquisitions or joint ventures, we may choose to issue shares of our common stock as consideration, which would dilute the ownership of our stockholders. If the price of our common stock is low or volatile, we may not be able to acquire other companies or fund a joint venture project using our stock as consideration. Alternatively, it may be necessary for us to raise additional funds for acquisitions through public or private financings. Additional funds may not be available on terms that are favorable to us, or at all.

International expansion of our business would expose us to business, regulatory, political, operational, financial, and economic risks associated with doing business outside of the United States.

Our business strategy contemplates possible international expansion, including partnering with academic and commercial testing laboratories, and introducing the PLA, the Nevome test, or other future products outside the United States and exporting the Adhesive Skin Sample Collection Kit. We are currently testing samples through a distributor in Canada. Doing business internationally involves a number of risks, including:

37

Table of Contents

Any of these risks, if encountered, could significantly harm our future international expansion and operations and, consequently, have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations, and cash flows.

Declining general economic or business conditions, including as a result of the recent COVID-19 outbreak, may have a negative impact on our business.

Continuing concerns over economic and business prospects in the United States and other countries have contributed to increased volatility and diminished expectations for the global economy. These factors, coupled with the prospect of decreased business and consumer confidence and increased unemployment resulting from the recent COVID-19 outbreak, may precipitate an economic slowdown and recession. If the economic climate deteriorates, our business, including our access to patient samples and the addressable market for diagnostic tests that we may successfully develop, as well as the financial condition of our suppliers and our third-party payors, could be adversely affected, resulting in a negative impact on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

Intrusions into our computer systems could result in compromise of confidential information and our ability to continue operations (in event of a cyber-attack).

Despite the implementation of security measures, our technology or systems that we interface with, including the Internet and related systems, may be vulnerable to physical break-ins, hackers, improper employee or contractor access, computer viruses, programming errors, or similar problems. Any of these might result in confidential medical, business, or payment information, including as may be disclosed as part of a credit card transaction, or other information of other persons or of us, including employees, being revealed to unauthorized persons.

We may have to comply with laws governing the use and disclosure of genetic testing information.

Many states have adopted laws governing genetic testing and the use and disclosure of genetic test results. These laws impose specific testing consent requirements, patient authorization requirements for the use and disclosure of test results and some impose limits on the retention and secondary use of patient samples. Many of these laws are vaguely written and some are overly broad. We must analyze and ensure compliance with the genetic testing laws in the jurisdictions from which we obtain samples and may be required to expend significant capital and other resources to ensure ongoing compliance. Our failure to comply could interfere with our ability to operate and/or lead to sanctions, fines, or other regulatory actions as well as civil claims.

We depend on our information technology and telecommunications systems, and any failure of these systems could harm our business.

We depend on information technology and telecommunications systems for significant aspects of our operations. In addition, our third-party billing and collections provider depends upon telecommunications and data systems provided by outside vendors and

38

Table of Contents

information we provide on a regular basis. These information technology and telecommunications systems support a variety of functions, including test processing, sample tracking, quality control, customer service and support, billing and reimbursement, R&D activities, and our general and administrative activities. Information technology and telecommunications systems are vulnerable to damage from a variety of sources, including telecommunications or network failures, malicious human acts, and natural disasters. Moreover, despite network security and back-up measures, some of our servers are potentially vulnerable to physical or electronic break-ins, computer viruses, and similar disruptive problems. Despite the precautionary measures we have taken to prevent unanticipated problems that could affect our information technology and telecommunications systems, failures or significant downtime of our information technology or telecommunications systems, or those used by our third-party service providers could prevent us from processing tests, providing test results to oncologists, pathologists, billing payors, processing reimbursement appeals, handling patient or physician inquiries, conducting R&D activities, and managing the administrative aspects of our business. Any disruption or loss of information technology or telecommunications systems on which critical aspects of our operations depend could have a material effect on our business, financial condition, results of operation and cash flows.

We rely on Federal Express Corporation, or FedEx, and United Parcel Service of America, Inc., or UPS, for the distribution of our Adhesive Skin Sample Collection Kits to customers and to transport specimens back to our laboratory facility and, if FedEx or UPS incurs any damage to their facilities or is unable to deliver our products as needed, it could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and business.

We rely on FedEx and UPS for the distribution of our Adhesive Skin Sample Collection Kits to customers, as well as to transport patient specimens back to our laboratory facility for processing. The FedEx or UPS facilities involved in such distribution may be harmed or rendered inoperable by natural or man-made disasters, including earthquakes, power outages, communications failure, or terrorism. Any material destruction to their facilities could adversely affect the ability of FedEx or UPS to meet the needs of our customers. In addition, a disruption or slowdown in the operations of FedEx or UPS, including as a result of damage to the facilities of FedEx or UPS or a strike by FedEx or UPS employees, could cause delays in our ability to fulfill customer orders and may cause orders to be cancelled, lost, or delivered late, our shipments to be returned, or receipt of shipments to be refused, any of which could adversely affect our business and our results of operations. If our shipping costs were to increase as a result of an increase by FedEx or UPS or as a result of obtaining a new third-party logistics company and if we are unable to pass on these higher costs to our customers, it could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and business, financial condition, results of operation and cash flows.

Regulatory Risks Related to Our Business

Changes in health care law and policy may have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations, and cash flows.

In March 2010, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Affordability Reconciliation Act, collectively called the ACA, became law. This law substantially changed the way health care is financed by both governmental and commercial payors, and continues to significantly impact our industry. Since its enactment, there have been judicial and Congressional challenges to certain aspects of the ACA. Both the current Congress and President Trump have expressed their intention to repeal or repeal and replace the ACA, and as a result, certain sections of the ACA have not been fully implemented or were effectively repealed. In December 2019, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a district court’s finding that the individual mandate in the Affordable Care Act is unconstitutional following removal of the penalty provision from the law. However, the Fifth Circuit reversed and remanded the case to the district court to determine if other reforms enacted as part of the Affordable Care Act but not specifically related to the individual mandate or health insurance could be severed from the rest of the Affordable Care Act so as not to have the law declared invalid in its entirety. It is unclear how this decision, subsequent appeals including potentially to the U.S. Supreme Court, and other efforts to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act will affect the implementation of that law and our business. The uncertainty around the future of the ACA, and in particular the impact to reimbursement levels and the number of insured individuals, may lead to delay in the purchasing decisions of our customers, which may in turn negatively impact our product sales. Further, if reimbursement levels are inadequate, our business and results of operations could be adversely affected.

