UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
FORM 10-Q
| x | QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
For the quarterly period ended September 30, 2014
Or
| o | TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
Commission file number: 001-33852
VirnetX Holding Corporation
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
|
Delaware
|
77-0390628
|
|
|
(State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization)
|
(I.R.S. Employer Identification Number)
|
|
308 Dorla Court, Suite 206
|
||
|
Zephyr Cove, Nevada
|
89448
|
|
|
(Address of principal executive offices)
|
(Zip Code))
|
Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: (775) 548-1785
Former name, former address and former fiscal year, if changed since last report:
Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant: (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.
Yes x No o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files).
Yes x No o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check one):
|
Large accelerated filer x
|
Accelerated filer o
|
Non-accelerated filer o
|
Smaller reporting company o
|
|
(Do not check if a smaller reporting company)
|
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act).
Yes o No x
The number of shares outstanding of the Registrant’s Common Stock as of November 3, 2014, was 51,996,701.
|
Page
|
||
|
1
|
||
|
Item 1 —Financial Statements.
|
1
|
|
|
1
|
||
|
2
|
||
|
2
|
||
|
3
|
||
|
4
|
||
|
13
|
||
|
17
|
||
|
Item 4 —Controls and Procedures
|
18
|
|
|
19
|
||
|
Item 1 —Legal Proceedings
|
19
|
|
|
Item 1A —Risk Factors
|
21
|
|
|
Item 6 —Exhibit
|
28
|
|
|
29
|
||
| 30 | ||
(in thousands, except share amounts)
|
September 30,
2014
|
December 31,
2013
|
|||||||
|
(Unaudited)
|
||||||||
|
ASSETS
|
||||||||
|
Current assets:
|
||||||||
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
$
|
8,498
|
$
|
19,173
|
||||
|
Investments available for sale
|
15,939
|
19,815
|
||||||
|
Prepaid expenses - current
|
759
|
357
|
||||||
|
Total current assets
|
25,196
|
39,345
|
||||||
|
Prepaid expenses - non-current
|
3,240
|
—
|
||||||
|
Property and equipment, net
|
52
|
53
|
||||||
|
Total assets
|
$
|
28,488
|
$
|
39,398
|
||||
|
LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS' EQUITY
|
||||||||
|
Current liabilities:
|
||||||||
|
Accounts payable and accrued liabilities
|
$
|
2,429
|
$
|
1,748
|
||||
|
Income tax liability
|
395
|
395
|
||||||
|
Deferred revenue, current portion
|
1,375
|
667
|
||||||
|
Derivative liability
|
431
|
2,564
|
||||||
|
Total current liabilities
|
4,630
|
5,374
|
||||||
|
Deferred revenue, non-current portion
|
1,000
|
—
|
||||||
|
Commitments and contingencies
|
—
|
—
|
||||||
|
Stockholders' equity:
|
||||||||
|
Preferred stock, par value $0.0001 per share
|
||||||||
|
Authorized: 10,000,000 shares at September 30, 2014, and December 31, 2013, Issued and outstanding: 0 shares at September 30, 2014 and December 31, 2013
|
—
|
—
|
||||||
|
Common stock, par value $0.0001 per share
|
||||||||
|
Authorized: 100,000,000 shares at September 30, 2014 and December 31, 2013, Issued and outstanding: 51,573,476 shares at September 30, 2014, and 51,236,141 shares at December 31, 2013
|
5
|
5
|
||||||
|
Additional paid in capital
|
130,625
|
124,589
|
||||||
|
Accumulated deficit
|
(107,760
|
)
|
(90,533
|
)
|
||||
|
Accumulated other comprehensive loss
|
(12
|
)
|
(37
|
)
|
||||
|
Total stockholders' equity
|
22,858
|
34,024
|
||||||
|
Total liabilities and stockholders' equity
|
$
|
28,488
|
$
|
39,398
|
||||
See accompanying notes to condensed consolidated financial statements.
(in thousands, except per share amounts)
|
Three Months Ended
|
Nine Months Ended
|
|||||||||||||||
|
September 30,
2014
|
September 30,
2013
|
September 30,
2014
|
September 30,
2013
|
|||||||||||||
|
Revenue
|
$
|
292
|
$
|
1,612
|
$
|
809
|
$
|
1,911
|
||||||||
|
Operating expense:
|
||||||||||||||||
|
Research and development
|
374
|
316
|
1,066
|
1,002
|
||||||||||||
|
Selling, general and administrative expenses
|
6,168
|
6,429
|
19,119
|
22,150
|
||||||||||||
|
Total operating expense
|
6,542
|
6,745
|
20,185
|
23,152
|
||||||||||||
|
Loss from operations
|
(6,250
|
)
|
(5,133
|
)
|
(19,376
|
)
|
(21,241
|
)
|
||||||||
|
Gain (loss) on change in value of derivative liability
|
1,817
|
(48
|
)
|
2,126
|
1,438
|
|||||||||||
|
Interest and other income (expense), net
|
(35
|
)
|
47
|
25
|
105
|
|||||||||||
|
Loss before taxes
|
(4,468
|
)
|
(5,134
|
)
|
(17,225
|
)
|
(19,698
|
)
|
||||||||
|
Income tax expense
|
—
|
—
|
(2
|
)
|
(356
|
)
|
||||||||||
|
Net loss
|
$
|
(4,468
|
)
|
$
|
(5,134
|
)
|
$
|
(17,227
|
)
|
$
|
(20,054
|
)
|
||||
|
Basic and diluted loss per share
|
$
|
(0.09
|
)
|
$
|
(0.10
|
)
|
$
|
(0.33
|
)
|
$
|
(0.39
|
)
|
||||
|
Weighted average shares outstanding basic and diluted
|
51,572
|
51,203
|
51,454
|
51,178
|
||||||||||||
VIRNETX HOLDING CORPORATION
(in thousands)
|
Three Months Ended
|
Nine Months Ended
|
|||||||||||||||
|
September 30,
2014
|
September 30,
2013
|
September 30,
2014
|
September 30,
2013
|
|||||||||||||
|
Net loss
|
$
|
(4,468
|
)
|
$
|
(5,134
|
)
|
$
|
(17,227
|
)
|
$
|
(20,054
|
)
|
||||
|
Other comprehensive loss, net of tax:
|
||||||||||||||||
|
Change in equity adjustment from foreign currency translation, net of tax
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
(12
|
)
|
|||||||||||
|
Change in unrealized gain (loss) on investments, net of tax
|
45
|
(31
|
)
|
25
|
(35
|
)
|
||||||||||
|
45
|
(31
|
)
|
25
|
(47
|
)
|
|||||||||||
|
Comprehensive loss
|
$
|
(4,423
|
)
|
$
|
(5,165
|
)
|
$
|
(17,202
|
)
|
$
|
(20,101
|
)
|
||||
See accompanying notes to condensed consolidated financial statements.
VIRNETX HOLDING CORPORATION
(in thousands)
|
Nine Months
Ended
September 30,
2014
|
Nine Months
Ended
September 30,
2013
|
|||||||
|
Cash flows from operating activities:
|
||||||||
|
Net loss
|
$
|
(17,227
|
)
|
$
|
(20,054
|
)
|
||
|
Adjustments to reconcile net loss to net cash used in operating activities:
|
||||||||
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
18
|
30
|
||||||
|
Stock-based compensation
|
5,952
|
5,454
|
||||||
|
Change in value of derivative liability
|
(2,126
|
)
|
(1,438
|
)
|
||||
|
Changes in assets and liabilities:
|
||||||||
|
Deferred revenues
|
1,708
|
916
|
||||||
|
Prepaid taxes
|
—
|
14,963
|
||||||
|
Prepaid expenses and other current assets
|
(402
|
)
|
(369
|
)
|
||||
|
Prepaid expenses non-current
|
(3,240
|
)
|
—
|
|||||
|
Accounts payable and accrued liabilities
|
681
|
(1,361
|
)
|
|||||
|
Net cash used in operating activities
|
(14,636
|
)
|
(1,859
|
)
|
||||
|
Cash flows from investing activities:
|
||||||||
|
Purchase of property and equipment
|
(17
|
)
|
(7
|
)
|
||||
|
Purchase of investments
|
(11,928
|
)
|
(69,120
|
)
|
||||
|
Proceeds from sale or maturity of investments
|
15,829
|
72,244
|
||||||
|
Net cash provided by investing activities
|
3,884
|
3,117
|
||||||
|
Cash flows from financing activities:
|
||||||||
|
Proceeds from exercise of options
|
68
|
29
|
||||||
|
Proceeds from exercise of warrants
|
9
|
—
|
||||||
|
Net cash provided by financing activities
|
77
|
29
|
||||||
|
Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents
|
(10,675
|
)
|
1,287
|
|||||
|
Cash and cash equivalents, beginning of period
|
19,173
|
19,661
|
||||||
|
Cash and cash equivalents, end of period
|
$
|
8,498
|
$
|
20,948
|
||||
See accompanying notes to condensed consolidated financial statements.
(in thousands, except share and per share amounts)
(Unaudited)
Note 1 — Business Description and Basis of Presentation
We develop software and technology solutions for securing real-time communications over the Internet. Our patented GABRIEL Connection Technology™ combines industry standard encryption protocols with our patented techniques for automated domain name system, or DNS, lookup mechanisms, and enables users to create a secure communication link using secure domain names over wired or wireless (4G/LTE) networks. We are currently beta testing our GABRIEL Connection Technology™ as part of our Secure Domain Name Initiative, or (SDNI), on various platforms including PCs, smart phones and tablets. We also intend to establish the exclusive secure domain name registry in the United States and other key markets around the world.
Our portfolio of intellectual property is the foundation of our business model. We currently own approximately 36 U.S. and 66 foreign patents with approximately 75 pending patent applications worldwide. Our patent portfolio is primarily focused on securing real-time communications over the Internet, as well as related services such as the establishment and maintenance of a secure domain name registry. Our patented methods also have additional applications in the key areas of device operating systems and network security for Cloud services, Mobile-to-Mobile (M2M) communications in areas of Smart City, Connected Car and Connected Home. The subject matter of all our U.S. and foreign patents relates generally to securing communication over the internet. Given the subject matter and the relatedness of our various patents and pending applications, we generally disclose them as a collection rather than listing them separately. Our issued U.S. and foreign patents expire at various times during the period from 2019 to 2024. Some of our issued patents and pending patent applications were acquired by our principal operating subsidiary, VirnetX, Inc., from Science Applications International Corporation (now Leidos, Inc.) in 2006 and we are required to make payments to Leidos, Inc. based on cash or certain other values generated from those patents. The amount of such payments depends upon the type of value generated, and certain categories are subject to maximums and other limitations.
We have submitted a declaration with the 3rd Generation Partnership Project, or 3GPP, identifying a group of our patents and patent applications that we believe are or may become essential to certain developing specifications in the 3GPP LTE, SAE project. We have agreed to make available a non-exclusive patent license under fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory terms and conditions, with compensation, or FRAND, to 3GPP members desiring to implement the technical specifications identified by us. We believe that we are positioned to license our essential security patents to 3GPP members as they move into 4G.
We believe that the market opportunity for our software and technology solutions is large and expanding as secure domain names are now an integral part of securing the next generation 4G/LTE Advanced wireless networks and M2M communications in areas including Smart City, Connected Car and Connected Home. We also believe that all 4G/LTE Advanced mobile devices will require unique secure domain names and become part of a secure domain name registry.
We intend to continue to license our patent portfolio, technology and software, including our secure domain name registry service, to domain infrastructure providers, communication service providers as well as to system integrators. We intend to seek further license of our technology, including our GABRIEL Connection Technology™ to enterprise customers, developers and original equipment manufacturers, or OEMs, of chips, servers, smart phones, tablets, e-Readers, laptops, net books and other devices, within the IP-telephony, mobility, fixed-mobile convergence and unified communications markets including 4G/LTE. We have published our royalty rates and guidelines on our website. All forward moving licenses have adhered to these guidelines and have met or exceeded these rates and we will continue to use these rates and guidelines in all future license negotiations.
Our software and technology solutions provide the security platform required by next-generation Internet-based applications such as instant messaging, or IM, voice over Internet protocol, or VoIP, mobile services, streaming video, file transfer, remote desktop and M2M communications in areas including Smart City, Connected Car and Connected Home. Our technology generates secure connections on a “zero-click” or “single-click” basis, significantly simplifying the deployment of secure real-time communication solutions by eliminating the need for end-users to enter any encryption information.
