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

FORM 20-F

(Mark One)
☐ REGISTRATION STATEMENT PURSUANT TO SECTION 12(b) OR (g) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

OR

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

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2023

OR

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

OR

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

Date of event requiring this shell company report

For the transition period from          to

Commission file number 001-39461

NANO-X IMAGING LTD
(Exact name of Registrant as specified in its charter)

N/A
(Translation of Registrant’s name into English)

State of Israel
(Jurisdiction of incorporation or organization)

Ofer Tech Park, 94 Shlomo Shmeltzer Road
Petach Tikva, Israel 4970602
(Address of principal executive offices)

Erez Meltzer, Chief Executive Officer

Telephone:
+972 03 37359202
+972 03 37359203

Email: Erez.m@nanox.vision

Ofer Tech Park, 94 Shlomo Shmeltzer Road
Petach Tikva, Israel 4970602
(Name, Telephone, E-mail and/or Facsimile number and Address of Company Contact Person)

Securities registered or to be registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act.

Securities registered or to be registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: None

Securities for which there is a reporting obligation pursuant to Section 15(d) of the Act: None

Indicate the number of outstanding shares of each of the issuer’s classes of capital or common stock as of the close of the period covered by the annual report:57,778,628 Ordinary Shares as of December 31, 2023

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

If this report is an annual or transition report, indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Yes ☐ No ☒

Note—Checking the box above will not relieve any registrant required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 from their obligations under those sections.

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

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically every Interactive Data File required to be submitted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit such files). Yes ☒ No ☐

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or an emerging growth company. See definition of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer,” and “emerging growth company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.

If an emerging growth company that prepares its financial statements in accordance with U.S. GAAP, indicate by check mark if the registrant has elected not to use the extended transition period for complying with any new or revised financial accounting standards† provided pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act. ☐

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has filed a report on and attestation to its management’s assessment of the effectiveness of its internal control over financial reporting under Section 404(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (15 U.S.C. 7262(b)) by the registered public accounting firm that prepared or issued its audit report. ☒

If securities are registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act, indicate by check mark whether the financial statements of the registrant included in the filing reflect the correction of an error to previously issued financial statements. ☐

Indicate by check mark whether any of those error corrections are restatements that required a recovery analysis of incentive-based compensation received by any of the registrant’s executive officers during the relevant recovery period pursuant to §240.10D-1(b). ☐

Indicate by check mark which basis of accounting the registrant has used to prepare the financial statements included in this annual report:

If “Other” has been checked in response to the previous question, indicate by check mark which financial statement item the registrant has elected to follow. Item 17 ☐ Item 18 ☐

If this is an annual report, indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act). Yes ☐ No ☒

(APPLICABLE ONLY TO ISSUERS INVOLVED IN BANKRUPTCY PROCEEDINGS DURING THE PAST FIVE YEARS)

Indicate by checkmark whether the registrant has filed all documents and reports required to be filed by Sections 12, 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 subsequent to the distribution of securities under a plan confirmed by a court. Yes ☐ No ☐

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION

NANO-X IMAGING LTD was incorporated under the laws of the State of Israel on December 20, 2018 and commenced operations on September 3, 2019. Unless the context otherwise requires, all references to “Nanox,” “we,” “us,” “our,” the “Company” and similar designations refer to NANO-X IMAGING LTD, an Israeli company, and its consolidated subsidiaries. Unless derived from our financial statements or otherwise noted, the terms “shekels” and “NIS” refer to New Israeli Shekels, the lawful currency of the State of Israel, the terms “dollar” or “$” refer to U.S. dollars, the lawful currency of the United States, “and “KRW” refers to Korean Won, the lawful currency of South Korea.

FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

The forward-looking statements made in this annual report relate only to events as of the date on which the statements are made. We undertake no obligation to update any forward-looking statements made in this annual report to reflect events or circumstances after the date of this annual report or to reflect new information or the occurrence of unanticipated events, except as required by law. We may not actually achieve the plans, intentions or expectations disclosed in our forward-looking statements, and you should not place undue reliance on our forward-looking statements. Our forward-looking statements do not reflect the potential impact of any future acquisitions, mergers, dispositions, joint ventures or investments.