Further, the ACA established the Physician Payments Sunshine Act, or the Sunshine Act, which imposes reporting and disclosure requirements for applicable device manufacturers of covered products and those entities under common ownership that provide assistance and support to applicable manufacturers, with regard to payments or other transfers of value made to certain practitioners (including physicians and teaching hospitals) and certain investment ownership interests held by physicians in the reporting entity. We are not subject to the Physician Payments Sunshine Act provisions at this time. However, if the FDA later determines that the Adhesive Skin Sample Collection Kit or any of our current or future products are subject to premarket clearance or approval process and such products are considered to be reimbursable by Medicare or Medicaid, we would be subject to the Physician Payments Sunshine Act and thus would be subject to its reporting requirements.

In addition to the ACA, there will continue to be proposals by legislators at both the federal and state levels, regulators and commercial payors to reduce costs while expanding individual health care benefits. Certain of these changes could impose additional

39

Table of Contents

limitations on the prices we will be able to charge for our tests or the amounts of reimbursement available for our tests from governmental or commercial payors. Any future changes to legal or regulatory requirements or new cost containment initiatives could have a materially adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operation, and cash flows.

Our business could be adversely impacted by our failure or the failure of physicians to comply with the ICD-10-CM Code Set.

Compliance with ICD-10-CM is required for all claims with dates of service on or after October 1, 2015. We believe we have fully implemented ICD-10-CM.  However, our failure to effectively implement and apply the new code set could adversely impact our business. In addition, if physicians fail to provide appropriate codes for desired tests, we may not be reimbursed for tests we perform.

Billing for our tests is complex and we must dedicate substantial time and resources to the billing process to be paid for our tests; long payment cycles of Medicare, Medicaid, and/or other third-party payors, or other payment delays, could hurt our cash flows and increase our need for working capital.

Billing for clinical laboratory testing services is complex, time-consuming, and expensive. Depending on the billing arrangement and applicable law, we will bill various payors, including Medicare, Medicaid, and commercial payors, all of which have different billing requirements. As required by law or contract, we routinely bill patients for co-payments, co-insurance, and deductible amounts owed. We may also face increased risks in our collection efforts, including potential write-offs of doubtful accounts, long collection cycles, and failure by third parties to properly process payment of claims in a timely manner that could adversely affect our business, results of operations, and financial condition. Several factors make the billing practice complex, including:

Additionally, our billing activities require us to implement compliance procedures and oversight, train and monitor our employees, challenge coverage and payment denials, assist patients in appealing claims, and undertake internal audits to evaluate compliance with applicable laws and regulations as well as internal compliance policies and procedures. Payors also conduct external audits to evaluate payments, which adds further complexity to the billing process.

Failure to comply with these billing requirements may result in non-payment, refunds, exclusion from government healthcare programs, and civil or criminal liabilities, any of which may have a material adverse effect on our revenues and earnings. These billing complexities and the related uncertainties in obtaining reimbursement could negatively affect our cash flow and our ability to achieve profitability.

Our business could be harmed by the loss, suspension, or other restriction on a license, certification, or accreditation, or by the imposition of a fine or penalties, under CLIA, its implementing regulations, or other state, federal, and foreign laws and regulations affecting licensure or certification, or by future changes in these laws or regulations.

The diagnostic testing industry is subject to extensive laws and regulations, many of which have not been interpreted by the courts. CLIA requires virtually all laboratories to be certified by the federal government and mandates compliance with various operational, personnel, facilities administration, quality, and proficiency testing requirements intended to ensure that testing services are accurate, reliable, and timely. Our clinical laboratory must be certified under CLIA in order for us to perform testing on human specimens. CLIA certification is also a prerequisite to be eligible to bill state and federal health care programs. Further, many commercial payors require CAP accreditation as a condition to contracting with clinical laboratories to cover their tests. In addition, some countries outside the United States require CAP accreditation as a condition to permitting clinical laboratories to test samples taken from their citizens.

We have a current certificate of accreditation from CMS to perform high-complexity testing, which is managed by California Laboratory Field Services, or CA LFS. To renew this certificate, we are subject to survey and inspection every two years.   We hold a certificate of accreditation because we are accredited by the College of American Pathologists, or CAP, which sets standards than are higher than the CLIA regulations. CAP is an independent, non-governmental organization of board-certified pathologists that accredits

40

Table of Contents

laboratories nationwide on a voluntary basis. Because CAP has deemed status with CA LFS, our biennial inspections will be performed by teams formed by CAP. Sanctions for failure to comply with CAP or CLIA requirements, including proficiency testing violations, may include suspension, revocation, or limitation of a laboratory’s CLIA certificate, which is necessary to conduct business, as well as the imposition of significant fines or criminal penalties. In addition, we are subject to regulation under state laws and regulations governing laboratory licensure. Two states, one of which is New York, have enacted state licensure laws that are more stringent than CLIA.

Failure to maintain CLIA certification, CAP accreditation, or required state licenses could have a material adverse effect on the sales of our tests and the results of our operations.  If we were to lose our CLIA certification, CAP accreditation or California laboratory license, whether as a result of a revocation, suspension, or limitation, we would no longer be able to offer our tests, which would limit our revenues and harm our business. If we were to lose our license in any other state where we are required to hold a license, we would not be able to test specimens from those states. In addition, state and foreign requirements for laboratory certification may be costly or difficult to meet and could affect our ability to receive specimens from certain states or foreign countries. Currently we are receiving samples from all 50 U.S. states and certain provinces in Canada. Each state maintains independent licensure, registration, or certification procedures with which we must maintain compliance in order to receive and test samples from that location. Maintaining compliance with the myriad of state and foreign requirements is time consuming and resource intensive and failure to maintain compliance could result in sanctions.

Any sanction imposed under CLIA, its implementing regulations, or state or foreign laws or regulations governing licensure, or our failure to renew a CLIA certificate, a state or foreign license, or accreditation, could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operation and cash flows. If the CLIA certificate of our laboratory is revoked, that could also impact our licensure or certification in the states or in foreign jurisdictions.

If the FDA were to begin requiring approval or clearance of our current tests and our planned future tests, or our proprietary specimen collection kit, we could incur substantial costs and time delays associated with meeting requirements for premarket clearance or approval.