Our employees include the core development team behind our patent portfolio, technology and software. This team has worked together for over ten years and is the same team that invented and developed this technology while working at Leidos. Leidos is a FORTUNE 500® scientific, engineering and technology applications company that uses its deep domain knowledge to solve problems of vital importance to the nation and the world, in national security, energy and the environment, critical infrastructure and health. The team has continued its research and development work started at Leidos and expanded the set of patents we acquired in 2006 from Leidos into a larger portfolio which now serves as the foundation of our licensing business and planned service offerings and is expected to generate the majority of our future revenue in license fees and royalties. We intend to continue our research and development efforts to further strengthen and expand our patent portfolio.
We intend to continue using an outsourced and leveraged model to maintain efficiency and manage costs as we grow our licensing business by, for example, offering incentives to early licensing targets or asserting our rights for use of our patents. We also intend to expand our design pilot in participation with leading 4G/LTE companies (domain infrastructure providers, chipset manufacturers, service providers, and others) and build our secure domain name registry.
Note 2 – Summary of Significant Accounting Policies
Unaudited Interim Financial Information
The accompanying unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements have been prepared in accordance with the SEC’s requirements for Form 10-Q and, in the opinion of management, contain all adjustments, of a normal and recurring nature, which are necessary for a fair statement of (i) the condensed consolidated statements of operations for the three and nine month periods ended September 30, 2014 and 2013; (ii) the condensed consolidated statements of comprehensive loss for the three and nine month periods ended September 30, 2014 and 2013; (iii) the condensed consolidated balance sheets at September 30, 2014 and December 31, 2013; and (iv) the condensed consolidated statements of cash flows for the nine month periods ended September 30, 2014 and 2013. However, the accompanying unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements do not include all information and notes required by accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“U.S. GAAP”). The condensed consolidated balance sheet, included in this report, as of December 31, 2013 was derived from our 2013 audited financial statements, but does not include all disclosures required by U.S. GAAP.
Basis of Consolidation
The consolidated financial statements include the accounts of VirnetX Holding Corporation and our wholly-owned subsidiaries. All intercompany balances and transactions have been eliminated.
Use of Estimates
The preparation of consolidated financial statements in conformity with U.S. GAAP requires us to make estimates and assumptions that affect the amounts reported and disclosed in the financial statements and the accompanying notes. Actual results could differ materially from these estimates. On an ongoing basis, we evaluate our estimates, including those related to the fair values of financial instruments, fair values of stock-based awards, income taxes, and derivative liabilities, among others. We base our estimates on historical experience and on various other assumptions that are believed to be reasonable, the results of which form the basis for making judgments about the carrying values of assets and liabilities.
Revenue Recognition
We derive our revenue from patent licensing. The timing and amount of revenue recognized from each licensee depends upon a variety of factors, including the specific terms of each agreement and the nature of the deliverables and obligations. Such agreements may be complex and include multiple elements. These agreements may include, without limitation, elements related to the settlement of past patent infringement liabilities, up-front and non-refundable license fees for the use of patents, patent licensing royalties on covered products sold by licensees, and the compensation structure and ownership of intellectual property rights associated with contractual technology development arrangements. Licensing agreements are accounted for under the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) revenue recognition guidance, "Revenue Arrangements with Multiple Deliverables." This guidance requires consideration to be allocated to each element of an agreement that has stand-alone value using the relative fair value method. In other circumstances, such as those agreements involving consideration for past and expected future patent royalty obligations, after consideration of the particular facts and circumstances, the appropriate recording of revenue between periods may require the use of judgment. In all cases, revenue is only recognized after all of the following criteria are met: (1) written agreements have been executed; (2) delivery of technology or intellectual property rights has occurred or services have been rendered; (3) fees are fixed or determinable; and (4) collectability of fees is reasonably assured.
Patent License Agreements: Upon signing a patent license agreement, including licenses entered into upon settlement of litigation, we provide the licensee permission to use our patented technology in specific applications. We account for patent license agreements in accordance with the guidance for revenue recognition for arrangements with multiple deliverables, with amounts allocated to each element based on their fair values. We have elected to utilize the leased-based model for revenue recognition with revenue being recognized over the expected period of benefit to the licensee. Under our patent license agreements, we do or expect to typically receive one or a combination of the following forms of payment as consideration for permitting our licensees to use our patented inventions in specific applications and products:
| · | Consideration for Past Sales: Consideration related to a licensee’s product sales from prior periods may result from a negotiated agreement with a licensee that utilized our patented technology prior to signing a patent license agreement with us or from the resolution of a litigation, disagreement or arbitration with a licensee over the specific terms of an existing license agreement. We may also receive royalty for past sales in connection with the settlement of patent litigation where there was no prior patent license agreement. These amounts are negotiated, typically based upon application of a royalty rate to historical sales prior to the execution of the license agreement. In each of these cases, since delivery has occurred, we record the consideration as revenue when we have obtained a signed agreement, identified a fixed or determinable price, and determined that collectability is reasonably assured. |
| · | Current Royalty Payments: Ongoing royalty payments cover a licensee’s obligations to us related to its sales of covered products in the current contractual reporting period. Licensees that owe these current royalty payments are obligated to provide us with quarterly or semi-annual royalty reports that summarize their sales of covered products and their related royalty obligations to us. We expect to receive these royalty reports subsequent to the period in which our licensees’ underlying sales occurred. As a result, it is impractical for us to recognize revenue in the period in which the underlying sales occur, and, in most cases, we will recognize revenue in the period in which the royalty report is received and other revenue recognition criteria are met due to the fact that without royalty reports from our licensees, our visibility into our licensees’ sales is limited. |
| · | Non-Refundable Up-Front Fees and Minimum Fee Contracts: For licenses that provide for non-refundable up-front or fixed minimum fees over their term, for which we have no future obligations or performance requirements, revenue is generally recognized over the license term. For licenses that provide for fees that are not fixed or determinable, including licenses that provide for extended payment terms and/or payment of a significant portion of the fee after expiration of the license or more than 12 months after delivery, the fees are generally presumed not to be fixed or determinable, and revenue is deferred and recognized as earned, but not in advance of collection. |
| · | Non-Royalty Elements: Elements that are not related to royalty revenue in nature, such as settlement fees, expense reimbursement, and damages, if any, are recorded as gain from settlement which is reflected as a separate line item within the operating expenses section in the consolidated statements of operations. |
Deferred revenue
In August 2013 we began receiving annual payments on a contract with a total value over 5 years of $10,000. From the inception of that license to September 30, 2014, we received a total of $5,000 ("August 2013 Contract Settlement"), all of which is non-refundable. We recognized $292 and $792 of revenue related to these payments in the three and nine-month periods ended September 30, 2014, respectively.
During the three month period ended September 30, 2013, we recognized $1,500 of revenue for historical royalties under the August 2013 Contract Settlement, and $112 of revenue for royalties earned subsequent to the settlement and execution of this license agreement and other licenses. Revenues for historical royalties were estimated based on estimated past and future usage of our IP on our customer's products. No amounts were allocable to settlement fees, expense reimbursement, damages or any other amounts other than historical and future sales because such amounts were not requested or received.
For the nine months ended September 30, 2013, we recognized royalty revenue of $1,911. In addition to revenue recognized under the August 2013 Contract Settlement described above, we recognized royalty revenue as part of license agreements entered into with customers during the patent infringement actions (see Note 7 - Litigation). These revenues relate to both payment for use of our patented technology prior to the signing of a license agreements and royalty payments after the execution of the license agreement; no amounts were allocable to settlement fees, expense reimbursement, damages or any other amounts other than historical and future sales because such amounts were not requested or received.
During 2014, activity under the August 2013 Contract Settlement was as follows:
|
Deferred Revenue, December 31, 2013
|
$
|
667
|
||
|
Payment received
|
2,500
|
|||
|
Less: Amount amortized as revenue
|
(792
|
)
|
||
|
Deferred Revenue, September 30, 2014
|
$
|
2,375
|
Earnings Per Share
Basic earnings per share are computed by dividing earnings available to common stockholders by the weighted average number of outstanding common shares during the period. Diluted earnings per share are computed by dividing net income by the weighted average number of shares outstanding during the period increased to include the number of additional shares of common stock that would have been outstanding if the potentially dilutive securities had been issued.
Concentration of Credit Risk and Other Risks and Uncertainties
Our cash and cash equivalents are primarily maintained at two major financial institutions in the United States. A portion of those balances are insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. During the nine months ended September 30, 2014 we had funds which were uninsured. We do not believe that we are subject to any unusual financial risk beyond the normal risk associated with commercial banking relationships with major financial institutions. We have not experienced any losses on our deposits of cash and cash equivalents.
Derivative Instruments
Our Series I Warrants are required to be accounted for as derivative liabilities and carried at fair value on our Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets as a result of an anti-dilution provision which precludes them from being considered indexed to our stock. The warrant liabilities are marked-to-market each period and the change in the fair value is recorded as gain or loss on derivative liability in the accompanying Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations.
Impairment of Long-Lived Assets
On an annual basis we identify and record impairment losses on long-lived assets when events and changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of an asset might not be recoverable. Recoverability is measured by comparison of the anticipated future net undiscounted cash flows to the related assets’ carrying value. If such assets are considered to be impaired, the impairment to be recognized is measured by the amount by which the carrying amount of the assets exceeds the projected discounted future net cash flows arising from the asset.
Fair Value of Financial Instruments
Fair value is the price that would result from an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. A fair value hierarchy prioritizes the inputs used to measure fair value. The hierarchy gives the highest priority to unadjusted quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities (Level 1 measurement) and the lowest priority to unobservable inputs (Level 3 measurement). Level 2 measurements utilize either directly or indirectly observable inputs in markets other than quoted prices in active markets.
Our financial instruments are stated at amounts that equal, or approximate, fair value. When we approximate fair value, we utilize market data or assumptions that we believe market participants would use in pricing the financial instrument, including assumptions about risk and inputs to the valuation technique. We use valuation techniques, primarily the income and market approach that maximize the use of observable inputs and minimize the use of unobservable inputs for recurring fair value measurements.
Mutual Funds: Valued at the quoted net asset value (NAV) of shares held.
Corporate, Municipal and U.S. Agency Securities: Fair value measured at the closing price reported on the active market on which the individual securities are traded.
Series I Warrants: Fair value measured by using a binomial valuation model. The assumptions used to measure fair value of our outstanding Series I Warrants carried as derivative liabilities on our Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet for September 30, 2014, included a warrant exercise price of $3.59 per share, a common share price of $6.00, discount rate of 1.78%, and a volatility of 90.28%. The assumptions used for December 31, 2013, were a warrant exercise price of $3.59 per share, a common share price of $19.41, a discount rate of 1.75%, and a volatility of 91.55%. The expiration date of the warrants is March 2015.