All statements that are not historical facts contained in this annual report on Form 20-F are forward-looking statements. These forward-looking statements include information about possible or assumed future results of our business, financial condition, results of operations, prospects, liquidity, plans and objectives. In some cases, you can identify forward-looking statements by terminology such as “can,” “might,” “believe,” “may,” “estimate,” “continue,” “anticipate,” “intend,” “should,” “plan,” “could,” “expect,” “predict,” “potential,” or the negative of these terms or other similar expressions. Forward-looking statements are based on information we have when those statements are made or our management’s good faith belief as of that time with respect to future events, and are subject to risks and uncertainties that could cause actual performance or results to differ materially from those expressed in or suggested by the forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, statements concerning:

Many important factors, in addition to the factors described above and in other sections of this annual report on Form 20-F, could adversely impact our business and financial performance. The forward-looking statements contained in this annual report on Form 20-F speak only as of the date of this annual report on Form 20-F and are subject to a number of known and unknown risks, uncertainties and assumptions, including those described under the sections in this annual report on Form 20-F entitled “Item 3. Key Information—D. Risk Factors” and “Item 5. Operating and Financial Review and Prospects” and elsewhere in this annual report on Form 20-F. Because forward-looking statements are inherently subject to risks and uncertainties, some of which cannot be predicted or quantified and some of which are beyond our control, you should not rely on these forward-looking statements as predictions of future events. Moreover, we operate in an evolving environment. New risks and uncertainties emerge from time to time, and it is not possible for our management to predict all risks and uncertainties, nor can we assess the impact of all factors on our business or the extent to which any factor, or combination of factors, may cause actual results to differ materially from estimates or forward-looking statements. We qualify all of our forward-looking statements by these cautionary statements. Except as required by law, we undertake no obligation to update publicly any forward-looking statements after the date of this annual report on Form 20-F to conform these statements to actual results or to changes in our expectations.

Part I

Item 1. Identity of Directors, Senior Management and Advisors

Not applicable.

Item 2. Offer Statistics and Expected Timetable

Not applicable.

Item 3. Key Information

A. Reserved

B. Capitalization and Indebtedness

Not applicable.

C. Reasons for the Offer and Use of Proceeds

Not applicable.

D. Risk Factors

Risk Factors Summary

Risks Related to Our Business

Risks Related to Our Intellectual Property

Risks Related to Government Regulation

Risks Related to Employee Matters

Risks Related to Owning Our Ordinary Shares

Risks Related to Our Operations in Israel

Risks Related to Our Business

We are an initial launch-stage company with limited operating history. We expect to incur significant additional losses in the future and may never be able to effectuate our business plan or achieve significant revenue or reach profitability. Therefore, at this stage of our business, potential investors have a high probability of losing their entire investment.

We are an initial launch-stage company, and are subject to all of the risks inherent in the establishment of a new business enterprise. While we began to generate revenue in the year ended December 31, 2021 through the sale of teleradiology services and the sale of AI solutions, following the completion of the acquisitions of Nano-X AI Ltd (“Nanox AI”) (formerly known as Zebra Medical Vision Ltd. (“Zebra”)), USARAD Holdings, Inc., a Delaware corporation (“USARAD”) and the assets of MDWEB, LLC (“MDWEB”) in November 2021, we have a limited operating history and an unproven business plan upon which investors may evaluate our prospects. We have obtained FDA clearance for the Nanox.ARC (including the Nanox.CLOUD), a multi-source 3D digital tomosynthesis system, for certain specified uses, and have produced a few dozen systems to date. We deployed the Nanox System at several medical imaging and diagnostic testing centers across various states in the United States and in other countries. As we are in the initial stages of commercial deployment of the Nanox System, we are still assessing and validating our MSaaS model. In addition, clinical operations of the Nanox System are expected to begin in additional sites, subject to certifications from the requisite regulatory authorities. We engaged Dagesh P.K. Ltd. (“Dagesh”) to manufacture these first Nanox.ARC units in Israel on a purchase order basis, and we expect such Nanox.ARC units will be used for the initial global deployment, among other purposes. Even if we are able to manufacture the Nanox.ARC, we may not be able to do so at the low costs needed to support our business models, including the Subscription Model, which is our primary business model. We may not receive, or may be delayed in receiving, the necessary approval or clearance for the Nanox System for additional uses or our future products. We also have not entered into any commercial arrangement for the licensing of our X-ray source under the Licensing Model.

Furthermore, even if our technology becomes commercially viable, our business models may not generate sufficient revenue necessary to support our business. We may never produce or deploy a sufficient number of Nanox Systems to jumpstart the MSaaS-based medical imaging market at any level or at all, which may cause our business to fail. The Subscription Model is based on selling the Nanox System at low cost or no cost using a pay-per-scan pricing structure, which is pioneering for medical imaging companies and is subject to numerous risks. The medical imaging industry is also highly competitive and our technology, products, services or business models may not achieve widespread market acceptance. If we are unable to address any issues mentioned above, or encounter other problems, expenses, difficulties, complications, and delays in connection with the starting and expansion of our business, our entire business may fail, in which case you may lose your entire investment.