The laws and regulations governing the marketing of diagnostic products are evolving, extremely complex and in many instances, there are no significant regulatory or judicial interpretations of these laws and regulations. Pursuant to its authority under the federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, or FDCA, the FDA has jurisdiction over medical devices, including in vitro diagnostics and, therefore, potentially our clinical laboratory tests. Among other things, pursuant to the FDCA and its implementing regulations, the FDA regulates the research, testing, manufacturing, safety, labeling, storage, recordkeeping, premarket clearance or approval, marketing and promotion, and sales and distribution of medical devices in the United States to ensure that medical products distributed domestically are safe and effective for their intended uses. Although the FDA has asserted that it has authority to regulate the development and use of LDTs, such as our and many other laboratories’ test as medical devices, it has generally exercised enforcement discretion and is not otherwise regulating most tests developed and performed within a single high complexity CLIA-certified laboratory. The FDA could, at any time, change its policy with regard to this matter or Congress could take action to amend the law to change the current regulatory framework for in vitro diagnostics and LDTs. For example, a discussion draft of the Verifying Accurate, Leading-edge IVCT Development (VALID) Act currently being circulated in Congress would codify into law the term “in vitro clinical test” in order to create a new medical product category separate from medical devices that would include products currently regulated as in vitro diagnostics as well as LDTs.

We believe that our tests, as utilized in our clinical laboratory, are and would be LDTs. As a result, we believe that pursuant to the FDA’s current policies and guidance, the FDA does not require that we obtain regulatory clearances or approvals for our LDTs. In addition, we believe the Adhesive Skin Sample Collection Kit we provide for collection and transport of skin samples from a health care provider to our clinical laboratory is considered a Class I medical device subject to the FDA’s general device controls but exempt from premarket review. However, the FDA could assert the specimen collection kit is a Class II device, which would subject it to premarket clearance or approval processes, which could be time-consuming and expensive. While we believe that we are currently in material compliance with applicable laws and regulations, we cannot assure you that the FDA, or other regulatory agencies, would agree with our determinations, and any determination by the government that we have violated the FDCA or any FDA regulations, or a public announcement that we are being investigated for possible violations of these laws, could adversely affect our business, prospects, results of operations, or financial condition.

Even though we commercialize our tests as LDTs, our tests may in the future become subject to more onerous regulation by the FDA. For example, the FDA may disagree with our assessment that our tests fall within the definition of an LDT and seek to regulate our tests as medical devices. The FDA has, for over the past decade, been introducing proposals to end enforcement discretion and to bring LDTs clearly under existing FDA regulatory frameworks and Congress has recently been working on legislation to create an LDT and in vitro diagnostic regulatory framework that would be separate and distinct from the existing medical device regulatory framework. On March 5, 2020, U.S. Representatives Diana DeGette (D-CO) and Dr. Larry Bucshon (R-IN) formally introduced the VALID Act in the House and an identical version of the bill was introduced in the U.S. Senate by Senators Michael Bennet (D-CO) and Richard Burr

41

Table of Contents

(R-NC). As anticipated from a discussion draft of the legislation released for stakeholder comment in December 2018, the VALID Act would codify into law the term “in vitro clinical test” (IVCT) to create a new medical product category separate from medical devices, and bring all such products within the scope of FDA’s oversight. It is unclear whether the VALID Act would be passed by Congress in its current form or signed into law by the President.

Absent any Congressional action, if the FDA begins to enforce its medical device requirements for LDTs, or if the FDA disagrees with our assessment that our tests are LDTs, our tests could for the first time be subject to a variety of regulatory requirements, including registration and listing, medical device reporting, and quality control, and we could be required to obtain premarket clearance or approval for our existing tests and any new tests we may develop, which may force us to cease marketing our tests until we obtain the required clearance or approval. The premarket review process for diagnostic products can be lengthy, expensive, time-consuming, and unpredictable. Further, obtaining premarket clearance or approval may involve, among other things, successfully completing clinical trials. Clinical trials require significant time and cash resources and are subject to a high degree of risk, including risks of experiencing delays, failing to complete the trial or obtaining unexpected or negative results. If we are required to obtain premarket clearance or approval and/or conduct premarket clinical trials, our development costs could significantly increase, our introduction of any new tests we may develop may be delayed, and sales of our existing tests could be interrupted or stopped. Any of these outcomes could reduce our revenue or increase our costs and materially adversely affect our business, prospects, results of operations, or financial condition. Moreover, any cleared or approved labeling claims may not be consistent with our current claims or adequate to support continued adoption of and reimbursement for our tests. For instance, if we are required by the FDA to label our tests as investigational, or if labeling claims the FDA allows us to make are limited, order levels may decline and reimbursement may be adversely affected. As a result, we could experience significantly increased development costs and a delay in generating additional revenue from our existing tests or from tests we may develop. Until the FDA finalizes its regulatory position regarding LDTs, or federal legislation is passed concerning regulation of LDTs, it is unknown how the FDA may regulate our tests in the future and what testing and data may be required to support any required clearance or approval as an medical device or an “in vitro clinical test” (as that category is being defined in the VALID Act, as introduced).

The requirement of premarket review could negatively affect our business until such review is completed and regulatory clearance or approval is obtained. The FDA could require that we stop selling our tests pending premarket clearance or approval. The regulatory approval process may involve, among other things, successfully completing additional clinical trials and making a premarket submission, such as a 510(k) notification, a premarket approval, or PMA, application or a de novo device classification request to the FDA. If the FDA requires any form of premarket review, our tests may not be cleared or approved on a timely basis, if at all. We may also decide voluntarily to pursue FDA premarket review and authorization of our tests if we determine that doing so would be appropriate.

Additionally, should future regulatory actions affect any of the reagents we obtain from suppliers and uses in conducting our tests, our business could be adversely affected in the form of increased costs of testing or delays, limits, or prohibitions on the purchase of reagents necessary to perform our testing. While we qualify all materials used in our products in accordance with the regulations and guidelines of CLIA, the FDA could promulgate regulations or guidance documents impacting our ability to purchase materials necessary for the performance of our tests. If any of the reagents we obtain from suppliers and use in our tests are affected by future regulatory actions, our business could be adversely affected, including by increasing the cost of testing or delaying, limiting, or prohibiting the purchase of reagents necessary to perform testing with our products.

Failure to comply with any applicable FDA requirements could trigger a range of enforcement actions by the FDA, including warning letters, civil monetary penalties, injunctions, criminal prosecution, recall or seizure, operating restrictions, partial suspension or total shutdown of operations and denial of or challenges to applications for clearance or approval, as well as significant adverse publicity.

If we were to be required by the FDA to conduct additional clinical studies or trials before continuing to offer tests that we have developed or may develop as LDTs, those studies or trials could lead to delays or failure to obtain necessary regulatory clearance or approval, which could cause significant delays in commercializing any future products and harm our ability to achieve profitability.

If the FDA decides to require that we obtain 510(k) clearance, premarket approvals pursuant to a PMA, or any other type of premarket submission in order for us to commercialize our current PLA, the Nevome test, or our planned future tests, we may be required to conduct additional  clinical testing before submitting a regulatory notification or other application for commercial marketing authorization. In addition, as part of our long-term strategy we may plan to seek FDA clearance or approval for certain gene expression tests in order to permit them to be offered by other clinical laboratories in addition to our own; however, we would need to conduct additional clinical validation activities on our tests before we  could submit an application for FDA approval or clearance. Clinical trials must be conducted in compliance with FDA regulations or the FDA may take certain enforcement actions or reject the data. We believe

42

Table of Contents

we would likely take two years or more to conduct the clinical studies and trials necessary to obtain approval from the FDA to commercially launch our current tests and our planned future tests outside of our clinical laboratory.