The following tables show the adjusted cost, gross unrealized gains, gross unrealized losses and fair value of our securities by significant investment category as of September 30, 2014 and December 31, 2013.
|
September 30, 2014
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Adjusted
Cost |
Unrealized
Gains |
Unrealized
Losses |
Fair
Value |
Cash
and Cash |
Investments
Available |
|||||||||||||||||||
|
Cash
|
$
|
4,119
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
4,119
|
$
|
4,119
|
$
|
-
|
||||||||||||
|
Level 1:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Mutual funds
|
112
|
-
|
-
|
112
|
112
|
-
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
Corporate securities
|
8,607
|
2
|
(3
|
)
|
8,606
|
-
|
8,606
|
|||||||||||||||||
|
Municipal securities
|
691
|
-
|
-
|
691
|
-
|
691
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
U.S agency securities
|
10,908
|
2
|
(1
|
)
|
10,909
|
4,267
|
6,642
|
|||||||||||||||||
|
20,318
|
4
|
(4
|
)
|
20,318
|
4,379
|
15,939
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
Total
|
$
|
24,437
|
$
|
4
|
$
|
(4
|
)
|
$
|
24,437
|
$
|
8,498
|
$
|
15,939
|
|||||||||||
|
December 31, 2013
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Adjusted
Cost |
Unrealized
Gains |
Unrealized
Losses |
Fair
Value |
Cash
and Cash |
Investments
Available |
|||||||||||||||||||
|
Cash
|
$
|
11,699
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
11,699
|
$
|
11,699
|
$
|
-
|
||||||||||||
|
Level 1:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Mutual funds
|
73
|
-
|
-
|
73
|
73
|
-
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
Corporate securities
|
10,782
|
-
|
-
|
10,782
|
2,325
|
8,457
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
Municipal securities
|
2,173
|
-
|
-
|
2,173
|
665
|
1,508
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
U.S agency securities
|
14,287
|
-
|
(25
|
)
|
14,262
|
4,411
|
9,851
|
|||||||||||||||||
|
27,315
|
-
|
(25
|
)
|
27,289
|
7,474
|
19,815
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
Total
|
$
|
39,014
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
(25
|
)
|
$
|
38,988
|
$
|
19,173
|
$
|
19,815
|
|||||||||||
The following tables set forth by level within the fair value hierarchy, our liabilities stated at fair value as of September 30, 2014 and December 31, 2013.
|
September 30, 2014
|
||||||||||||||||
|
Quoted
Prices in
Active
Markets for
Identical
Assets
|
Significant
Other
Observable
Inputs
|
Significant
Unobservable
Inputs
|
||||||||||||||
| (Level 1) | (Level 2) | (Level 3) |
Total
|
|||||||||||||
|
Series l Warrants
|
$
|
—
|
$
|
—
|
$
|
431
|
431
|
|||||||||
|
Total
|
$
|
—
|
$
|
—
|
$
|
431
|
431
|
|||||||||
|
December 31, 2013
|
||||||||||||||||
|
Quoted
Prices in
Active
Markets for
Identical
Assets
|
Significant
Other
Observable
Inputs
|
Significant
Unobservable
Inputs
|
||||||||||||||
| (Level 1) | (Level 2) | (Level 3) |
Total
|
|||||||||||||
|
Series l Warrants
|
$
|
—
|
$
|
—
|
$
|
2,564
|
$
|
2,564
|
||||||||
|
Total
|
$
|
—
|
$
|
—
|
$
|
2,564
|
$
|
2,564
|
||||||||
The following table sets forth a summary of changes in the fair value of our Level 3 liability stated at fair value for the nine months ended September 30, 2014 and 2013.
|
Nine Months Ended
September 30, 2014
|
Nine Months Ended
September 30, 2013
|
||||||||
|
Fair Value
Measurements
Using
Significant
Unobservable
Inputs (Level 3)
|
Fair Value
Measurements
Using
Significant
Unobservable
Inputs (Level 3)
|
||||||||
|
Balance December 31, 2013
|
$
|
2,564
|
Balance December 31, 2012
|
$
|
4,172
|
||||
|
Gain on derivative liability included in net loss
|
(2,126
|
)
|
Gain on derivative liability included in net loss
|
(1,438
|
)
|
||||
|
Settlements
|
(7
|
)
|
Settlements
|
—
|
|||||
|
Balance September 30, 2014
|
$
|
431
|
Balance September 30, 2013
|
$
|
2,734
|
||||
New Accounting Pronouncements
In August 2014, the Financial Accounting Standards Board ("FASB") issued Accounting Standards Update ("ASU") No. 2014-15, “Presentation of Financial Statements – Going Concern, Subtopic 205-40, “Disclosure of Uncertainties about an Entity’s Ability to Continue as a Going Concern.” The amendments in this Update apply to all entities and require management to assess an entity’s ability to continue as a going concern by incorporating and expanding upon certain principles that are currently in U.S. auditing standards. Specifically, the amendments (1) provide a definition of the term substantial doubt, (2) require an evaluation every reporting period including interim periods, (3) provide principles for considering the mitigating effect of management’s plans, (4) require certain disclosures when substantial doubt is alleviated as a result of consideration of management’s plans, (5) require an express statement and other disclosures when substantial doubt is not alleviated, and (6) require an assessment for a period of one year after the date that the financial statements are issued (or available to be issued). The amendments in this Update are effective for the annual period ending after December 15, 2016, and for annual periods and interim periods thereafter. Early application is permitted. We are currently evaluating the impact this guidance will have on our financial position and results of operations.
In June 2014, the FASB issued (ASU) No. 2014-12, "Compensation - Stock Compensation (Topic 718)," which makes amendments to the codification topic 718, "Accounting for Share-Based Payments," when the terms of an award provide that a performance target could be achieved after the requisite service period. The new guidance becomes effective for annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2015, early adoption is permitted. We are currently evaluating the impact this guidance will have on our financial position and results of operations.
In May 2014, the FASB issued (ASU) No. 2014-09 "Revenue from Contracts with Customers" (Topic 606). Topic 606 supersedes the revenue recognition requirements in Topic 605, Revenue Recognition, including most industry-specific revenue recognition guidance throughout the Industry Topics of the Codification. In addition, the amendments create a new Subtopic 340-40, Other Assets and Deferred Costs—Contracts with Customers. In summary, the core principle of Topic 606 is that an entity recognizes revenue to depict the transfer of promised goods or services to customers in an amount that reflects the consideration to which the entity expects to be entitled in exchange for those goods or services. For a public entity, the amendments in this Update are effective for annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2016, including interim periods within that reporting period. Early application is not permitted. We are currently evaluating the impact this guidance will have on our financial position and statement of operations.
In July 2013, the FASB issued (ASU) No. 2013-11 "Presentation of an Unrecognized Tax Benefit When a Net Operating Loss Carry forward, a Similar Tax Loss, or a Tax Credit Carry forward Exists." The guidance is a new accounting standard on the financial statement presentation of unrecognized tax benefits. The standard provides that a liability related to an unrecognized tax benefit would be presented as a reduction of a deferred tax asset for a net operating loss carry forward, a similar tax loss or a tax credit carry forward if such settlement is required or expected in the event the uncertain tax position is disallowed. The standard became effective for us on January 1, 2014 and had no material effect on our financial position or results of operations when implemented.
Note 3 - Income Taxes
We had no income tax expense for the three months ended September 30, 2014. The income tax expense for the nine months ended September 30, 2014 was $2 related to minimum tax payments. During the three and nine month periods ended September 30, 2014, we had net operating losses (“NOLs”) which generated deferred tax assets for NOL carry-forwards. We provided valuation allowances against the net deferred tax assets including the deferred tax assets for NOL carry-forwards. Valuation allowances provided for our net deferred tax assets increased by approximately $2,100 and $6,200 for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2014, respectively.
There was no income tax expense for the three months ended September 30, 2013. The income tax expense for the nine months ended September 30, 2013 was $356, which was a negative effective income tax rate of 2 percent. As a result of NOLs during the periods, the income tax expense for the nine months ended September 30, 2013 reflected only a prior year change in estimate of our taxable income. During the three and nine month periods ended September 30, 2013, we had NOLs which generated deferred tax assets for NOL carry-forwards. We provided valuation allowances against the net deferred tax assets including the deferred tax assets for NOL carry-forwards. Valuation allowances provided for our net deferred tax assets increased by approximately $1,700 and $6,100 for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2013, respectively.
In assessing the realization of deferred tax assets, management considers whether it is more likely than not that some portion or all of deferred assets will not be realized. The ultimate realization of the deferred tax assets is dependent upon the generation of future taxable income during the periods in which those temporary differences become deductible. Based on the available objective evidence, including our history of operating losses and the uncertainty of generating future taxable income, management believes it is more likely than not that the net deferred tax assets at September 30, 2014 will not be fully realizable. Accordingly, management has maintained a valuation allowance against our net deferred tax assets at September 30, 2014. The valuation allowance provided against our net deferred tax assets was approximately $22,000 and $16,000 at September 30, 2014 and December 31, 2013, respectively.
At September 30, 2014, we have federal and state net operating loss carry-forwards of approximately $38,000 each, expiring beginning in 2027 and 2016, respectively.
Effective January 1, 2009, we adopted accounting guidance for income taxes, which clarifies the accounting for uncertainty in income taxes recognized in an enterprise's financial statements and prescribes a recognition threshold and measurement attribute for the financial statements recognition and measurement of a tax position taken or expected to be taken in a tax return. We are now required to recognize in the financial statements the impact of a tax position, if that position is more likely than not of being sustained on audit, based on the technical merits of the position.
Our tax years for 2005 and forward are subject to examination by the U.S. tax authority and various state tax authorities. These years are open due to net operating losses and tax credits remaining unutilized from such years.
Our policy is to recognize interest and penalties accrued on any unrecognized tax benefits as a component of income tax expense. As of September 30, 2014, we had accrued immaterial amounts of interest and penalties related to uncertain tax positions.
Note 4 — Commitments
We lease our corporate headquarters for $5 per month. Our lease expires in October 2015.
Note 5 — Stock-Based Compensation
We have a stock incentive plan for employees and others called the VirnetX Holding Corporation 2013 Equity Incentive Plan (the "Plan"), which has been approved by our stockholders. The Plan provides for the granting of up to 14,124,469 shares of our common stock, including stock options and stock purchase rights (“RSUs”), and will expire in 2023. As of September 30, 2014, 1,816,217 shares remained available for grant under the Plan.
During the three months ended September 30, 2014 we granted options for a total of 206,500 shares and none for the same period in 2013. The weighted average fair values per option issued at the grant dates during the three months ended September 30, 2014 was $11.47.
During the nine months ended September 30, 2014 and 2013, we granted options for a total of 261,500 and 274,625 shares, respectively. The weighted average fair values of options issued during the nine months ended September 30, 2014 and 2013 were $11.23 and $19.24 per option, respectively. The fair values of options at the grant date were estimated utilizing the Black-Scholes valuation model with the following weighted average assumptions for the nine months ended September 30, 2014 and 2013, respectively: (i) dividend yield on our common stock of 0 percent for both periods (ii) expected stock price volatility of 87 percent and 93 percent; (iii) a risk-free interest rate of 2.56 percent and 2.06 percent; and (iv) an expected option term of 6 years respectively.
During the three months ended September 30, 2014 we granted 137,666 RSUs, and none for the same period in 2013. The weighted average fair values at the grant dates for RSUs issued during the three months ended September 30, 2014 were $15.40 per RSU. During the nine months ended September 30, 2014 and 2013, we granted 154,332 and 156,415 RSUs, respectively. The weighted average fair values at the grant dates for RSUs issued during the nine months ended September 30, 2014 and 2013 were $15.30 and $23.72 per RSU, respectively. RSUs, which are subject to forfeiture if employment terminates prior to the shares vesting, are expensed ratably over the vesting period.
Stock-based compensation expense included in general and administrative expense was $2,221 and $5,952 for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2014, respectively and $2,110 and $5,454 for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2013, respectively.
As of September 30, 2014, the unrecognized stock-based compensation expense related to non-vested stock options and RSUs was $10,358 and $5,515, respectively, which will be amortized over an estimated weighted average period of approximately 2.52 and 2.83 years, respectively.
During the nine month period ended September 30, 2014 we issued 337,335 new shares of common stock as a result of share-based awards. Options to purchase 256,096 shares were exercised and 78,739 RSUs vested and were paid out as well as 2,500 shares from warrant exercise.
Note 6 — Warrants
Information about warrants outstanding during the nine months ended September 30, 2014 follows:
|
Original Number
of
Warrants Issued
|
Exercise
Price per
Common
Share
|
Exercisable
at
December 31,
2013
|
Became
Exercisable
|
Exercised
|
Terminated /
Cancelled /
Expired
|
Exercisable
at Sept 30, 2014
|
Expiration
Date
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
|
2,619,036
|
(1)
|
$
|
3.59
|
159,967
|
—
|
2,500
|
—
|
157,467
|
March 2015
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
Total
|
159,967
|
—
|
2,500
|
—
|
157,467
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
| (1) | Referred to as our Series I Warrants. |
Note 7 — Litigation
We have four intellectual property infringement lawsuits pending against multiple parties in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division, pursuant to which we allege that these parties infringe on certain of our patents. We seek damages and injunctive relief in all the complaints.