We have a history of net losses and negative cash flow from operations since inception and we expect such losses and negative cash flows from operations to continue in the foreseeable future. As of December 31, 2023, 2022 and 2021, we had working capital of approximately $73.1 million, $57.4 million and $42.1 million, respectively, and shareholders’ equity of approximately $195.5 million, $216.7 million and $292.1 million, respectively. For the years ended December 31, 2023, 2022, and 2021, we incurred net losses of approximately $60.8 million, $113.2 million and $61.8 million, respectively. As of December 31, 2023, 2022 and 2021, we had an accumulated deficit of approximately $320.2 million, $259.5 million and $146.2 million, respectively, and negative cash flow from operations of $44.8 million, $43.4 million and $38.1 million for the years ended December 31, 2023, 2022, and 2021, respectively. We anticipate our losses will continue to increase from current levels because we expect to incur additional costs related to developing our business, including research and development costs, manufacturing costs, employee-related costs, costs related to acquisitions, costs of complying with government regulations, intellectual property development and prosecution costs, marketing and promotion costs, capital expenditures, general and administrative expenses (including litigation costs), and costs associated with operating as a public company.

Our ability to generate significant revenue from our operations and, ultimately, achieve profitability will depend on, among others, whether we can complete the development and commercialization of our technology, our future products and our services, including our X-ray source technology, the Nanox.ARC and the Nanox.CLOUD, whether we can manufacture the Nanox.ARC on a commercial scale in such amounts and at such costs as we anticipate, and whether we can achieve market acceptance of our products, services and business models. We may never generate significant revenue or operate on a profitable basis. Even if we achieve profitability, we may not be able to sustain it.

Our efforts may never demonstrate the feasibility of our digital X-ray source technology, including both the MEMs X-ray chips and tubes, for commercial applications.

We have developed our X-ray source technology, including both the MEMs X-ray chips and tubes, and the Nanox System, which includes the Nanox.ARC and the Nanox.CLOUD. Even though we believe our X-ray source, which we refer to as the Nanox.SOURCE, has achieved commercial applicability, our technology has not been tested over extended periods of time and therefore no meaningful data exists regarding the durability, safety and effectiveness of our X-ray source over extended periods. In addition, there is no precedent for commercialization of technology like ours. The commercial scale production and deployment of the Nanox System will require significant additional sales and marketing efforts, and we may not be able to ensure the effectiveness, accuracy, consistency and safety of the Nanox System in mass production and deployment. Any unanticipated technical or other problems and the possible insufficiency of funds and other resources needed to continue the development and commercialization of our X-ray source, the Nanox.ARC or the Nanox.CLOUD may result in delays and cause us to incur additional expenses that would increase our losses. If our X-ray source is not commercially feasible now or in the long term, our business may fail.

Two of our business models depend on the successful commercial application of the Nanox.CLOUD, which is subject to numerous risks and uncertainties.

In addition to the Nanox.ARC, we have also developed, and continue to improve, the Nanox.CLOUD, a companion cloud software designed to deliver MSaaS. The continued development and commercialization of the Nanox.CLOUD has a number of risks, including:

If we are unable to successfully commercialize the Nanox.CLOUD, our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects could be negatively impacted.

Our ability to generate revenue from our teleradiology services and AI solutions, as well as the other imaging offerings that we are developing, will depend in large part on referrals from physicians.

The use of AI in healthcare offerings poses certain clinical risks resulting from potential misdiagnosis or misinformation provided from AI applications, diminishing critical judgment, or loss of interpersonal care from clinicians. These deficiencies could undermine the decisions, predictions, or analysis AI applications produce, as well as their adoption, subjecting us to competitive harm, legal liability, including under new proposed legislation regulating AI in jurisdictions such as the EU or new applications of existing data protection, privacy, IP, and other laws; regulatory actions; and reputational harm.

In addition, some AI scenarios, such as using AI applications to generate patient data, even if synthetic and non-identifiable, present ethical, privacy, or other social issues, risking reputational harm and/or reduced market demand or acceptance of AI solutions. The safeguards we have designed to promote the ethical implementation of AI may not be sufficient to protect us against negative outcomes.

We also depend on referrals of patients from unaffiliated physicians and other third parties who have no contractual obligations to refer patients to us for our teleradiology services, as well as the other imaging offerings that we are developing. If these physicians and other third parties do not refer patients to us, our ability to generate revenue from our teleradiology services, as well as the other imaging offerings that we are developing would be adversely affected. Further, we currently derive substantially all of our revenue from our teleradiology services from fees charged for the diagnostic imaging services performed by radiologists. If physicians and other third parties were to discontinue referring patients to our radiologists, our revenue from our teleradiology services would decrease and our financial results could be adversely affected.

All of these risks are amplified by the critical nature of healthcare decisions and the sensitivity of health-related information, and the occurrence of any of the above could have a material adverse effect on our business results, cash flows, financial condition, or prospects.