Even if clinical trials are completed as planned, we cannot be certain that their results would be able to support our test claims or that the FDA or foreign authorities will agree with our conclusions regarding the results of our clinical trials. Success in early clinical trials does not ensure that later clinical trials will be successful, and we cannot be sure that the later trials will replicate the results of prior clinical trials and studies. If we are required to conduct clinical trials to support a premarket submission to the FDA, whether using prospectively acquired samples or archival samples, delays in the commencement or completion of clinical testing could significantly increase our test development costs and delay commercialization. Many of the factors that may cause or lead to a delay in the commencement or completion of clinical trials may also ultimately lead to delay or denial of regulatory clearance or approval. The commencement of clinical trials may be delayed due to insufficient patient enrollment, which is a function of many factors, including the size of the patient population, the nature of the protocol, the proximity of patients to clinical sites and the eligibility criteria for the clinical trial. Moreover, the clinical trial process may fail to demonstrate that our current tests and our planned future tests are effective for the proposed indications for use, which could cause us to abandon a test candidate and may delay development of other tests.

We may find it necessary to engage contract research organizations to perform data collection and analysis and other aspects of our clinical trials, which would increase the cost and complexity of our trials. We may also depend on clinical investigators, medical institutions, and contract research organizations to perform the trials properly. If these parties do not successfully carry out their contractual duties or obligations or meet expected deadlines, or if the quality, completeness, or accuracy of the clinical data they obtain is compromised due to the failure to adhere to our clinical protocols or for other reasons, our clinical trials may have to be extended, delayed or terminated. Many of these factors would be beyond our control. We may not be able to enter into replacement arrangements without undue delays or considerable expenditures. If there are delays in testing or approvals as a result of the failure to perform by third parties, our R&D costs would increase, and we may not be able to obtain regulatory clearance or approval for our current tests and our planned future tests, if needed. In addition, we may not be able to establish or maintain relationships with these parties on favorable terms, if at all. Each of these outcomes would harm our ability to market our tests outside of the LDT context or to achieve profitability.

We are subject to numerous federal, local and foreign laws and regulations; complying with laws pertaining to our business is an expensive and time-consuming process, and any failure to comply could result in substantial penalties and a material adverse effect to our business and operations

Our operations are subject to extensive federal, state, local and foreign laws and regulations, all of which are subject to change. These laws and regulations currently include, among other things:

43

Table of Contents

In addition, in October 2018, EKRA was enacted as part of the Substance Use-Disorder Prevention that Promotes Opioid Recovery and Treatment for Patients and Communities Act, or SUPPORT Act. EKRA is an all-payor anti-kickback law that makes it a criminal offense to pay any remuneration to induce referrals to, or in exchange for, patients using the services of a recovery home, a substance use clinical treatment facility, or laboratory. Although it appears that EKRA was intended to reach patient brokering and similar arrangements to induce patronage of substance use recovery and treatment, the language in EKRA is broadly written. Further, certain of EKRA’s exceptions, such as the exception applicable to relationships with employees that effectively prohibits incentive compensation, are inconsistent with the federal anti-kickback statute and regulations, which permit payment of employee incentive compensation, a practice that is common in the industry. Significantly, EKRA permits the U.S. Department of Justice to issue regulations clarifying EKRA’s exceptions or adding additional exceptions, but such regulations have not yet been issued. Laboratory industry stakeholders are reportedly seeking clarification regarding EKRA’s scope and/or amendments to its language.

As a clinical laboratory, our business practices may face heightened scrutiny from government enforcement agencies such as the Department of Justice, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General, or OIG, and CMS. The OIG has issued fraud alerts in recent years that identify certain arrangements between clinical laboratories and referring physicians as implicating the Anti-Kickback Statute. The OIG has stated that it is particularly concerned about these types of arrangements because the choice of laboratory, as well as the decision to order laboratory tests, typically are made or strongly influenced by the physician, with little or no input from the patient. Moreover, the provision of payments or other items of value by a clinical laboratory to a referral source could be prohibited under the federal self-referral prohibition, commonly known as the Stark Law or the Physician Self-Referral Law, unless the arrangement meets all criteria of an applicable exception. The government has actively enforced these laws against clinical laboratories in recent years.

These laws and regulations are complex and are subject to interpretation by the courts and by government agencies. Our failure to comply could lead to significant civil or criminal penalties, exclusion from participation in state and federal health care programs, individual imprisonment, disgorgement of profits, contractual damages, reputational harm, diminished profits and future earnings, additional reporting or oversight obligations if we become subject to a corporate integrity agreement or other agreement to resolve allegations of non-compliance with the law, curtailment or restructuring of our operations, or prohibitions or restrictions on our laboratories’ ability to provide or receive payment for our services, any of which could adversely affect our ability to operate our business and pursue our strategy. We believe that we are in material compliance with all statutory and regulatory requirements, but there is a risk that one or more government agencies could take a contrary position, or that a private party could file suit under the qui tam provisions of the federal False Claims Act or a similar state law. Such occurrences, regardless of their outcome, could damage our reputation and adversely affect important business relationships with third parties, including managed care organizations, and other private third-party payors.

Numerous states have enacted laws prohibiting business corporations, such as us, from practicing medicine and other professions and from employing or engaging physicians and other professionals to practice medicine, generally referred to as the prohibition against the corporate practice of medicine and the professions, which could include physician laboratory directors. These laws are designed to prevent interference in the medical decision-making process by anyone who is not a licensed professional. For example, California’s Medical Board has indicated that determining the appropriate diagnostic tests for a particular condition and taking responsibility for the ultimate overall care of a patient, including providing treatment options available to the patient, would constitute the unlicensed practice of medicine if performed by an unlicensed person. Violation of these corporate practice of medicine laws may result in civil or criminal fines, as well as sanctions imposed against the business corporation and/or the professional through licensure proceedings and criminal penalties.

The growth of our business and our expansion outside of the United States may increase the potential of violating similar foreign laws or our internal policies and procedures. The risk of us being found in violation of these or other laws and regulations is further increased by the fact that many have not been fully interpreted by the regulatory authorities or the courts, and their provisions are open to a variety of interpretations. Any action brought against us for violation of these or other laws or regulations, even if we successfully defend against it, could cause us to incur significant legal expenses and divert our management’s attention from the operation of our business. Any of the foregoing consequences could seriously harm our business and our financial results.