VirnetX Inc. et al., v. Microsoft Corporation (Case 6:13-CV-00351-LED)
On April 22, 2013, we initiated a lawsuit by filing a complaint against Microsoft Corporation in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division, pursuant to which we allege that Microsoft has infringed U.S. Patent Nos. 6,502,135, 7,188,180, 7,418,504, 7,490,151, 7,921,211, and 7,987,274. We seek an unspecified amount of damages and injunctive relief. A hearing on claims construction and multiple motions by both parties was held on September 4, 2014. On September 10, 2014, the court issued an order granting in part and denying-in-part our sealed motion to compel interrogatory responses, denying Microsoft’s sealed motion to enter order focusing patent claims and prior art, denying Microsoft’s sealed motion to compel, denying Microsoft’s sealed motion to stay the case and granting our request for leave to file a Motion for Partial Summary Judgment. The jury trial in this case is scheduled for July 13, 2015.
VirnetX Inc. v. Cisco Systems, Inc. et al (13-1489-LP VirnetX, Case 6:10-CV-00417-LED)
On August 11, 2010, we initiated a lawsuit by filing a complaint against Aastra, Apple, Cisco, and NEC in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division, pursuant to which we alleged that these parties infringe on certain of our patents. We sought damages and injunctive relief. Subsequently, on February 4, 2011, we amended our original complaint, filed on August 11, 2010, against Aastra, Apple, Cisco and NEC, to assert U.S. Patent No. 7,418,504 against Apple and Aastra. On April 5, 2011, we further amended our complaint to include Apple’s iPad 2 in the list of Apple products that are accused of infringing our patents and to assert our newly-issued patent, U.S. Patent No. 7,921,211 against all of the defendants in that lawsuit. A claim construction hearing was held on January 5, 2012 and the court issued a Markman ruling on April 25, 2012. Aastra and NEC agreed to sign license agreements with us and we agreed to drop all the accusations of infringement against them. At the pre-trial hearing, the judge decided to conduct separate jury trial for each defendant, and just try the case against Apple on the scheduled trial date. The jury trial against Cisco was held on March 4, 2013. The jury against Cisco the jury came back with a verdict of non-infringement also determined that all our patents-in-suit patents are not invalid. Our motions for a new trial and Cisco’s infringement of certain VirnetX patents was denied and the case against Cisco was closed.
The jury trial against Apple was held on October 31, 2012 and on November 6, 2012, a jury in the United States Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division, awarded us over $368 million in a verdict against Apple Corporation for infringing four of our patents. On February 26, 2013, the court issued its Memorandum Opinion and Order regarding post-trial motions resulting from the prior jury verdict denying Apple’s motion to reduce the damages awarded by the jury for past infringement. The Court further denied Apple’s request for a new trial on the liability and damages portions of the verdict and granted our motions for pre-judgment interest, post-judgment interest, and post-verdict damages to date. The Court ordered that Apple pay $34 in daily interest up to final judgment and $330 in daily damages for infringement up to final judgment for certain Apple devices included in the verdict. The Court denied our request for a permanent injunction and severed the future infringement portion into its own separate proceedings under Case 6:13-CV-00211-LED.
On July 3, 2013, Apple filed an appeal of the judgment dated February 27, 2013 and order dated June 4, 2013 denying Apple’s motion to alter or amend the judgment to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (USCAFC). On October 16, 2013 Apple filed its opening appeal brief to the USCAFC. Our response to the opening brief was filed on December 2, 2013, and on December 19, 2013, Apple filed its final response to complete the briefing of the court. A hearing was held on March 3, 2014 at the USCAFC. On September 16, 2014, USCAFC issued their opinion, affirming the jury’s finding that all 4 of our patents are valid, confirming the jury’s finding of infringement of VPN on Demand under many of the asserted claims of our ‘135 and ‘151 patents, and confirming the district’s court’s decision to allow evidence concerning our licenses and royalty rates in connection with the determination of damages. In its opinion, the USCAFC also vacated the jury’s damages award and the district court’s claim construction with respect to parts of our ‘504 and ‘211 patents and remanded the damages award and determination of infringement with respect to FaceTime –for further proceedings consistent with its opinion. On October 16, 2014, we filed a petition with the USCAFC, requesting a rehearing and rehearing en banc of the Federal Circuit’s September 14, 2014, decision concerning VirnetX’s litigation against Apple Inc. In our petition, we have asked the court to rehear its decision with respect to damages and affirm the district court’s damages award against Apple in full because the Federal Circuit’s decision is contrary to the patent statute and Supreme Court precedent. We are also asking the Federal Circuit to reinstate the jury’s award that Apple infringed the ’504 and ’211 patents on the basis that the district court correctly construed the claim term “secure communication link”. We are waiting for the Court’s ruling in this matter.
VirnetX, Inc. v. Apple, Inc. (Case 6:13-CV-00211-LED)
The Court ordered the parties to mediate over an ongoing license in the following 45 days for Apple’s future infringing use not covered by the Court’s Order, and ordered us to file an appropriate motion with the court if the parties fail to agree to a license. On March 28, 2013, Apple filed a motion to alter or amend the judgment entered by the Court. The mediation was held on April 9, 2013 and the parties did not come to an agreement on an ongoing royalty rate for infringing Apple products. We filed our opposition to this motion on April 10, 2013. As ordered by the Court, we filed a sealed motion with the Court on April 16, 2013, requesting the Court’s assistance in deciding an appropriate royalty rate for all infringing products shipped by Apple that are “not more than colorably different” with regards to the accused functionality. On August 1, 2013, a hearing was held in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division on our motion for an ongoing royalty. On March 6, 2014, the court issued a public version of the order previously issued under seal on March 3, 2014, awarding us an on-going royalty of 0.98% on adjudicated products and products “not colorably” different from those adjudicated at trial that incorporate any of the FaceTime or VPN on Demand features found to infringe at trial. On March 27, 2014, Apple filed its notice of appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. On March 28, 2014 Apple also filed a motion for Entry of Final Judgment by Apple Inc. with the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division. The Court stayed the proceedings in this matter while the Court’s ruling in the Case 6:10-CV-00417-LED is pending.
VirnetX Inc. v. Apple, Inc. (Case 6:12-CV-00855-LED)
On November 6, 2012, we filed a new complaint against Apple Inc., in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division for willfully infringing four of our patents, U.S. Patent Nos. 6,502,135, 7,418,504, 7,921,211 and 7,490,151, and seeking both an unspecified amount of damages and injunctive relief. The accused products include the iPhone 5, iPod Touch 5th Generation, iPad 4th Generation, iPad mini, and the latest Macintosh computers. Due to their release dates, these products were not included in the previous lawsuit that concluded with a Jury verdict on November 6, 2012 that was subsequently upheld by the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division, on February 26, 2013. On July 1, 2013, we filed a consolidated and amended complaint to include U.S. Patent No. 8,051,181 and consolidate Civil Action No. 6:11-cv-00563-LED. On August 27, 2013, we filed an amended complaint including allegations of willful infringement related to U.S. Patent No. 8,504,697 seeking both damages and injunctive relief. The Markman hearing in this case was held on May 20, 2014 and on August 8, 2014, issued its Markman Order, denying Apple’s motion for summary judgment of indefiniteness, in which Apple alleged that some of the disputed claims terms in the patents asserted by us were invalid for indefiniteness. In a separate order, the court granted in part and denied in part our motion for partial summary judgment on Apple’s invalidity counterclaims, precluding Apple from asserting invalidity as a defense against infringement of the claims that were tried before a jury in our prior litigation against Apple (VirnetX vs. Cisco et. al., Case 6:10-CV-00417-LED). The jury trial in this case is scheduled for October 13, 2015.
One or more potential intellectual property infringement claims may also be available to us against certain other companies who have the resources to defend against any such claims. Although we believe these potential claims are worth pursuing, commencing a lawsuit can be expensive and time-consuming, and there is no assurance that we will prevail on such potential claims. In addition, bringing a lawsuit may lead to potential counterclaims which may preclude our ability to commercialize our initial products, which are currently in development. Currently, we are not a party to any other pending legal proceedings, and are not aware of any proceeding threatened or contemplated against us by any governmental authority or other party.
Note 8 — Subsequent Events
Subsequent to the quarter ended September 30, 2014, options to purchase 423,225 were exercised and the shares were issued.
Note About Forward-Looking Statements
Certain statements in this report, other than purely historical information, including estimates, projections, statements relating to our business plans, objectives, and expected operating results, and the assumptions upon which those statements are based, are “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Forward-looking statements may appear throughout this report, including without limitation, the following sections: “Management’s Discussion and Analysis,” and “Risk Factors.” These forward-looking statements generally are identified by the words “believe,” “project,” “expect,” “anticipate,” “estimate,” “intend,” “strategy,” “future,” “opportunity,” “plan,” “may,” “should,” “will,” “would,” “will be,” “will continue,” “will likely result,” and similar expressions. Forward-looking statements are based on current expectations and assumptions that are subject to risks and uncertainties which may cause actual results to differ materially from the forward-looking statements. A detailed discussion of risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results and events to differ materially from such forward-looking statements is included in the section titled “Risk Factors” (Part II, Item 1A of this Form 10-Q). We undertake no obligation to update or revise publicly any forward-looking statements, whether because of new information, future events, or otherwise.
Company Overview
We develop software and technology solutions for securing real-time communications over the Internet. Our patented GABRIEL Connection Technology™ combines industry standard encryption protocols with our patented techniques for automated domain name system, or DNS, lookup mechanisms, and enables users to create a secure communication link using secure domain names over wired or wireless (4G/LTE) networks. We are currently beta testing our GABRIEL Connection Technology™ as part of our Secure Domain Name Initiative, or (SDNI), on various platforms including PCs, smart phones and tablets. We also intend to establish the exclusive secure domain name registry in the United States and other key markets around the world.
Our portfolio of intellectual property is the foundation of our business model. We currently own approximately 36 U.S. and 66 foreign patents with approximately 75 pending patent applications worldwide. Our patent portfolio is primarily focused on securing real-time communications over the Internet, as well as related services such as the establishment and maintenance of a secure domain name registry. Our patented methods also have additional applications in the key areas of device operating systems and network security for Cloud services, Mobile-to-Mobile (M2M) communications in areas of Smart City, Connected Car and Connected Home. The subject matter of all our U.S. and foreign patents relates generally to securing communication over the internet. Given the subject matter and the relatedness of our various patents and pending applications, we generally disclose them as a collection rather than listing them separately. Our issued U.S. and foreign patents expire at various times during the period from 2019 to 2024. Some of our issued patents and pending patent applications were acquired by our principal operating subsidiary, VirnetX, Inc., from Science Applications International Corporation (now Leidos, Inc.) in 2006, and we are required to make payments to Leidos based on cash or certain other values generated from those patents. The amount of such payments depends upon the type of value generated, and certain categories are subject to maximums and other limitations.
We have an ongoing GABRIEL Licensing Program under which we offer licenses to our patent portfolio, technology and software, including our secure domain name registry service, to domain infrastructure providers, communication service providers as well as to system integrators. Our GABRIEL Connection TechnologyTM License is offered to OEM customers who want to adopt the GABRIEL Connection Technology™ as their solution for establishing secure connections using secure domain names within their products. We have developed GABRIEL Connection Technology™ Software Development Kit (SDK) to assist with rapid integration of these techniques into existing software implementations with minimal code changes and include object libraries, sample code, testing and quality assurance tools and the supporting documentation necessary for a customer to implement our technology. Customers who want to develop their own implementation of the VirnetX patented techniques for supporting secure domain names, or other techniques that are covered by our patent portfolio for establishing secure communication links, can purchase a patent license. The number of patents licensed, and therefore the cost of the patent license to the customer, will depend upon which of the patents are used in a particular product or service. These licenses will typically include an initial license fee, as well as an ongoing royalty.
We intend to continue to license our patent portfolio, technology and software, including our secure domain name registry service, to domain infrastructure providers, communication service providers as well as to system integrators. We believe that the market opportunity for our software and technology solutions is large and expanding as secure domain names are now an integral part of securing the next generation 4G/LTE wireless networks. We also believe that all 4G mobile devices will require unique secure domain names and become part of a secure domain name registry.
We further intend to seek licenses of our technology, including our GABRIEL Connection Technology™ to enterprise customers, developers and original equipment manufacturers, or OEMs, of chips, servers, smart phones, tablets, e-Readers, laptops, net books and other devices, within the IP-telephony, mobility, fixed-mobile convergence and unified communications markets including 4G/LTE. We have published our royalty rates and guidelines on our website. All licenses with current royalty payment obligations have adhered to these guidelines and have met or exceeded these rates and we will continue to use these rates and guidelines in all future license negotiations.