We are highly dependent on the successful manufacturing, marketing and sale of our X-ray source technology and the related products and services.

Our core digital X-ray source technology is the basis of our Nanox System. As a result, the success of our business plan is highly dependent on our ability to manufacture and commercialize our X-ray source technology and related products and services, and our failure to do so could cause our business to fail. Successful commercialization of medical imaging devices is a complex and uncertain process, dependent on the efforts of management, manufacturers, local operators, integrators, medical professionals, third-party payors, as well as general economic conditions, among other factors. Any factor that adversely impacts the manufacture and commercialization of our X-ray source technology or related products and services will have a negative impact on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. Some potential factors include:

Our inability to successfully obtain applicable approval for and subsequently commercialize our X-ray source technology or related products and services, and/or successfully develop and commercialize additional products or any enhancements to the products which we may develop would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Products utilizing our technology may need to be approved or cleared by the FDA and similar regulatory agencies worldwide. We may not receive, or may be delayed in receiving, the necessary approval or clearance for our future products, which would adversely affect business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

We continue to implement a multi-step approach to the regulatory clearance process. On April 1, 2021, we received clearance from the FDA to market our Nanox Cart X-Ray System. On April 28, 2023, we received a 510(k) clearance from the FDA to market the Nanox.ARC (including the Nanox.CLOUD), a multi-source 3D digital tomosynthesis system, as a stationary X-ray system intended to produce tomographic images of the human musculoskeletal system adjunctive to conventional radiography, on adult patients. This device is intended to be used in professional healthcare facilities or radiological environments, such as hospitals, clinics, imaging centers and other medical practices by trained radiographers, radiologists and physicians. In the U.S., each state requires regulatory approvals for these uses. The Company received regulatory approvals in some states and intends to pursue the requisite approvals in additional states. In the future, we plan to seek additional clearances or approvals from the FDA for additional uses of the currently cleared Nanox System, or for future versions of the Nanox System.

We are in the early stages of commercializing the FDA-cleared Nanox.ARC and the Nanox.CLOUD as the Nanox System, and we may also commercialize one or more future versions of our Nanox System, once cleared or approved. We may need to seek approval from foreign regulatory authorities. We believe the digital X-ray source falls within a category of radiology vacuum tubes converting electrical input power into X-rays that utilize the same energy levels, radiation types and throughputs as already existing and approved X-ray tubes applied in a wide range of radiology medical procedures. As a result, we expect that there will be no novel claim or methodology related to the X-ray radiation produced by the digital X-ray source; however, regulatory agencies may not agree. To date, we have not had any discussion with the FDA or other regulatory authorities regarding the regulatory pathways for the novel digital X-ray source. Although we have received FDA clearance for the Nanox.ARC, efforts to achieve additional governmental clearances and approvals could be costly and time consuming, and we may not be able to obtain any such required clearances or approvals in accordance with our anticipated timeline or in a cost-efficient manner. Any delay or failure to obtain necessary regulatory clearances or approvals could have a material negative impact on our ability to generate revenues. Even if the products containing our technology receive the required regulatory clearance or approval, such products will remain subject to extensive regulatory requirements. If we fail to comply with the regulatory requirements of the FDA and other applicable U.S. and foreign regulatory authorities, or previously unknown problems with any approved commercial products, manufacturers or manufacturing processes are discovered, we could be subject to administrative or judicially imposed sanctions.

In addition, the cost of compliance with new laws or regulations governing our technology or future products could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. New laws or regulations may impose restrictions or obligations on us that could force us to redesign our technology or other future products or services, and may impose restrictions that are not possible or practicable to comply with, which could cause our business to fail. See “—Risks Related to Government Regulation.”

We may need to obtain additional financing to fund our future operations. If we are unable to obtain such financing, we may be unable to complete the development and commercialization of our technology and our products and services.

Our operations have consumed substantial amounts of cash since inception. Our net losses were $60.8 million, $113.2 million and $61.8 million for the years ended December 31, 2023, 2022 and 2021, respectively. In addition, significant resources were invested in the development of our X-ray source technology prior to us acquiring the technology. We anticipate that our future cash requirements will continue to be significant. While we began to generate revenue in the year ended December 31, 2021 and continued to generate revenue in the years ended December 31, 2022 and 2023, we expect that we will need to obtain additional financing to implement our business plan as described in this annual report on Form 20-F, such as the financing we consummated with a single institutional investor in July of 2023. Specifically, although we believe our cash on hand is sufficient to complete the manufacture, shipping, installation and deployment of a significant number of Nanox System units, as well as to support the ongoing development of the Nanox.ARC and the Nanox.CLOUD, we may need to raise additional funds for such purposes. Such financings could include equity financing, which may be dilutive to shareholders, or debt financing, which would likely restrict our ability to borrow from other sources. In addition, such securities may contain rights, preferences or privileges senior to those of the rights of our current shareholders. Further, inflation and rising interest rates across the global economy have resulted in, and may continue to result in, significant disruption of global financial markets, which may reduce our ability to access capital and may result in increased financing costs. Additional funds may not be available when we need them, on terms attractive to us, or at all. If adequate funds are not available on a timely basis, we may be required to curtail the development of our technology, products or services, or materially delay, curtail, reduce or terminate our research and development and commercialization activities. We could be forced to sell or dispose of our rights or assets. Any inability to raise adequate funds on commercially reasonable terms could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operation and prospects, including the possibility that a lack of funds could cause our business to fail and liquidate with little or no return to investors.