44

Table of Contents

We must comply with complex and overlapping laws protecting the privacy and security of health information and personal data.

There are a number of state, federal and international laws protecting the privacy and security of health information and personal data.  Under the administrative simplification provisions of HIPAA, HHS has issued regulations which establish uniform standards governing the conduct of certain electronic health care transactions and protecting the privacy and security of PHI used or disclosed by health care providers and other covered entities.

The privacy regulations regulate the use and disclosure of PHI by health care providers engaging in certain electronic transactions or “standard transactions.” They also set forth certain rights that an individual has with respect to his or her PHI maintained by a covered health care provider, including the right to access or amend certain records containing PHI or to request restrictions on the use or disclosure of PHI. The HIPAA security regulations establish administrative, physical, and technical standards for maintaining the integrity and availability of PHI in electronic form. These standards apply to covered health care providers and also to “business associates” or third parties providing services involving the use or disclosure of PHI. The HIPAA privacy and security regulations establish a uniform federal “floor” and do not supersede state laws that are more stringent or provide individuals with greater rights with respect to the privacy or security of, and access to, their records containing PHI. As a result, we may be required to comply with both HIPAA privacy regulations and varying state privacy and security laws.

Moreover, HITECH, among other things, established certain health information security breach notification requirements. In the event of a breach of unsecured PHI, a covered entity must notify each individual whose PHI is breached, federal regulators and in some cases, must publicize the breach in local or national media. Breaches affecting 500 individuals or more are publicized by federal regulators who publicly identify the breaching entity, the circumstances of the breach and the number of individuals affected.

These laws contain significant fines and other penalties for wrongful use or disclosure of PHI. Given the complexity of HIPAA and HITECH and their overlap with state privacy and security laws, and the fact that these laws are rapidly evolving and are subject to changing and potentially conflicting interpretation, our ability to comply with the HIPAA, HITECH and state privacy requirements is uncertain and the costs of compliance are significant. Adding to the complexity is that our operations are evolving and the requirements of these laws will apply differently depending on such things as whether or not we bill electronically for our services, or provide services involving the use or disclosure of PHI and incur compliance obligations as a business associate. The costs of complying with any changes to the HIPAA, HITECH and state privacy restrictions may have a negative impact on our operations. Noncompliance could subject us to criminal penalties, civil sanctions and significant monetary penalties as well as reputational damage.

We also are required to collect and maintain personal information about our employees, and we collect information about customers as part of some of our marketing programs, as well as receive and transfer certain payment information, to accept payments from our customers, including credit card information.  Most states have adopted laws requiring notification of affected individuals and state regulators in the event of a breach of personal information, which is a broader class of information than the health information protected by HIPAA. Many state laws impose significant data security requirements, such as encryption or mandatory contractual terms to ensure ongoing protection of personal information. Activities outside of the United States implicate local and national data protection standards, impose additional compliance requirements, and generate additional risks of enforcement for non-compliance. The collection and use of such information may be subject to contractual obligations as well. If the security and information systems that we or our outsourced third-party providers use to store or process such information are compromised or if we, or such third parties, otherwise fail to comply with these laws, regulations, and contractual obligations, we could face litigation and the imposition of penalties that could adversely affect our financial performance.

We must comply with all applicable privacy and data security laws in order to operate our business and may be required to expend significant capital and other resources to ensure ongoing compliance, to protect against security breaches and hackers or to alleviate problems caused by such breaches. Breaches of health information and/or personal data may be extremely expensive to remediate, may prompt federal or state investigation, fines, civil and/or criminal sanctions and significant reputational damage.

Our services present the potential for embezzlement, identity theft or other similar illegal behavior by our employees, consultants, service providers or commercial partners.

Our operations involve the use and disclosure of personal and business information that could be used to impersonate third parties or otherwise gain access to their data or funds. If any of our employees, consultants, service providers or commercial partners takes, converts or misuses these funds or data, we could be liable for any resulting damages, which could harm our financial condition and damage our business reputation.

45

Table of Contents

Clinical research is heavily regulated and failure to comply with human subject protection regulations may disrupt our research program leading to significant expense, regulatory enforcement, private lawsuits, and reputational damage.

Clinical research is subject to federal, state, and, for studies conducted outside of the United States, international regulation. At the federal level, the Department of Health and Human Services imposes regulations for the protection of human subjects and requirements such as initial and ongoing institutional review board review, informed consent requirements, adverse event reporting and other protections to minimize the risk and maximize the benefit to research participants. Clinical studies done under an investigational device exemption for purposes of an anticipated FDA premarket submission are subject to an additional layer of human subject protection regulations. Many states also impose human subject protection laws that mirror or in some cases exceed federal requirements. HIPAA and other privacy laws also regulate the use and disclosure of PHI in connection with research activities. Research conducted overseas is subject to a variety of national protections such as mandatory ethics committee review, as well as laws regulating the use, disclosure and cross-border transfer of personal data. The costs of compliance with these laws may be significant and compliance with regulatory requirements may result in delay. Noncompliance may disrupt our research and result in data that is unacceptable to regulatory authorities, data lock, or other sanctions that may significantly disrupt our operations.

Violation of a state’s prohibition on the corporate practice of medicine could result in a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operation and cash flows.

A number of states, including California, do not allow business corporations, such as us, to employ physicians to provide professional services. This prohibition against the “corporate practice of medicine” is aimed at preventing corporations such as us from exercising control over the medical judgments or decisions of physicians. The state licensure statutes and regulations and agency and court decisions that enumerate the specific corporate practice rules vary considerably from state to state and are enforced by both the courts and regulatory authorities, each with broad discretion. If regulatory authorities or other parties in any jurisdiction successfully assert that we are engaged in the unauthorized corporate practice of medicine, we could be required to restructure our contractual and other arrangements. In addition, violation of these laws may result in sanctions imposed against us and/or the professional through licensure proceedings, and we could be subject to civil and criminal penalties that could result in exclusion from state and federal health care programs.

We could be adversely affected by alleged violations of the Federal Trade Commission Act or other truth-in-advertising and consumer protection laws.