Our employees include the core development team behind our patent portfolio, technology and software. This team has worked together for over ten years and is the same team that invented and developed this technology while working at Science Application International Corporation, or SAIC and renamed “Leidos, Inc.” Leidos is a FORTUNE 500® scientific, engineering and technology applications company that uses its deep domain knowledge to solve problems of vital importance to the nation and the world, in national security, energy and the environment, critical infrastructure and health. The team has continued its research and development work started at Leidos and expanded the set of patents we acquired in 2006 from Leidos into a larger portfolio which now serves as the foundation of our licensing business and planned service offerings and is expected to generate the majority of our future revenue in license fees and royalties. We intend to continue our research and development efforts to further strengthen and expand our patent portfolio.
We intend to continue using an outsourced and leveraged model to maintain efficiency and manage costs as we grow our licensing business by offering incentives to early licensing targets or asserting our rights for use of our patents. We also intend to expand our design pilot in participation with leading 4G/LTE companies (domain infrastructure providers, chipset manufacturers, service providers, and others) and build our secure domain name registry.
New Accounting Pronouncements
In August 2014, the Financial Accounting Standards Board ("FASB") issued Accounting Standards Update ("ASU") No. 2014-15, “Presentation of Financial Statements – Going Concern, Subtopic 205-40, “Disclosure of Uncertainties about an Entity’s Ability to Continue as a Going Concern.” The amendments in this Update apply to all entities and require management to assess an entity’s ability to continue as a going concern by incorporating and expanding upon certain principles that are currently in U.S. auditing standards. Specifically, the amendments (1) provide a definition of the term substantial doubt, (2) require an evaluation every reporting period including interim periods, (3) provide principles for considering the mitigating effect of management’s plans, (4) require certain disclosures when substantial doubt is alleviated as a result of consideration of management’s plans, (5) require an express statement and other disclosures when substantial doubt is not alleviated, and (6) require an assessment for a period of one year after the date that the financial statements are issued (or available to be issued). The amendments in this Update are effective for the annual period ending after December 15, 2016, and for annual periods and interim periods thereafter. Early application is permitted. We are currently evaluating the impact this guidance will have on our financial position and results of operations.
In June 2014, the FASB issued (ASU) No. 2014-12, "Compensation - Stock Compensation (Topic 718)," which makes amendments to the codification topic 718, "Accounting for Share-Based Payments," when the terms of an award provide that a performance target could be achieved after the requisite service period. The new guidance becomes effective for annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2015, early adoption is permitted. We are currently evaluating the impact this guidance will have on our financial position and results of operations.
In May 2014, the FASB issued (ASU) No. 2014-09 “Revenue from Contracts with Customers” (Topic 606). Topic 606, supersede the revenue recognition requirements in Topic 605, Revenue Recognition, including most industry-specific revenue recognition guidance throughout the Industry Topics of the Codification. In addition, the amendments create a new Subtopic 340-40, Other Assets and Deferred Costs—Contracts with Customers. In summary, the core principle of Topic 606 is that an entity recognizes revenue to depict the transfer of promised goods or services to customers in an amount that reflects the consideration to which the entity expects to be entitled in exchange for those goods or services. For a public entity, the amendments in this Update are effective for annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2016, including interim periods within that reporting period. Early application is not permitted. We are currently evaluating the impact this guidance will have on our financial position and statement of operations.
In July 2013, the FASB issued (ASU) No. 2013-11 "Presentation of an Unrecognized Tax Benefit When a Net Operating Loss Carry forward, a Similar Tax Loss, or a Tax Credit Carry forward Exists." The guidance is a new accounting standard on the financial statement presentation of unrecognized tax benefits. The standard provides that a liability related to an unrecognized tax benefit would be presented as a reduction of a deferred tax asset for a net operating loss carry forward, a similar tax loss or a tax credit carry forward if such settlement is required or expected in the event the uncertain tax position is disallowed. The standard became effective for us on January 1, 2014, and had no material effect on our financial position or results of operations when implemented.
Results of Operation
Three and Nine Months Ended September 30, 2014
Compared with Three and Nine Months Ended September 30, 2013
(in thousands, except per share amounts)
Revenue
We had revenues of $292 and $809 for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2014, respectively, and $1,612 and $1,911 of revenues for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2013, respectively. The 2013 periods included $1,500 of historical revenue resulting from a settlement discussed below.
For the three and nine months ended September 30, 2014 we recognized revenue of $292 and $792, respectively from non-refundable up-front fees earned during the period. In August 2013 we began receiving annual payments on a contract (the “August 2013 Contract Settlement”) with a total value over 5 years of $10,000. From its inception through September 30, 2014 we received a total payment of $5,000 under this license. Revenues from these fees are deferred and recognized as revenue as earned in accordance with our revenue recognition policy, but not in advance of collection.
For the three and nine month periods ended September 30, 2013, we recognized $1,500 of revenue for historical royalties under the August 2013 Contract Settlement, and $112 of revenue for royalties earned subsequent to the settlement and execution of this license agreement and other licenses.
In addition to the revenues from the August 2013 Contract Settlement discussed above, for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2014, we recognized royalty revenue of zero and $17, respectively, as part of settlement agreements entered into with customers during patent infringement actions. This compares to revenues totaling $28 and $327 for the three and nine months ending September 30, 2013, respectively, excluding revenues from the August 2013 Contract Settlement.
In accordance with our revenue recognition policy related to a licensee’s product sales from prior periods, the amounts recognized resulted from negotiated agreements with licensees that utilized our patented technology prior to signing a patent license agreement with us. We record the consideration as revenue when we have obtained a signed agreement, identified a fixed or determinable price, and determined that collectability is reasonably assured. Revenue to be earned from forward licensing agreements entered into as a result of the litigation will be recognized as the earnings process is completed, license fees are fixed and determinable, and in accordance with our revenue recognition policy.
Research and Development Expenses
Research and development expenses were $374 and $316 for the three months ended September 30, 2014 and 2013, respectively, representing an increase of $58 due primarily to an increase in stock-based compensation expense for the three months ended September 30, 2014. Research and development expenses were $1,066 and $1,002 for the nine months ended September 30, 2014 and 2013, respectively.
Selling, General and Administrative Expenses
Selling, general and administrative expenses include management and administrative personnel, as well as outside legal, accounting, and consulting expenses.
Our selling, general and administrative expenses for the three months ended September 30, 2014 compared to September 30, 2013 decreased by $261 to $6,168. The change is primarily due to a decrease of $679 in legal fees associated with our patent infringement actions (see “Legal Proceedings”) and partially offset by an increase in stock-based compensation expense and related payroll taxes. For the nine months ended September 30, 2014 our selling, general and administrative expenses decreased by $3,031 to $19,119 compared to the nine months ended September 30, 2013. The change was primarily due to a $4,080 decrease in legal fees associated with our patent infringement actions and an increase in stock-based compensation expense and payroll taxes. The increase in stock-based compensation and payroll taxes is associated with continued amortization on stock-based awards to employees and incurrence of payroll tax expense on RSUs vesting in the current quarter. We expect to incur the same levels or increased levels of legal fees over the foreseeable future as we continue to pursue these infringement actions and we expect to report losses from operations as a result. See “Legal Proceedings” for additional information regarding these infringement actions. Management believes our legal expenses will decrease materially after our current court schedule is complete.
Other Income and Expenses
For the three months ended September 30, 2014, the non-cash gain related to the periodic revaluation of our Series I Warrants liability was $1,817, which compares to a non-cash loss of $48 for the three months ended September 30, 2013. For the nine months ended September 30, 2014, the non-cash gain was $2,126 as compared to the non-cash gain of $1,438 for the nine months ended September 30, 2013. The liability for the Series I Warrants decreased to $431 at September 30, 2014, from $2,564 at December 31, 2013. The gain from the revaluations of the warrant liability in the nine months ended September 30, 2014 was primarily the result of a decrease in our common share price during the period.
Interest and other income (expense) decreased by $82 to $(35) for the three months ended September 30, 2014, from $47 for the comparable 2013 period, and decreased by $80 to $25 for the nine months ended September 30, 2014, from $105 for the nine months ended September 30, 2013. This decrease is primarily due to realized losses exceeding interest earned in the quarter.
Liquidity and Capital Resources
As of September 30, 2014, our cash and cash equivalents totaled $8,498 and our short-term investments totaled $15,939, compared to cash and cash equivalents of $19,173 and short-term investments of $19,815 at December 31, 2013. Working capital was $20,566 at September 30, 2014 and $33,971 at December 31, 2013. The decrease in cash and investments during the periods reported are primarily attributed to costs incurred for legal expenses in defense of our patent infringement actions, payment of a non-cancellable lease obligation and losses incurred during the periods reported.
We expect that our cash and cash equivalents and short-term investments as of September 30, 2014 will be sufficient to fund our operations and provide working capital for general corporate purposes and legal expenses for the foreseeable future. Over the long term, we expect to derive the majority of our revenue from license fees and royalties associated with our patent portfolio, technology, software and secure domain name registry in the United States and other markets around the world.
Income Taxes
We had no income tax expense for the three months ended September 30, 2014. The income tax expense for the nine months ended September 30, 2014 was $2 related to minimum tax payments. During the three and nine month periods ended September 30, 2014, we had net operating losses (“NOLs”) which generated deferred tax assets for NOL carry-forwards. We provided valuation allowances against the net deferred tax assets including the deferred tax assets for NOL carry-forwards. Valuation allowances provided for our net deferred tax assets increased by approximately $2,100 and $6,200 for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2014, respectively.
There was no income tax expense for the three months ended September 30, 2013. The income tax expense for the nine months ended September 30, 2013 was $356, which was a negative effective income tax rate of 2 percent. As a result of NOLs during the periods, the income tax expense for the nine months ended September 30, 2013 reflected only a prior year change in estimate of our taxable income. During the three and nine month periods ended September 30, 2013, we had NOLs which generated deferred tax assets for NOL carry-forwards. We provided valuation allowances against the net deferred tax assets including the deferred tax assets for NOL carry-forwards. Valuation allowances provided for our net deferred tax assets increased by approximately $1,700 and $6,100 for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2013, respectively.
In assessing the realization of deferred tax assets, management considers whether it is more likely than not that some portion or all of deferred assets will not be realized. The ultimate realization of the deferred tax assets is dependent upon the generation of future taxable income during the periods in which those temporary differences become deductible. Based on the available objective evidence, including our history of operating losses and the uncertainty of generating future taxable income, management believes it is more likely than not that the net deferred tax assets at September 30, 2014 will not be fully realizable. Accordingly, management has maintained a valuation allowance against our net deferred tax assets at September 30, 2014. The valuation allowance provided against our net deferred tax assets was approximately $22,000 and $16,000 at September 30, 2014 and December 31, 2013, respectively.
At September 30, 2014, we have federal and state net operating loss carry-forwards of approximately $38,000 each, expiring beginning in 2027 and 2016, respectively.
Effective January 1, 2009, we adopted accounting guidance for income taxes, which clarifies the accounting for uncertainty in income taxes recognized in an enterprise's financial statements and prescribes a recognition threshold and measurement attribute for the financial statements recognition and measurement of a tax position taken or expected to be taken in a tax return. We are now required to recognize in the financial statements the impact of a tax position, if that position is more likely than not of being sustained on audit, based on the technical merits of the position.
Our tax years for 2005 and forward are subject to examination by the U.S. tax authority and various state tax authorities. These years are open due to net operating losses and tax credits remaining unutilized from such years.
Our policy is to recognize interest and penalties accrued on any unrecognized tax benefits as a component of income tax expense. As of September 30, 2014, we had accrued immaterial amounts of interest and penalties related to uncertain tax positions.
Contractual Obligations
There have been no material changes to the contractual obligations disclosed in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2013, except for a payment of $3,750 related to a non-cancellable lease obligation, which is included in prepaid expenses on our Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet.
Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements
None.
Interest Rate Risk
We invest our excess cash primarily in highly liquid instruments including time deposits, money market, and corporate debt securities. We seek to limit the amount of our credit exposure to any one issuer.
Investments in fixed rate instruments carry a degree of interest rate risk. Fixed rate securities may have their fair market value adversely impacted due to a rise in interest rates. Due in part to these factors, our income from investments may decrease in the future.
We considered the historical volatility of short-term interest rates and determined that it was reasonably possible that an adverse change of 100 basis points could be experienced in the near term but would have an immaterial impact in the fair value of our marketable securities, which generally mature within nine months of September 30, 2014.