We operate in a capital intensive, high-cost industry that requires significant amounts of capital to fund operations. We incur capital expenditures to, among other things, manufacture and commercially deploy our Nanox Systems. To the extent we are unable to generate sufficient cash from our operations or we are unable to structure or obtain financing, we may be unable to meet our capital expenditure requirements to support the maintenance and continued growth of our operations.

The success of our primary business model, the Subscription Model, is subject to numerous risks and uncertainties.

We expect the Subscription Model to be our primary business model and the key to achieving our vision of increasing early-detection of medical conditions that are discoverable by X-ray. Even if we are able to successfully implement our CapEx Model and/or our Licensing Model, the sustainability of our general business plan depends substantially on the sustainability of our Subscription Model. The success of our Subscription Model will also depend on each device, once deployed, performing a sufficient number of scans per day to be fully utilized. We may not be successful in achieving these goals for various reasons, including:

Any of the above factors may negatively affect the implementation of our Subscription Model, or cause our Subscription Model to fail.

We may not be successful in tailoring our X-ray source to the specific systems of other medical imaging companies under our Licensing Model, and/or entering into licensing agreements on terms favorable to us.

Under our proposed Licensing Model, we expect to be engaged to tailor our X-ray source to other medical imaging companies’ or manufacturers’ of other X-ray devices specific systems to replace the legacy X-ray source or to license our X-ray source technology to them to develop new types of imaging systems, and we expect to receive a one-time, non-recurring licensing fee upfront, as well as recurring royalty payments for each imaging system sold by such companies. We expect customization to be a complex and multi-step process that varies for each project, which will require significant research and testing activities. We may also not be able to demonstrate the feasibility, functionality or safety of our technology in other medical imaging systems, meet the potential licensees’ design and manufacturing requirements, or satisfy their marketing and product needs. In addition, we may not be successful in entering into licensing agreements with favorable terms as a result of a numbers of factors, many of which are outside of our control, including willingness of, and the resources available to, other medical imaging companies to in-license our novel X-ray source technology, our ability to agree with a potential partner on the value of our technology, or on the related terms, as well as the availability of other technologies at lower cost or other alternative technologies at the time. We have not entered into any licensing agreements to date. Any of the above factors may negatively affect the implementation of our Licensing Model, or cause our Licensing Model to fail.

To the extent that we license our X-ray source technology to other medical imaging companies, the products integrating our technology may need to be approved or cleared by the FDA or similar regulatory agencies.

The FDA or similar regulatory agencies may require products developed by other medical imaging companies under the Licensing Model to go through lengthier or more rigorous processes than we expected. These products may also be subject to regulations by governmental agencies in other jurisdictions, or regulation by other federal, state and local agencies. In addition, we may not have control with respect to any such further regulatory approval strategies or process. If such products do not receive, or are delayed in receiving, the necessary clearances or approvals, or if the performance of one or more clinical trials are required in connection with such clearances or approvals, the prospects of our Licensing Model may be materially affected, which could have a material adverse impact on our business and our revenues.

We may experience operational and financial risks in connection with acquisitions.

In November 2021, we completed the acquisitions of Nanox AI (formerly known as Zebra), a deep-learning machine analytics company, USARAD, a leading provider of teleradiology services, and the assets of MDWEB, a decentralized marketplace connecting imaging facilities with radiologists. We integrated the operations of these acquired businesses and began to generate revenue in the year ended December 31, 2021 through the sale of teleradiology services and AI solutions, following the completion of these acquisitions. However, we may never realize the expected synergies, business opportunities and growth prospects in connection with any future acquisitions and/or joint ventures. We may not be able to capitalize on the expected business opportunities, assumptions underlying estimates of expected cost savings may be inaccurate or general industry and business conditions may deteriorate. In addition, integrating operations may require significant efforts and expense on our part. Personnel may leave or be terminated because of an acquisition. Our management may have its attention diverted while trying to integrate an acquisition. If these factors limit our ability to integrate the operations of any future acquisition successfully or on a timely basis, our expectations of future results of operations, including certain cost savings and synergies as a result of these or any future acquisition, may not be met. The failure to successfully manage these risks in the implementation of any future acquisition and any new lines of business could have a material, adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Our industry is highly competitive and is subject to technological change, which may result in new products or solutions that are superior to our technology or other future products we may bring to market from time to time. If we are unable to anticipate or keep pace with changes in the marketplace and the direction of technological innovation and customer demands, our technology may become less useful or obsolete and our operating results will suffer.