Our advertising for laboratory services and tests is subject to federal truth-in-advertising laws enforced by the Federal Trade Commission, or FTC, as well as comparable state consumer protection laws. Under the Federal Trade Commission Act, the FTC is empowered, among other things, to (a) prevent unfair methods of competition and unfair or deceptive acts or practices in or affecting commerce; (b) seek monetary redress and other relief for conduct injurious to consumers; and (c) gather and compile information and conduct investigations relating to the organization, business, practices, and management of entities engaged in commerce. The FTC has very broad enforcement authority, and failure to abide by the substantive requirements of the FTC Act and other consumer protection laws can result in administrative or judicial penalties, including civil penalties, injunctions affecting the manner in which we would be able to market services or products in the future, or criminal prosecution. Our direct-to-consumer advertising and social media presence, as well as our physician-directed advertising, are subject to these federal and state truth-in-advertising laws. Any actual or perceived non-compliance with those laws could lead to an investigation by the FTC or a comparable state agency, or could lead to allegations of misleading advertising by private plaintiffs. Any such action against us would disrupt our business operations, cause damage to our reputation, and result in a material adverse effects on our business, financial condition, results of operation, and cash flows.

Medical product manufacturers’ use of social media platforms presents new risks.

We believe that our customer base and potential patient populations are active on social media and intend to engage through those platforms to elevate our national marketing presence. Social media practices in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries are evolving, which creates uncertainty and risk of noncompliance with regulations applicable to our business. For example, patients may use social media platforms to comment on the effectiveness of, or adverse experiences with, one of our products, which could result in reporting obligations or the need for us to conduct an investigation. In addition, there is a risk of inappropriate disclosure of sensitive information or negative or inaccurate posts or comments about us or our products on any social networking website. If any of these events were to occur or we otherwise fail to comply with any applicable regulations, we could incur liability, face restrictive regulatory actions or incur other harm to our business.

46

Table of Contents

Intellectual Property Risks Related to Our Business

Our collaborators may assert ownership or commercial rights to inventions we develop from our use of the biological materials which they provide to us, or otherwise arising from the collaboration.

We collaborate with several institutions, physicians, and researchers in scientific matters. Also, we rely on numerous third parties to provide us with adhesive patch samples and biological materials that we use to develop tests. If we cannot successfully negotiate sufficient ownership, licensing, and/or commercial rights to any inventions that result from our use of a third-party collaborator’s materials, or if disputes arise with respect to the intellectual property developed with the use of a collaborator’s samples, or data developed in a collaborator’s study, our ability to capitalize on the market potential of these inventions or developments may be limited or precluded altogether.

If we are unable to maintain intellectual property protection, our competitive position could be harmed.

Our ability to protect our discoveries and technologies affects our ability to compete and to achieve profitability. Currently, we rely on a combination of U.S. and foreign patents and patent applications, copyrights, trademarks and trademark applications, confidentiality or non-disclosure agreements, material transfer agreements, licenses, consulting agreements, work-for-hire agreements, and invention assignment agreements to protect our intellectual property rights. We also maintain certain company know-how, trade secrets, and technological innovations designed to provide us with a competitive advantage in the marketplace as trade secrets. Currently, we own five issued U.S. patents, six pending U.S. patent applications (three provisional and three non-provisional), several corresponding foreign counterpart patents and patent applications, and two PCT applications, relevant to our testing methodology and expression profiles. While we intend to pursue additional patent applications, it is possible that our pending patent applications and any future applications may not result in issued patents. Even if patents are issued, third parties may independently develop similar or competing technology that avoids our patents. Further, we cannot be certain that the steps we have taken will prevent the misappropriation of our trade secrets and other confidential information as well as the misuse of our patents and other intellectual property, particularly in foreign countries where we have not filed for patent protection.

From time-to-time the U.S. Supreme Court, other federal courts, the USPTO, may change the standards of patentability and any such changes could have a negative impact on our business. For instance, in 2008, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued a decision that methods or processes cannot be patented unless they are tied to a machine or involve a physical transformation. The U.S. Supreme Court later reversed that decision in Bilski v. Kappos, finding that the “machine-or-transformation” test is not the only test for determining patent eligibility. The Court, however, declined to specify how and when processes are patentable. In 2012, in the case Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Laboratories, Inc., the U.S. Supreme Court reversed the Federal Circuit’s application of Bilski and invalidated a patent focused on a diagnostic process because the patent claim embodied a law of nature.

In 2013, in Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, the Supreme Court unanimously ruled that, “[a] naturally occurring DNA segment is a product of nature and not patent eligible merely because it has been isolated,” thereby invalidating Myriad Genetics’ patents on the BRCA1 and BRCA2 breast cancer genes. However, the Supreme Court also held that manipulation of a gene to create something not found in nature, such as a strand of synthetically-produced complementary DNA, or cDNA, could still be eligible for patent protection. The Supreme Court noted that method patents, which concern technical procedures for carrying out a certain process, are not affected by the ruling.

More recently, the Federal Circuit has ruled on several patent cases—such as Univ. of Utah Research Found. v. Ambry Genetics Corp., 774 F.3d 755 (Fed. Cir. 2014), Ariosa Diagnostics, Inc. v. Sequenom, Inc., 788 F.3d 1371 (Fed. Cir. 2015), Genetic Tech. Ltd. v. Merial LLC, 818 F.3d 1369 (Fed. Cir. 2016), and Cleveland Clinic Found. v. True Health Diagnostics, 859 F.3d 1352 (Fed. Cir. 2017)—that some diagnostic method claims are patent ineligible. These decisions have narrowed the scope of patent protection available in certain circumstances or weakened the rights of patent owners in certain situations. Some aspects of our technology involve processes that may be subject to this evolving standard and we cannot guarantee that any of our pending process claims will be patentable as a result of such evolving standards. In addition, this combination of decisions has created uncertainty as to the value of certain issued patents, in particular patents in the molecular biology analysis and diagnostic space. Moreover, there is additional uncertainty around the evolving standard in light of the USPTO Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance issued in Jan. 2019.

It should also be noted that in 2010, the Secretary’s Advisory Committee on Genetics, Health and Society voted to approve a report entitled “Gene Patents and Licensing Practices and Their Impact on Patient Access to Genetic Tests.” That report defines “patent claims on genes” broadly to include claims to isolated nucleic acid molecules as well as methods of detecting particular sequences or mutations. The report also contains six recommendations, including the creation of an exemption from liability for infringement of patent claims on genes for anyone making, using, ordering, offering for sale, or selling a test developed under the patent for patient care purposes, or for anyone using the patent-protected genes in the pursuit of research. The report also recommended that HHS should explore, identify, and implement mechanisms that will encourage more voluntary adherence to current guidelines that promote nonexclusive in-licensing of diagnostic genetic and genomic technologies. It is unclear whether HHS will act upon these recommendations, or if the recommendations would result in a change in law or process that could negatively impact our patent portfolio or future R&D. If acted upon, implementation of such provisions could have a material negative impact on our business.

47

Table of Contents

We may face intellectual property infringement claims that could be time-consuming and costly to defend, and could result in the loss of significant rights, the implementation of an injunction, and the assessment of treble damages.