Other Market Risks
We have no obligation to settle our Series I Warrant obligations in cash. However, these derivative instruments are accounted for as liabilities on our consolidated balance sheets and are marked-to-market each period based on their estimated fair value. The non-cash gains or losses from the decreases and increases in the estimated fair value of the warrant liability are recognized in earnings each period. The estimated fair value is determined in large part by reference to our assumptions and estimates of various factors. Our liability will increase by, and we will recognize a non-cash loss of approximately $200, all other factors being constant if the market price of our common shares increases by $1. Conversely, our liability will decrease by, and we will recognize a non-cash gain of approximately $200, all other factors being constant, if the market price of our common shares decreases by $1.
We considered the historical volatility of our stock prices and determined that it was reasonably possible that the fair market value of our stock price could increase or decrease substantially in the near term and could have a material impact to our consolidated balance sheets and statement of operations.
Evaluation of Disclosures Controls and Procedures
Under the supervision and with the participation of our management, including our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, we conducted an evaluation of the effectiveness of the design and operation of our disclosure controls and procedures, as defined in Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, as of September 30, 2014.
The purpose of this evaluation was to determine whether as of September 30, 2014 our disclosure controls and procedures were effective to provide reasonable assurance that the information we are required to disclose in our filings with the SEC, (i) is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in the SEC’s rules and forms and (ii) accumulated and communicated to our management, including our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, as appropriate to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure.
Based on their evaluation, our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer have concluded that as of September 30, 2014, our disclosure controls and procedures were effective.
Changes in Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
There were no changes in our internal control over financial reporting during the quarter ended September 30, 2014 that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting.
We have four intellectual property infringement lawsuits pending against multiple parties in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division, pursuant to which we allege that these parties infringe on certain of our patents. We seek damages and injunctive relief in all the complaints.
VirnetX Inc. et al., v. Microsoft Corporation (Case 6:13-CV-00351-LED)
On April 22, 2013, we initiated a lawsuit by filing a complaint against Microsoft Corporation in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division, pursuant to which we allege that Microsoft has infringed U.S. Patent Nos. 6,502,135, 7,188,180, 7,418,504, 7,490,151, 7,921,211, and 7,987,274. We seek an unspecified amount of damages and injunctive relief. A hearing on claims construction and multiple motions by both parties was held on September 4, 2014. On September 10, 2014, the court issued an order granting in part and denying-in-part our sealed motion to compel interrogatory responses, denying Microsoft’s sealed motion to enter order focusing patent claims and prior art, denying Microsoft’s sealed motion to compel, denying Microsoft’s sealed motion to stay the case and granting our request for leave to file a Motion for Partial Summary Judgment. The jury trial in this case is scheduled for July 13, 2015.
VirnetX Inc. v. Cisco Systems, Inc. et al (13-1489-LP VirnetX, Case 6:10-CV-00417-LED)
On August 11, 2010, we initiated a lawsuit by filing a complaint against Aastra, Apple, Cisco, and NEC in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division, pursuant to which we alleged that these parties infringe on certain of our patents. We sought damages and injunctive relief. Subsequently, on February 4, 2011, we amended our original complaint, filed on August 11, 2010, against Aastra, Apple, Cisco and NEC, to assert U.S. Patent No. 7,418,504 against Apple and Aastra. On April 5, 2011, we further amended our complaint to include Apple’s iPad 2 in the list of Apple products that are accused of infringing our patents and to assert our newly-issued patent, U.S. Patent No. 7,921,211 against all of the defendants in that lawsuit. A claim construction hearing was held on January 5, 2012 and the court issued a Markman ruling on April 25, 2012. Aastra and NEC agreed to sign license agreements with us and we agreed to drop all the accusations of infringement against them. At the pre-trial hearing, the judge decided to conduct separate jury trial for each defendant, and just try the case against Apple on the scheduled trial date. The jury trial against Cisco was held on March 4, 2013. The jury against Cisco the jury came back with a verdict of non-infringement also determined that all our patents-in-suit patents are not invalid. Our motions for a new trial and Cisco’s infringement of certain VirnetX patents was denied and the case against Cisco was closed.
The jury trial against Apple was held on October 31, 2012 and on November 6, 2012, a jury in the United States Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division, awarded us over $368 million in a verdict against Apple Corporation for infringing four of our patents. On February 26, 2013, the court issued its Memorandum Opinion and Order regarding post-trial motions resulting from the prior jury verdict denying Apple’s motion to reduce the damages awarded by the jury for past infringement. The Court further denied Apple’s request for a new trial on the liability and damages portions of the verdict and granted our motions for pre-judgment interest, post-judgment interest, and post-verdict damages to date. The Court ordered that Apple pay $34 in daily interest up to final judgment and $330 in daily damages for infringement up to final judgment for certain Apple devices included in the verdict. The Court denied our request for a permanent injunction and severed the future infringement portion into its own separate proceedings under Case 6:13-CV-00211-LED.
On July 3, 2013, Apple filed an appeal of the judgment dated February 27, 2013 and order dated June 4, 2013 denying Apple’s motion to alter or amend the judgment to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (USCAFC). On October 16, 2013 Apple filed its opening appeal brief to the USCAFC. Our response to the opening brief was filed on December 2, 2013, and on December 19, 2013, Apple filed its final response to complete the briefing of the court. A hearing was held on March 3, 2014 at the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. On September 16, 2014, USCAFC issued their opinion, affirming the jury’s finding that all 4 of our patents are valid, confirming the jury’s finding of infringement of VPN on Demand under many of the asserted claims of our ‘135 and ‘151 patents, and confirming the district’s court’s decision to allow evidence concerning our licenses and royalty rates in connection with the determination of damages. In its opinion, the USCAFC also vacated the jury’s damages award and the district court’s claim construction with respect to parts of our ‘504 and ‘211 patents and remanded the damages award and determination of infringement with respect to FaceTime –for further proceedings consistent with its opinion. On October 16, 2014, we filed a petition with the USCAFC, requesting a rehearing and rehearing en banc of the Federal Circuit’s September 14, 2014, decision concerning VirnetX’s litigation against Apple Inc. In our petition, we have asked the court to rehear its decision with respect to damages and affirm the district court’s damages award against Apple in full because the Federal Circuit’s decision is contrary to the patent statute and Supreme Court precedent. We are also asking the Federal Circuit to reinstate the jury’s award that Apple infringed the ’504 and ’211 patents on the basis that the district court correctly construed the claim term “secure communication link. We are waiting for the Court’s ruling in this matter.
VirnetX, Inc. v. Apple, Inc. (Case 6:13-CV-00211-LED)
The Court ordered the parties to mediate over an ongoing license in the following 45 days for Apple’s future infringing use not covered by the Court’s Order, and ordered us to file an appropriate motion with the court if the parties fail to agree to a license. On March 28, 2013, Apple filed a motion to alter or amend the judgment entered by the Court. The mediation was held on April 9, 2013 and the parties did not come to an agreement on an ongoing royalty rate for infringing Apple products. We filed our opposition to this motion on April 10, 2013. As ordered by the Court, we filed a sealed motion with the Court on April 16, 2013, requesting the Court’s assistance in deciding an appropriate royalty rate for all infringing products shipped by Apple that are “not more than colorably different” with regards to the accused functionality. On August 1, 2013, a hearing was held in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division on our motion for an ongoing royalty. On March 6, 2014, the court issued a public version of the order previously issued under seal on March 3, 2014, awarding us an on-going royalty of 0.98% on adjudicated products and products “not colorably” different from those adjudicated at trial that incorporate any of the FaceTime or VPN on Demand features found to infringe at trial. On March 27, 2014, Apple filed its notice of appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. On March 28, 2014 Apple also filed a motion for Entry of Final Judgment by Apple Inc. with the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division. The Court stayed the proceedings in this matter while the Court’s ruling in the Case 6:10-CV-00417-LED is pending.
VirnetX Inc. v. Apple, Inc. (Case 6:12-CV-00855-LED)
On November 6, 2012, we filed a new complaint against Apple Inc., in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division for willfully infringing four of our patents, U.S. Patent Nos. 6,502,135, 7,418,504, 7,921,211 and 7,490,151, and seeking both an unspecified amount of damages and injunctive relief. The accused products include the iPhone 5, iPod Touch 5th Generation, iPad 4th Generation, iPad mini, and the latest Macintosh computers. Due to their release dates, these products were not included in the previous lawsuit that concluded with a Jury verdict on November 6, 2012 that was subsequently upheld by the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division, on February 26, 2013. On July 1, 2013, we filed a consolidated and amended complaint to include U.S. Patent No. 8,051,181 and consolidate Civil Action No. 6:11-cv-00563-LED. On August 27, 2013, we filed an amended complaint including allegations of willful infringement related to U.S. Patent No. 8,504,697 seeking both damages and injunctive relief. The Markman hearing in this case was held on May 20, 2014 and on August 8, 2014, issued its Markman Order, denying Apple’s motion for summary judgment of indefiniteness, in which Apple alleged that some of the disputed claims terms in the patents asserted by us were invalid for indefiniteness. In a separate order, the court granted in part and denied in part our motion for partial summary judgment on Apple’s invalidity counterclaims, precluding Apple from asserting invalidity as a defense against infringement of the claims that were tried before a jury in our prior litigation against Apple (VirnetX vs. Cisco et. al., Case 6:10-CV-00417-LED).. The jury trial in this case is scheduled for October 13, 2015.
One or more potential intellectual property infringement claims may also be available to us against certain other companies who have the resources to defend against any such claims. Although we believe these potential claims are worth pursuing, commencing a lawsuit can be expensive and time-consuming, and there is no assurance that we will prevail on such potential claims. In addition, bringing a lawsuit may lead to potential counterclaims which may preclude our ability to commercialize our initial products, which are currently in development. Currently, we are not a party to any other pending legal proceedings, and are not aware of any proceeding threatened or contemplated against us by any governmental authority or other party.
You should carefully consider the following material risks in addition to the other information set forth in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q, as well as our Annual Form 10-K filed March 3, 2014 before making any investment in our common stock. The risks and uncertainties described below are not the only ones we face. Additional risks and uncertainties not presently known to us or that we currently believe to be immaterial may also adversely affect our business. If any of these risk factors occurs, you could lose substantial value or your entire investment in our shares.
Risks Related to Our Business and Our Financial Reporting
We may not be able to capitalize on market opportunities related to our licensing strategy or our patent portfolio.
Our business strategy includes licensing our patents and technology to other companies in order to reach a larger end-user base than we could reach through direct sales and marketing efforts; as such, our business strategy and revenues will depend on intellectual property licensing fees and royalties for the majority of our revenues. We currently derive minimal revenue from licensing activities and we cannot assure you that we will successfully capitalize on our market opportunities or that our current business strategy will succeed. Factors that may affect our ability to execute our current business strategy including, but are not limited to:
| ● | Although we have to date entered into a limited number of settlement and license agreements, we may not be successful in entering into further licensing relationships and existing settlement and license agreements may not generate the financial results we expect; |
| ● | Third parties may challenge the validity of our patents; |
| ● | The pendency of our various litigations may cause potential licensees not to do business with us; |
| ● | We face, and we expect to continue to face, intense competition from new and established competitors who may have superior products and services or better marketing, financial or other capacities than we do; and |
| ● | It is possible that one or more of our potential customers or licensees develops or otherwise sources products or technologies similar to, competitive with or superior to ours. |
If we are not able to adequately protect our patent rights, our business would be negatively impacted.
We believe our patents are valid, enforceable and valuable. Notwithstanding this belief, third parties may make claims of infringement or invalidity claims with respect to our patents and such claims could give rise to material cost for defense or settlement or both, jeopardize or substantially delay a successful outcome of litigation we are or may become involved in, divert resources away from our other activities, limit or cease our revenues related to such patents, or otherwise materially and adversely affect our business. Similar challenges could also prevent us from obtaining additional patents in the future. Even if we are successful in enforcing our rights, our patents may not ultimately provide us with any competitive advantages and may be less valuable than we currently expect. These risks may be heightened in countries other than the United States where laws regarding patent protection are less developed, and may be negatively affected by the fact that legal standards in the United States and elsewhere for protection of intellectual property rights in Internet-related businesses are uncertain and still evolving. In addition, there are a significant number of United States and foreign patents and patent applications in our areas of interest, and we expect that significant litigation in these areas will continue, and will add uncertainty to the value of certain patents and other intellectual property rights in our areas of interest. If we are unable to protect our intellectual property rights or otherwise realize value from them, our business would be negatively affected.