The medical imaging industry is rapidly evolving and subject to intense and increasing competition. To compete successfully and to be able to establish and maintain a competitive position in current and future technologies, we will need to demonstrate the advantages of our technology over well-established alternative solutions, products and technologies, such as computed tomography (“CT”), as well as newer methods of medical imaging and early detection. To achieve this, we will need to raise or develop financial resources, technical expertise, marketing, distribution or support capabilities and we may not be successful in doing so.

Also, companies offering traditional medical imaging systems, such as GE Healthcare, Siemens, Philips, Hologic, Varian, Fuji, Toshiba and Hitachi, may be better established in the market than we are, have greater corporate, financial, operational, sales and marketing resources than we do, or have more experience in research and development than we have. In particular, the field emission technology has been used by a wide range of leading market players in an attempt to create an alternative digital source of X-ray, the most well-known attempt being the use of carbon nano tubes as the base materials for a potential field emission-based solution. In addition, early-detection technologies developed by other companies, such as blood testing and DNA screening, may also reduce the attractiveness of our technology for early detection or render it obsolete. Successful developments of these or other technologies by competitors resulting in new approaches for medical imaging, including technologies, products or services that are more effective or commercially attractive, could make our technology less useful or obsolete. We may also face opposition from certain industry leaders, who may have political influence and the ability to delay deployment of the Nanox System in certain geographical areas.

Furthermore, as the market expands, we expect the entry of additional competitors, such as cloud computing companies or leading IT companies, who may have longer operating histories, more extensive international operations, greater name recognition, and/or substantially greater technical, marketing and financial resources.

Our competitive position also depends on our ability to:

With respect to our AI imaging solutions, there are a number of companies that currently offer AI radiology solutions, such as Aidoc, which, to our knowledge, focus on life threatening and urgent cases. In addition, legacy healthcare technology companies are expected in the future to increase development efforts in the field of AI imaging solutions. For example, Siemens Healthineers has developed AI-Rad Companion, which provides automatic post-processing of imaging datasets through AI-powered algorithms for Siemens CTs. The AI medical imaging market is new and competition from new market players may develop in the next few years.

With respect to our teleradiology services, the teleradiology market is highly competitive, rapidly evolving and fragmented, and is subject to changing technology and market dynamics. The market has recently experienced and is expected to continue to experience competitive pricing pressure and radiologist compensation pressure. We compete directly with both large and small-scale service providers who offer local, regional and national coverage operations. We believe that our principal competitors are StatRad, ONRAD and Radiology Partners. We compete to attract and retain relationships with customers and radiologists in different ways.

If our technology is not, or our future products or services are not, competitive based on these or other factors, our business would be harmed.

We expect to depend on third parties to manufacture the Nanox.ARC and to supply certain component parts. Our reliance on third-party manufacturers and suppliers involves certain risks that may result in, among others, increased costs, quality or compliance issues, or failure to timely manufacture the Nanox.ARC, any of which could materially harm our business.

We have continued to engage third-party manufacturers and suppliers for the commercial production of our digital X-ray tubes for use in the Nanox.ARC, following receipt of clearance from the FDA in 2023. We are in the process of engaging additional third-party manufacturers and suppliers for various other components of the Nanox.ARC. We intend to continue engaging third-party manufacturers and suppliers, following additional clearances and approvals by similar regulatory authorities in other jurisdictions, based on, among other things, cost effectiveness. We are currently developing both ceramic and glass-based digital X-ray tubes for use in the Nanox.ARC. We are working with third parties as well as producing digital ceramic tubes at our Korean facility, which is currently our primary manufacturer and supplier for our digital ceramic tubes.

In May 2020, we entered into a three-year contract manufacturing agreement with FoxSemicon Integrated Technology, Inc., a subsidiary of Foxconn (“FITI”) to manufacture the multi-source Nanox.ARC. Under the contract manufacturing agreement with FITI, FITI will negotiate and contract with other parties for the supply of the various other components of the Nanox.ARC in accordance with the pre-approved supplier list and on the terms to be agreed upon by both parties.