From time-to-time we may face intellectual property infringement or misappropriation claims from third parties. Some of these claims may lead to litigation. The outcome of any such litigation can never be guaranteed, and an adverse outcome could affect us negatively. For example, were a third party to succeed on an infringement claim against us, we may be required to pay substantial damages, including treble damages if such infringement were found to be willful. In addition, we could face an injunction barring us from conducting the allegedly infringing activity, including an order preventing us from offering our current tests and future planned tests in the marketplace. The outcome of the litigation could require us to enter into a license agreement which may not be pursuant to acceptable or commercially reasonable or practical terms or which may not be available at all.

It is also possible that an adverse finding of infringement against us may require us to dedicate substantial resources and time in developing non-infringing alternatives, which may or may not be possible. In the case of diagnostic tests, we would also need to include non-infringing technologies, which would require us to re-validate the test. Any such re-validation, in addition to being costly and time-consuming, may be unsuccessful. Finally, we may initiate claims to assert or defend our own intellectual property against third parties. Any intellectual property litigation, irrespective of whether we are the plaintiff or the defendant, and regardless of the outcome, is expensive and time-consuming, and could divert and distract our management’s attention from our business and negatively affect our operating results or financial condition.

Tax Risks Related to Our Business

Our ability to use our net operating losses to offset future taxable income may be subject to certain limitations.

In general, under Section 382 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, or the IRC, a corporation that undergoes an “ownership change” is subject to limitations on its ability to utilize its carryforwards to offset future taxable income. Our existing net operating loss carryforwards, or NOLs, may be subject to limitations arising from previous ownership changes, and if we underwent an ownership change in connection with or after the Business Combination, our ability to utilize NOLs could be further limited by Section 382 of the IRC. Future changes in our stock ownership, some of which are outside of our control, could result in an ownership change under Section 382 of the IRC. There is also a risk that due to regulatory changes, such as suspensions on the use of NOLs, or other unforeseen reasons, our existing and any future NOLs could expire or otherwise be unavailable to offset future income tax liabilities. We have not conducted a study to assess whether an ownership change has occurred or whether there have been multiple ownership changes since inception due to the significant complexity and cost associated with such a study.

The comprehensive tax reform bill passed in 2017 could adversely affect our business and financial condition.

On December 22, 2017, President Trump signed into law the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, or TCJA, that significantly reforms the IRC. The TCJA, among other things, contains significant changes to corporate taxation, including reduction of the corporate tax rate from a top marginal rate of 35% to a flat rate of 21%, limitation on the deductibility of interest expense to 30% of adjusted earnings (except for certain small businesses), limitation of the deduction for net operating losses generated after December 31, 2017 to 80% of current year taxable income and elimination of net operating loss carrybacks, one time taxation of offshore earnings at reduced rates regardless of whether they are repatriated, reduction or elimination of U.S. tax on foreign earnings (subject to certain important exceptions), immediate deductions for certain new investments instead of deductions for depreciation expense over time, and modifying or repealing many business deductions and credits. Many aspects of the TCJA are unclear and future guidance from the Internal Revenue Service and other tax authorities with respect to the TCJA may adversely affect our business and our financial condition. The impact of the TCJA on holders of our common stock is also uncertain and could be adverse. You are urged to consult with your legal and tax advisors with respect to such legislation and the potential tax consequences of investing in our common stock.

Risks Related to Our Securities

There is no assurance that we will continue satisfying the listing requirements of the Nasdaq Capital Market.

Our common stock is listed on the Nasdaq Capital Market. To maintain our listing, we are required to satisfy continued listing requirements. There can be no assurance we will continue satisfying such continued listing requirements, which include that the closing bid price of our common stock be at least $1 per share, that we have at least 300 round lot holders and at least 500,000 publicly held shares, that the market value of our publicly held securities be at least $1 million, and that we meet one of these standards: stockholders’ equity of at least $2.5 million; market value of listed securities of at least $35 million; or net income from continuing operations of $500,000 in the most recently completed fiscal year or in two of the three most recently completed fiscal years. The delisting of our common stock for whatever reason could, among other things, substantially impair our ability to raise additional capital; result in the loss of interest from institutional investors, the loss of confidence in our company by investors and employees, and in fewer financing,

48

Table of Contents

strategic and business development opportunities; and result in potential breaches of agreements under which we made representations or covenants relating to our compliance with applicable listing requirements. Claims related to any such breaches, with or without merit, could result in costly litigation, significant liabilities and diversion of our management’s time and attention and could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, business and results of operations. In addition, the delisting of our common stock for whatever reason may materially impair our stockholders’ ability to buy and sell shares of our common stock and could have an adverse effect on the market price of, and the efficiency of the trading market for, our common stock.

We are an emerging growth company, and a smaller reporting company, and the reduced disclosure requirements applicable to emerging growth companies and smaller reporting companies may make our securities less attractive to investors.

We are an emerging growth company, under the Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act and a smaller reporting company under SEC regulations. For so long as we remain an emerging growth company or smaller reporting company, we will be permitted to and intend to rely on exemptions from certain disclosure requirements applicable to other public companies that are not emerging growth companies or smaller reporting companies. These exemptions include:

We may choose to take advantage of some, but not all, of the available exemptions. Emerging growth companies may take advantage of an extended transition period for complying with new or revised accounting standards, allowing emerging growth companies to delay the adoption of certain accounting standards until those standards would otherwise apply to private companies.

We will continue to be an emerging growth company until the earliest to occur of (i) the last day of the fiscal year during which we had total annual gross revenues of at least $1.07 billion, (ii) the day we are deemed to be a large accelerated filer, which means the market value of our common stock that is held by non-affiliates exceeds $700 million, measured as of our most recently completed second fiscal quarter, (iii) the date on which we have issued more than $1.0 billion in non-convertible debt during the prior three-year period, and (iv) December 31, 2022. In addition, we are eligible to remain a smaller reporting company for so long as we have a public float (based on our common equity) of less than $250 million measured as of the last business day of our most recently completed second fiscal quarter or, a public float (based on our common equity) of less than $700 million as of this date and annual revenues of less than $100 million during the most recently completed fiscal year.

We cannot predict whether investors will find our securities less attractive if we rely on these exemptions. If some investors find our securities less attractive as a result, there may be a less active trading market for our securities and the price of our securities price may be more volatile.

Future issuances of equity securities may dilute the interests of our security holders and reduce the price of our securities.

Any future issuance of our equity securities could dilute the interests of our then existing security holders and could substantially decrease the trading price of our securities. We may issue equity or equity-linked securities for a number of reasons, including to finance our operations and business strategy, to adjust our ratio of debt to equity, to satisfy our obligations upon the exercise of then-outstanding options or other equity-linked securities, if any, or for other reasons.