We are involved and will continue to be involved in numerous litigation matters defending our patent portfolio, which can be time-consuming and costly and we cannot anticipate the results.
We spend a significant amount of our financial and management resources to pursue our current litigation matters and related patent office proceedings. We believe that these litigation matters and others that we may in the future determine to pursue could continue for years and continue to consume significant financial and management resources. The counterparties to our litigation are all large, well-financed companies with substantially greater resources than us. We cannot assure you that any of our current or future litigation matters will result in a favorable outcome for us. In addition, even if we obtain favorable interim rulings or verdicts in particular litigation matters, they may not be predictive of the ultimate resolution of the dispute. Also, we cannot assure you that we will not be exposed to claims or sanctions against us which may be costly or impossible for us to defend. Unfavorable or adverse outcomes may result in losses, exhaustion of financial resources or other adverse effects, which could encumber our ability to develop and commercialize products.
We may require additional capital to support our business growth, and this capital may not be available on acceptable terms, if at all.
We may require additional capital to support our business growth or to respond to business opportunities, challenges or unforeseen circumstances. Our ability to obtain additional capital, if and when required, will depend on our business plans, investor demand, our operating performance, the condition of the capital markets, and other factors. If we raise additional funds through the issuance of equity, equity-linked or debt securities, those securities may have rights, preferences, or privileges senior to the rights of our common stock, and our existing stockholders may experience dilution. If we are unable to obtain additional capital, or are unable to obtain additional capital on satisfactory terms, our ability to continue to support our business growth or to respond to business opportunities, challenges, or unforeseen circumstances could be adversely affected, and our business may be harmed.
We can provide no assurances that the licensing of our essential security patents under FRAND will be successful.
At the request of the European Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI), and the Alliance for Telecommunications Industry Solutions (ATIS), we agreed to update our licensing declaration to ETSI and ATIS under their respective Intellectual Property Rights (IRP) policies. This was in response to our Statement of Patent Holder identifying a group of our patents and patent applications that we believe are or may become essential to certain developing specifications in the 3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) Long Term Evolution (LTE), Systems Architecture Evolution (SAE) project. We will make available a non-exclusive patent license under FRAND (fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory terms and conditions, with compensation) for the patents identified by VirnetX that are or become essential, to applicants desiring to implement the Technical Specifications identified by VirnetX, as set forth in the updated licensing declaration under the ATIS and ETSI IPR policies. Our licensing declarations under the ATIS and ETSI IPR policies may limit our flexibility in determining royalties and license terms for certain of our patents. Consequently, we cannot assure you that the licensing of the essential security patents will be successful or that third parties will be willing to enter into licenses with VirnetX on reasonable terms or at all, which could have an adverse effect on our business and harm our competitive position.
Because our business is conducted or expected to be conducted in an environment that is subject to rapid change, we may be subject to various developments in regulation, law and consumer preferences to which we may not be able to adapt successfully.
The current regulatory environment for our products and services remains unclear. We can give no assurance that our planned product offerings will be in compliance with laws and regulations of local, state, United States federal or foreign authorities. Further, we can give no assurance that we will not unintentionally violate such laws or regulations or that such laws or regulations will not be modified, or that new laws or regulations will be enacted in the future which would cause us to be in violation of such laws or regulations. For example, Voice-over-Internet Protocol (or VoIP) services are not currently subject to all of the same regulations that apply to traditional telephony, but it is possible that similar regulations may be applied to VoIP in the future and that these could result in substantial costs which adversely affect the marketability of our products and planned products related to VoIP. For further example, the use of the Internet and private Internet Protocol (IP) networks for communication is largely unregulated within the United States, but may become regulated in the future; also several foreign governments have enacted measures that could restrict or prohibit voice communications services over the Internet or private IP networks.
Our business depends on the growth of instant messaging, VoIP, mobile services, streaming video, file transfer and remote desktop and other next-generation Internet-based applications which are relatively new. A decline in the use of these applications due to complexity or cost of these applications relative to alternate traditional or newly developed communications channels, or development of alternative technologies, could cause a material decline in the number of users in these areas.
More aggressive domestic or international regulation of the Internet in general, and Internet telephony providers and services specifically or a lack of growth in acceptance of the Internet as a long term viable marketplace for communications services may materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, operating results and future prospects.
Our exposure to outside influences beyond our control, including new legislation, court rulings or actions by the United States Patent and Trademark Office, could adversely affect our licensing and enforcement activities and results of operations.
Our licensing and enforcement activities are subject to numerous risks from outside influences, including the following:
| ● |
New legislation, regulations or rules related to obtaining patents or enforcing patents could significantly increase our operating costs and decrease our revenue. For instance, the United States Supreme Court has recently modified some tests used by the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) in granting patents during the past 20 years which may decrease the likelihood that we will be able to obtain patents and increase the likelihood of challenge of any patents we obtain or license. In addition, the United States recently enacted sweeping changes to the United States patent system under the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (“AIA”), including changes that transition the United States from a “first-to-invent” system to a “first to file” system and alter the processes for challenging issued patents
|
| ● | More patent applications are filed each year resulting in longer delays in getting patents issued by the USPTO. |
| ● | Federal courts are becoming more crowded, and as a result, patent enforcement litigation is taking longer. |
| ● | As patent enforcement becomes more prevalent, it may become more difficult for us to voluntarily license our patents. |
If we experience security breaches, we could be exposed to liability and our reputation and business could suffer.
We expect to retain certain confidential customer information in our secure data centers and secure domain name registry. It will be critical to our business strategy that our facilities and infrastructure remain secure and are perceived by the marketplace to be secure. Our secure domain name registry operations will also depend on our ability to maintain our computer and telecommunications equipment in effective working order and to reasonably protect our systems against interruption, and potentially depend on protection by other registrars in the shared registration system. The secure domain name servers that we will operate will be critical hardware to our registry services operations. Therefore, we expect to have to expend significant time and money to maintain or increase the security of our facilities and infrastructure. Security technologies are constantly being tested by computer professionals, academics and “hackers.” Advances in the techniques for attacking security solutions could make some or all of our products obsolete or unmarketable. Likewise, if any of our products are found to have significant security vulnerabilities, then we may need to dedicate engineering and other resources to eliminate the vulnerabilities and to repair or replace products already sold or licensed to our customers. Despite our security measures, our infrastructure may be vulnerable to physical break-ins, computer viruses, attacks by hackers or similar disruptive problems. It is possible that we may have to expend additional financial and other resources to address such problems. Any physical or electronic break-in or other security breach or compromise of the information stored at our secure data centers and domain name registration systems may jeopardize the security of information stored on our premises or in the computer systems and networks of our customers. In such an event, we could face significant liability and customers could be reluctant to use our services. Such an occurrence could also result in adverse publicity and therefore adversely affect the market’s perception of the security of electronic commerce and communications over IP networks as well as the security or reliability of our services.
A security breach could require a substantial amount of expense to rectify and could result in a product liability claim that causes us to incur substantial liability and related legal and other costs. A security breach may also harm our reputation and make it more difficult or impossible for us to successfully market to others. These matters could harm our operating results and financial condition.
We expect that we will experience long and unpredictable sales cycles, which may impact our operating results.
We expect that our sales cycles will be long and unpredictable due to a number of uncertainties such as:
| ● | The need to educate potential customers about our patent rights and our product and service capabilities; |
| ● | Customers’ willingness to invest potentially substantial resources and modify their network infrastructures to take advantage of our products; |
| ● | Customers’ budgetary constraints; |
| ● | The timing of customers’ budget cycles; and |
| ● | Delays caused by customers’ internal review processes. |
| ● | Long sales cycles may increase the risk that our financial resources are exhausted before we are able to generate significant revenue. |
We expect that we will be substantially dependent on a concentrated number of customers. If we are unable to establish, maintain or replace our relationships with customers and develop a diversified customer base, our revenues may fluctuate and our growth may be limited.
We expect that in the future, a significant portion of our revenues will be generated from a limited number of customers. There can be no guarantee that we will be able to obtain additional customers, or if we do so, to sustain our revenue levels from these prospective customers. If we are not able to establish, maintain or replace the limited group of prospective customers that we anticipate may generate a substantial majority of our revenues in the future, or if they do not generate revenues at the levels or at the times that we anticipate, our ability to maintain or grow our revenues will be adversely affected.
Our products are highly technical and may contain undetected errors, which could cause harm to our reputation and adversely affect our business.
Our products are highly technical and complex and, when deployed, may contain errors or defects. Despite testing, some errors in our products may only be discovered after a product has been installed and used by customers. Any errors or defects discovered in our products after commercial release could result in failure to achieve market acceptance, loss of revenue or delay in revenue recognition, loss of customers and increased service and warranty cost, any of which could adversely affect our business, operating results and financial condition. In addition, we could face claims for product liability, tort or breach of warranty, including claims relating to changes to our products made by our channel partners. The performance of our products could have unforeseen or unknown adverse effects on the networks over which they are delivered as well as on third-party applications and services that utilize our services, which could result in legal claims against us, harming our business. Furthermore, we expect to provide implementation, consulting and other technical services in connection with the implementation and ongoing maintenance of our products, which typically involves working with sophisticated software, computing and communications systems. We expect that our contracts with customers will contain provisions relating to warranty disclaimers and liability limitations, which may not be upheld. Defending a lawsuit, regardless of its merit, is costly and may divert management’s attention and adversely affect the market’s perception of us and our products. In addition, if our business liability insurance coverage proves inadequate or future coverage is unavailable on acceptable terms or at all, our business, operating results and financial condition could be adversely impacted.
Malfunctions of third-party communications infrastructure, hardware and software expose us to a variety of risks we cannot control.
Our business will depend upon, among other things, the capacity, reliability and security of the infrastructure owned by third parties that we will use to deploy our offerings. We have no control over the operation, quality or maintenance of a significant portion of that infrastructure or whether or not those third parties will upgrade or improve their equipment. We depend on these companies to maintain the operational integrity of our connections. If one or more of these companies is unable or unwilling to supply or expand its levels of service to us in the future, our operations could be severely interrupted. Also, to the extent the number of users of networks utilizing our future products suddenly increases, the technology platform and secure hosting services which will be required to accommodate a higher volume of traffic may result in slower response times or service interruptions. System interruptions or increases in response time could result in a loss of potential or existing users and, if sustained or repeated, could reduce the appeal of the networks to users. In addition, users depend on real-time communications; outages caused by increased traffic could result in delays and system failures. These types of occurrences could cause users to perceive that our solution does not function properly and could therefore adversely affect our ability to attract and retain licensees, strategic partners and customers.
System failure or interruption or our failure to meet increasing demands on our systems could harm our business.
The success of our license and service offerings will depend on the uninterrupted operation of various systems, secure data centers and other computer and communication networks that we establish. To the extent the number of users of networks utilizing our future products suddenly increases, the technology platform and hosting services which will be required to accommodate a higher volume of traffic may result in slower response times, service interruptions or delays or system failures. Our systems and operations will also be vulnerable to damage or interruption from:
| ● | power loss, transmission cable cuts and other telecommunications failures; |
| ● | damage or interruption caused by fire, earthquake, and other natural disasters; |
| ● | computer viruses or software defects; and |
| ● | physical or electronic break-ins, sabotage, intentional acts of vandalism, terrorist attacks and other events beyond our control |
System interruptions or failures and increases or delays in response time could result in a loss of potential or existing users and, if sustained or repeated, could reduce the appeal of the networks to users. These types of occurrences could cause users to perceive that our solution does not function properly and could therefore adversely affect our ability to attract and retain licensees, strategic partners and customers.
Any significant problem with our systems or operations could result in lost revenue, customer dissatisfaction or lawsuits against us. A failure in the operation of our secure domain name registration system could result in the inability of one or more registrars to register and maintain secure domain names for a period of time. A failure in the operation or update of the master directory that we plan to maintain could result in deletion or discontinuation of assigned secure domain names for a period of time. The inability of the registrar systems we establish, including our back office billing and collections infrastructure, and telecommunications systems to meet the demands of an increasing number of secure domain name requests could result in substantial degradation in our customer support service and our ability to process registration requests in a timely manner.