However, due, in part, to travel restrictions as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, we engaged Dagesh to manufacture Nanox.ARC units (including the Nanox.CLOUD) in Israel on a purchase order basis that are being used for purposes of collecting clinical sample images, obtaining regulatory approvals, demonstrations and training, and initial global deployment, among other purposes. We have not entered into a formal agreement with Dagesh to date and we may not be able to enforce the obligations under such arrangements.

In addition, in September 2023, we entered into a manufacture and supply agreement with Varex Imaging Corporation (“Varex”), under which Varex will supply X-ray tubes utilizing the Nanox digital X-ray source for the Nanox.ARC. The agreement was entered into after Varex completed an assessment of our digital X-ray source. Under the agreement, we may order X-ray tubes from Varex for use in our Nanox.ARC units.

As we further expand our business in connection with the commercialization of our technology, we expect to seek to engage several additional manufacturers of the Nanox.ARC. If any of our current or future manufacturers or suppliers breach their agreements, are unable to meet their contractual or quality requirements, or become unwilling to perform for any reason, we may be unable, or may be unable in a timely manner, to locate alternative acceptable manufacturers or suppliers and enter into favorable agreements with them.

Our dependence on third-party manufacturers and suppliers involves a number of risks, including:

We commenced the manufacture of the MEMs X-ray chips at our fabrication facility in Korea, which is expected to meet our currently anticipated needs. However, we may not be successful in mass production of the MEMs X-ray chips at the facility or have sufficient capacity to manufacture the MEMs X-ray chips as our business expands. In addition, we rely on third parties to supply the raw materials and certain component parts. Disruptions of our relationships with such suppliers could negatively impact our production for an extended period of time. Any inability to acquire sufficient quantities of any raw materials or components in a timely manner from these third-party suppliers could have a material negative impact on our business. We may need to enhance or redesign our MEMs X-ray chip to generate licensing revenue from it or for it to be functional for certain medical imaging applications.

In addition, if we change the manufacturer of a critical component of our products, we will be required to verify that the new manufacturer maintains facilities, procedures and operations that comply with our quality and applicable regulatory requirements, which could further impede our ability to manufacture our products in a timely manner.

Transitioning to a new supplier could be time-consuming and expensive, may result in interruptions in our operations and product delivery, could affect the performance specifications of our products or could require that we modify the design of those systems. If the change in manufacturer results in a significant change to any product, a new 510(k) clearance or approval from the FDA or similar international regulatory authorization may be necessary before we implement the change, which could cause substantial delays. The occurrence of any of these events could harm our ability to meet the demand for our products in a timely or cost-effective manner. See “—Risks Related to Government Regulation.”

We may experience development or manufacturing problems and higher costs, or delays that could limit our revenue, if any, or increase our losses.

Developing manufacturing procedures for new products requires developing specific production processes for those products. Developing such processes could be time consuming, and any unexpected difficulty in doing so can delay the deployment of the Nanox System. Moreover, difficulties associated with adapting our technology and product design to the proprietary process technology and design rules of outside manufacturers can lead to reduced yields. Since low yields may result from either design or process technology failures, yield problems may not be effectively determined or resolved until an actual product exists that can be analyzed and tested to identify process sensitivities relating to the design rules that are used. As a result, yield problems may not be identified until well into the production process, and resolution of yield problems may require cooperation between our manufacturers and us. This risk could be compounded by the offshore location of certain of our manufacturers, increasing the effort and time required to identify, communicate and resolve manufacturing yield problems. Manufacturing defects that we do not discover during the manufacturing or testing process may lead to costly product recalls. These risks may lead to increased costs or delayed product delivery, which would harm our profitability and customer relationships. Furthermore, our, our manufacturers’ or our suppliers’ production processes and assembly methods may have to change to accommodate any significant, future expansion of our manufacturing capacity, which may increase the manufacturing costs, delay production of our products, reduce our product margin, require supplemental filings with the FDA or other regulatory authorities, any of which may adversely impact our business. If we are unable to keep up with demand for our products by successfully manufacturing and shipping our products in a timely manner, our revenue could be impaired, and market acceptance for our products could be adversely affected.

We may not be able to successfully execute our business models.

We are pursuing three simultaneous business models to maximize the commercial potential of our X-ray source technology, each of which requires significant time and resources, in particular, our primary business model, the Subscription Model. We are a company with limited operating history and we may not have the necessary resources, expertise and experience to successfully execute any of our business models on a global scale, such as obtaining the necessary approvals or clearances from the regulatory agencies of our target markets. Our ability to execute our models is dependent on a number of factors, including the ability of our senior management team to execute our models, our ability to engage local operators and integrators in different geographic regions, our ability to begin or maintain our pace of product development, manufacturing and commercialization, our ability to meet the changing needs of the medical imaging market, and the ability of our employees to perform at a high-level. If we are unable to execute our models, if our models do not drive the growth that we anticipate, or if our market opportunity is not as large as we have estimated, it could adversely affect our business and our prospects.