49

Table of Contents

We may amend the terms of our publicly traded warrants currently trading on the Pink Market under the ticker symbol “DMTKW,” or the publicly traded warrants, in a manner that may be adverse to holders with the approval by the holders of a majority of the then outstanding publicly traded warrants. As a result, the exercise price of the publicly traded warrants could be increased, the exercise period could be shortened and the number of shares purchasable upon exercise of a publicly traded warrant could be decreased, all without your approval.

Our publicly traded warrants are subject to the Warrant Agreement. The Warrant Agreement provides that the terms of the publicly traded warrants may be amended without the consent of any holder to cure any ambiguity or correct any defective provision, but requires the approval by the holders of a majority of the then outstanding publicly traded warrants to make any change that adversely affects the interests of the registered holders. Accordingly, we may amend the terms of the publicly traded warrants in a manner adverse to a holder if holders of a majority of the then outstanding publicly traded warrants approve of such amendment. Although our ability to amend the terms of the publicly traded warrants with the consent of a majority of the then outstanding publicly traded warrants is unlimited, examples of such amendments could be amendments to, among other things, increase the exercise price of the publicly traded warrants, shorten the exercise period or decrease the number of shares of common stock purchasable upon exercise of the publicly traded warrants.

We may redeem your unexpired publicly traded warrants prior to their exercise at a time that is disadvantageous to you, thereby making your publicly traded warrants worthless.

We will have the ability to redeem our outstanding publicly traded warrants at any time after they become exercisable and prior to their expiration, at a price of $0.01 per warrant, provided that the last reported sales price of our common stock equals or exceeds $36.00 per share for any 20 trading days within a 30-trading day period ending on the third trading day prior to the date we give notice of redemption. If and when the publicly traded warrants become redeemable by us, we may exercise our redemption right even if we are unable to register or qualify the underlying securities for sale under all applicable state securities laws. Redemption of the outstanding publicly traded warrants could force you (i) to exercise your publicly traded warrants and pay the exercise price therefor at a time when it may be disadvantageous for you to do so, (ii) to sell your publicly traded warrants at the then-current market price when you might otherwise wish to hold your publicly traded warrants or (iii) to accept the nominal redemption price which, at the time the outstanding publicly traded warrants are called for redemption, is likely to be substantially less than the market value of your publicly traded warrants.

Because we have no current plans to pay cash dividends on our shares for the foreseeable future, you may not receive any return on investment unless you sell your shares for a price greater than that which you paid for it.

We may retain future earnings, if any, for future operations, expansion and debt repayment and have no current plans to pay any cash dividends for the foreseeable future. Any decision to declare and pay dividends as a public company in the future will be made at the discretion of our board of directors and will depend on, among other things, our results of operations, financial condition, cash requirements, contractual restrictions and other factors that our board of directors may deem relevant. In addition, our ability to pay dividends may be limited by covenants of any existing and future outstanding indebtedness we or our subsidiaries incur. As a result, you may not receive any return on an investment in our shares unless you sell your shares of the Company for a price greater than that which you paid for them.

If securities or industry analysts do not publish or cease publishing research or reports about us, our business, or our market, or if they change their recommendations regarding our securities adversely, the price and trading volume of our securities could decline.

The trading market for our securities will be influenced by the research and reports that industry or securities analysts may publish about us, our business, market or competitors. If no securities or industry analysts publish reports about us, our share price and trading volume would likely be negatively impacted. If any of the analysts who may cover us change their recommendation regarding our shares of common stock adversely, or provide more favorable relative recommendations about our competitors, the price of our shares of common stock would likely decline. If any analyst who may cover us were to cease coverage of us or fail to regularly publish reports on us, we could lose visibility in the financial markets, which in turn could cause our share price or trading volume to decline.

50

Table of Contents

Provisions of our charter documents or Delaware law could delay or prevent an acquisition of us, even if the acquisition would be beneficial to our stockholders, and could make it more difficult for you to change management.

Provisions in our Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation and our bylaws may discourage, delay or prevent a merger, acquisition or other change in control that our stockholders may consider favorable, including transactions in which our stockholders might otherwise receive a premium for their shares. In addition, these provisions may frustrate or prevent any attempt by our stockholders to replace or remove our current management by making it more difficult to replace or remove our board of directors. These provisions include:

In addition, Delaware law prohibits a publicly held Delaware corporation from engaging in a business combination with an interested stockholder, generally a person who, together with his, her or its affiliates, owns or within the last three years has owned 15% or more of the company’s voting stock, for a period of three years after the date of the transaction in which the person became an interested stockholder, unless the business combination is approved in a prescribed manner. Accordingly, Delaware law may discourage delay or prevent a change in control of the Company.

In addition, our Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation, to the fullest extent permitted by law, provides that the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware will be the exclusive forum for: any derivative action or proceeding brought on our behalf; any action asserting a breach of fiduciary duty; any action asserting a claim against us arising pursuant to the Delaware General Corporation Law, our Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation, or our bylaws; or any action asserting a claim against us that is governed by the internal affairs doctrine. This exclusive forum provision does not apply to suits brought to enforce a duty or liability created by the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or the Exchange Act. It could apply, however, to a suit that falls within one or more of the categories enumerated in the exclusive forum provision and asserts claims under the Securities Act, inasmuch as Section 22 of the Securities Act creates concurrent jurisdiction for federal and state courts over all suits brought to enforce any duty or liability created by the Securities Act or the rule and regulations thereunder. There is uncertainty as to whether a court would enforce such provision with respect to claims under the Securities Act, and our stockholders will not be deemed to have waived our compliance with the federal securities laws and the rules and regulations thereunder.

This choice of forum provision may limit a stockholder’s ability to bring a claim in a judicial forum that it finds favorable for disputes with us or any of our directors, officers, or other employees, which may discourage lawsuits with respect to such claims. Alternatively, if a court were to find the choice of forum provisions contained in our Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation to be inapplicable or unenforceable in an action, we may incur additional costs associated with resolving such action in other jurisdictions, which could harm our business, results of operations and financial condition.

Provisions in our charter and other provisions of Delaware law could limit the price that investors are willing to pay in the future for shares of our common stock.

51

Table of Contents

We expect the price of our common stock may be volatile and may fluctuate substantially.

The stock market in general and the market for life sciences companies in particular, have experienced extreme volatility that has often been unrelated to companies’ operating performance. The market price for our common stock may be influenced by many factors, including:

In the past, following periods of volatility in companies’ stock prices, securities class-action litigation has often been instituted against such companies. Such litigation, if instituted against us, could result in substantial costs and diversion of management’s attention and resources, which could materially and adversely affect our business and financial condition.

52

Table of Contents