Our ability to sell our solutions will be dependent on the quality of our technical support, and our failure to deliver high-quality technical support services could have a material adverse effect on our sales and results of operations.
If we do not effectively assist our customers in deploying our products, succeed in helping our customers quickly resolve post-deployment issues and provide effective ongoing support, or if potential customers perceive that we may not be able achieve to the foregoing, our ability to sell our products would be adversely affected, and our reputation with potential customers could be harmed. In addition, as we expand our operations internationally, our technical support team will face additional challenges, including those associated with delivering support, training and documentation in languages other than English. Our failure to deliver and maintain high-quality technical support services to our customers could result in customers choosing to use our competitors’ products instead of ours in the future.
Telephone carriers have petitioned governmental agencies to enforce regulatory tariffs, which, if granted, would increase the cost of online communication, and such increase in cost may impede the growth of online communication and adversely affect our business.
Use of the Internet has over-burdened existing telecommunications infrastructures, and many high traffic areas have begun to experience interruptions in service. As a result, certain local telephone carriers have petitioned governmental agencies to enforce regulatory tariffs on IP telephony traffic that crosses over their traditional telephone networks. If the relief sought in these petitions is granted, the costs of communicating via online could increase substantially, potentially adversely affecting the growth in the use of online secure communications. Any of these developments could have an adverse effect on our business.
The departure of Kendall Larsen, our Chief Executive Officer and President, and/or other key personnel could compromise our ability to execute our strategic plan and may result in additional severance costs to us.
Our success largely depends on the skills, experience and efforts of our key personnel, including Kendall Larsen, our Chief Executive Officer and President. We have no employment agreements with any of our key executives that prevent them from leaving us at any time. In addition, we do not maintain key person life insurance for any of our officers or key employees. The loss of Mr. Larsen, or our failure to retain other key personnel, would jeopardize our ability to execute our strategic plan and materially harm our business.
We will need to recruit and retain additional qualified personnel to successfully grow our business.
Our future success will depend in part on our ability to attract and retain qualified operations, marketing and sales personnel as well as engineers. Inability to attract and retain such personnel could adversely affect our business. Competition for engineering, sales, marketing and executive personnel is intense, particularly in the technology and Internet sectors and in the regions where our facilities are located. We can provide no assurance that we will attract or retain such personnel.
The fair value of accounting for our Series I Warrants as derivative liabilities may materially impact our results of our operations in future periods.
We record the Series I Warrants as a derivative liability in accordance with ASC 815-40, “Derivatives and Hedging – Contracts in Entity’s Own Equity.” These derivative liabilities are reported at fair value each reporting period with changes in the fair value recognized as gain or loss during each reporting period. An increase in our share price or measure of our share price volatility, for example, will generally result in an increase in the fair value of our warrant liability and a non-cash charge during the period of such increase, which could materially and negatively impact our results of operations in future periods.
We may identify future material weaknesses which may result in late filings, increased costs or declines in our share price.
Although we believe that we currently maintain effective control over our disclosures and procedures and internal control over financial reporting, we may in the future identify deficiencies regarding the design and effectiveness of our system of internal control over financial reporting. If we experience any material weaknesses in our internal control over financial reporting the future or are unable to provide unqualified management or attestation reports about our internal controls, we may be unable to meet financial and other reporting deadlines and may incur costs associated with remediation, and any of which could cause our share price to decline.
Risks Related to Our Stock
We do not currently pay dividends on our common stock and thus stockholders must look to appreciation of our common stock to realize a gain on their investments.
Our dividend policy is within the discretion of our Board of Directors and will depend upon various factors, including our business, financial condition, results of operations, capital requirements, and investment opportunities. We therefore can’t make assurances that our Board of Directors will determine to pay regular or special dividends in the future. Accordingly, unless our Board of Directors determines to pay dividends, stockholders will be required to look to appreciation of our common stock to realize a gain on their investment. This appreciation may not occur.
The exercise of our outstanding stock options would result in a dilution of our current stockholders' voting power and an increase in the number of shares eligible for future resale in the public market which may negatively impact the market price of our stock.
The exercise of our outstanding vested stock options would dilute the ownership interests of our existing stockholders. As of September 30, 2014, we had outstanding options to purchase an aggregate of 4,982,253 shares of common stock representing approximately 9.7 percent of our total shares outstanding as of September 30, 2014, of which 4,381,438 are vested and therefore exercisable. To the extent outstanding stock options are exercised, additional shares of common stock will be issued, and such issuance would dilute non-exercising stockholders' percentage voting interests and increase the number of shares eligible for resale in the public market.
The trading in our common shares is limited and the price of our common shares may be subject to substantial volatility, particularly in light of instability in the financial and capital markets.
Our common stock is listed on NYSE MKT. Over the past years the market price of our common stock has experienced significant fluctuations. Between July 1, 2013, and September 30, 2014, the reported last sale price on NYSE MKT for our common stock ranged between $4.95 and $22.65 per share. The price of our common stock may continue to be volatile as a result of a number of factors, some of which are beyond our control. These factors include, but not limited to, the following:
| ● | developments in any then-outstanding litigation or patent office proceedings; |
| ● | quarterly variations in our operating results; |
| ● | large purchases or sales of common stock or derivative transactions related to our stock; |
| ● | actual or anticipated announcements of new products or services by us or competitors; |
| ● | general conditions in the markets in which we compete; and |
| ● | general economic and financial conditions |
In addition, we believe there has been and may continue to be substantial trading in derivatives of our stock, including short selling activity or related similar activities, which are beyond our control and which may be beyond the full control of the SEC and Financial Institutions Regulatory Authority ("FINRA"). While SEC and FINRA rules prohibit some forms of short selling and other activities that may result in stock price manipulation, such activity may nonetheless occur without detection or enforcement. We have held conversations with regulators concerning trading activity in our stock; however, there can be no assurance that should there be any illegal manipulation in the trading of our stock it will be detected, prosecuted or successfully eradicated. Significant short selling or other types of market manipulation could cause our stock trading price to decline, to become more volatile, or both.
The market price of our common stock may decline because our operating results may not be consistent and may be difficult to predict.
Our reported net income has fluctuated in the past due to several factors. We expect that our future operating results may also fluctuate due to the same or similar factors. We had a net loss of $26.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2012 a net loss of $27.6 million for the year ended December 31, 2013 and a net loss of $4.5 million for the quarter ended September 30, 2014 with an accumulated deficit of $107.8 million. The following include some of the factors that may cause our operating results to fluctuate:
| · | the outcome of actions to enforce our intellectual property rights currently in progress or that we may undertake in the future, and the timing thereof; |
| · | the amount and timing of receipt of license fees from potential infringers, licensees or customers; |
| · | the rate of adoption of our patented technologies; |
| · | the number of new license arrangements we may execute, or that may expire, within a particular period and the scope of those licenses, including the number of our patents which are licensed, the extent of prior infringement of our patent rights, royalty rates, timing of payment obligations, expiration date etc.; |
| · | the success of a licensee in selling products that use our patented technologies; and |
| · | the amount and timing of expenses related to our patent filings and enforcement proceedings, including litigation, related to our intellectual property rights |
These fluctuations may make our business particularly difficult to manage, adversely affect our business and operating results, make our operating results difficult for investors to predict and, further, cause our results to fall below investor’s expectations and adversely affect the market price of our common stock.
Because ownership of our common stock is concentrated, investors may have limited influence on stockholder decisions.
As of September 30, 2014, our executive officers and directors beneficially owned approximately 18% of our outstanding common stock. In addition, a group of stockholders that, as of December 31, 2007, held 4,766,666 shares, or approximately 11%, of our then outstanding common stock, have entered into a voting agreement with us that requires them to vote all of their shares of our voting stock in favor of the director nominees approved by our Board of Directors at each director election going forward, and in a manner that is proportional to the votes cast by all other voting shares as to any other matters submitted to the stockholders for a vote. However, we cannot be certain how many shares of our common stock this group of stockholders currently owns. Because of their beneficial ownership interest, our officers and directors could significantly influence stockholder actions of which you disapprove or that are contrary to your interests. This ability to exercise significant influence could prevent or significantly delay another company from acquiring or merging with us.
Our protective provisions could make it difficult for a third party to successfully acquire us even if you would like to sell your stock to them.
We have a number of protective provisions that could delay, discourage or prevent a third party from acquiring control of us without the approval of our Board of Directors. Our protective provisions include:
| ● | A staggered Board of Directors: This means that only one or two directors (since we have a five-person Board of Directors) will be up for election at any given annual meeting. This has the effect of delaying the ability of stockholders to effect a change in control of us because it would take two annual meetings to effectively replace a majority of the Board of Directors. |
| ● | Blank check preferred stock: Our Board of Directors has the authority to establish the rights, preferences and privileges of our 10,000,000 authorized, but unissued, shares of preferred stock. Therefore, this stock may be issued at the discretion of our Board of Directors with preferences over your shares of our common stock in a manner that is materially dilutive to you. In addition, blank check preferred stock can be used to create a “poison pill” which is designed to deter a hostile bidder from buying a controlling interest in our stock without the approval of our Board of Directors. We have not adopted such a “poison pill;” but our Board of Directors has the ability to do so in the future, very rapidly and without stockholder approval. |
| ● | Advance notice requirements for director nominations and for new business to be brought up at stockholder meetings: Stockholders wishing to submit director nominations or raise matters to a vote of the stockholders must provide notice to us within very specific date windows and in very specific form in order to have the matter voted on at a stockholder meeting. This has the effect of giving our Board of Directors and management more time to react to stockholder proposals generally and could also have the effect of disregarding a stockholder proposal or deferring it to a subsequent meeting to the extent such proposal is not raised properly. |
| ● | No stockholder actions by written consent: No stockholder or group of stockholders may take actions rapidly and without prior notice to our Board of Directors and management or to the minority stockholders. Along with the advance notice requirements described above, this provision also gives our Board of Directors and management more time to react to proposed stockholder actions. |
| ● | Super majority requirement for stockholder amendments to the By-laws: Stockholder proposals to alter or amend our By-laws or to adopt new By-laws can only be approved by the affirmative vote of at least 66 2/3% of the outstanding shares of our common stock. |
| ● | No ability of stockholders to call a special meeting of the stockholders: Only the Board of Directors or management can call special meetings of the stockholders. This could mean that stockholders, even those who represent a significant percentage of our shares of common stock, may need to wait for the annual meeting before nominating directors or raising other business proposals to be voted on by the stockholders. |
In addition, the provisions of Section 203 of the Delaware General Corporate Law govern us. These provisions may prohibit large stockholders, in particular those owning 15% or more of our outstanding voting stock, from merging or combining with us for a certain period of time.
These and other provisions in our amended and restated certificate of incorporation, our By-laws and under Delaware law could discourage potential takeover attempts, reduce the price that investors might be willing to pay for shares of our common stock in the future and result in the market price being lower than it would be without these provisions.
|
Number
|
Description
|
|
31.1
|
Certification of the President and Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
|
|
31.2
|
Certification of the Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
|
|
32.1*
|
Certification of the President and Chief Executive Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
|
|
32.2*
|
Certification of the Chief Financial Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
|
|
101
|
Interactive Data Files
|
| * | This exhibit is furnished herewith, but not deemed “filed” for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or otherwise subject to liability under that section. Such certifications will not be deemed to be incorporated by reference in any filing under the Securities Act or the Exchange Act, except to the extent that we explicitly incorporate them by reference. |
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned thereunto duly authorized.
|
VIRNETX HOLDING CORPORATION
|
|||
|
By:
|
/s/ Kendall Larsen
|
||
|
Name
|
Kendall Larsen
|
||
|
Title
|
Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer)
|
||
|
By:
|
/s/ Richard H. Nance
|
||
|
Name
|
Richard H. Nance
|
||
|
Title
|
Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial Officer and Principal Accounting Officer)
|
||
|
Date: November 10, 2014
|
|||
|
Exhibit
Number
|
Description
|
|
Certification of the President and Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
|
|
|
Certification of the Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
|
|
|
Certification of the President and Chief Executive Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
|
|
|
Certification of the Chief Financial Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
|
|
|
101
|
Interactive Data Files
|
| * | This exhibit is furnished herewith, but not deemed “filed” for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or otherwise subject to liability under that section. Such certifications will not be deemed to be incorporated by reference in any filing under the Securities Act or the Exchange Act, except to the extent that we explicitly incorporate them by reference. |
30