We have a limited operating history. If we successfully complete the commercial launch of the Nanox System, and it does not achieve widespread market acceptance, we will not be able to generate the revenue necessary to support our business.

We have a limited operating history and while we began the marketing of our AI solutions and teleradiology services following the acquisitions in November 2021, we have limited history of marketing our X-ray source technology and the Nanox System. We may fail to generate significant interest in our X-ray source technology or the Nanox System or the imaging products using our technology, or any other product we may develop. These and other factors, including the following, may affect the rate and level of market acceptance:

If cleared or approved for marketing by the Notified Body (CE) or other regulatory agencies, as the Nanox.ARC (including the Nanox.CLOUD) was cleared for marketing by the FDA, depending on the approved clinical indication, the Nanox System will be competing with existing and future imaging products and similar offerings. The technology underlying our X-ray source and the Nanox System may be perceived as inferior or inaccurate and patients may be unwilling to undergo medical screening using the Nanox.ARC or other products using our technology. Moreover, patients and medical professionals may be unwilling to depart from the current medical imaging technology. Medical professionals tend to be slow to change their medical diagnostic practices because of perceived liability risks arising from the use of new technology or products, and they may not recommend medical imaging using the Nanox.ARC or other products using our technology until there is long-term clinical evidence to convince them to alter or modify their existing imaging methods. Our efforts to educate patients, radiologists and other members of the medical community on the benefits of our products require significant resources and may not be successful. Our efforts to educate the marketplace may require more resources than are required by conventional technologies marketed by our competitors. In particular, gaining market acceptance for our products in nascent markets, such as Africa, China, India, and certain countries in Latin America, could be challenging. Moreover, in the event that the Nanox System or other products using our technology are the subject of guidelines, clinical studies or scientific publications that are unfavorable or damaging, or otherwise call into question their benefits, we may have difficulty in convincing market participants to adopt our products. In addition, medical professionals, patients, providers of medical imaging services and third-party payors may not adopt or reimburse the use of the Nanox System in the near term or at all. If we are unable to achieve or maintain an adequate level of market acceptance, we may not generate significant revenue or become profitable and our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects would be significantly harmed.

We plan to do business globally, including in certain countries where we might have limited resources and would be subject to additional regulatory burdens and other risks and uncertainties.

We expect to do business globally, including in North America and certain countries in Asia, Europe, Africa, Latin America and Australia. Commercialization of our X-ray source technology, the Nanox.ARC or the Nanox System in foreign markets, either directly or through third parties, is subject to additional risks and uncertainties, including:

Specifically, we are subject to the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act of 1977, as amended, the U.S. domestic bribery statute contained in 18 U.S.C. § 201, the U.S. Travel Act, the USA PATRIOT Act, the United Kingdom Bribery Act 2010, the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002, Chapter 9 (sub-chapter 5) of the Israeli Penal Law, 1977, the Israeli Prohibition on Money Laundering Law–2000 and possibly other anti-bribery and anti-money laundering laws in countries outside of the United States in which we conduct our activities. As we engage finders to obtain MSaaS agreements in certain countries, we and our finders may have direct or indirect interactions with officials and employees of government agencies or state-owned or affiliated entities. We may be held liable for the corrupt or other illegal activities of these third-party business partners and intermediaries, our employees, representatives, contractors, partners and agents, even if we do not explicitly authorize such activities. As we expand our international business, our risks under these laws may increase.

We also may sell the Nanox System to government entities, which are subject to a number of challenges and risks. Any actual or perceived privacy, data protection, or data security incident, or even any perceived defect with regard to our practices or measures in these areas, may negatively impact public sector demand for our products. Government entities may also have statutory, contractual or other legal rights to terminate contracts with us for convenience or due to a default, and any such termination may adversely affect our future results of operations. Governments routinely investigate and audit government contractors’ administrative processes, and any unfavorable audit could result in the government refusing to continue buying our subscriptions, a reduction of revenue, or fines or civil or criminal liability if the audit uncovers improper or illegal activities. In addition, sales of the Nanox System in foreign markets could also be adversely affected by the imposition of governmental controls, political and economic instability, war, conflicts, civil unrest and other hostilities, trade restrictions and changes in tariffs, any of which may adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Although we received clearance from the FDA to market the Nanox.ARC (including the Nanox.CLOUD), the device is not yet approved for third-party payor coverage or reimbursement. If in the future we are approved for and are otherwise able to commercialize it, but are unable to obtain adequate reimbursement or insurance coverage from third-party payors, we may not be able to generate significant revenue, in which case we may need to obtain additional financing.

Although we received clearance from the FDA to market the Nanox.ARC (including the Nanox.CLOUD), the device is not yet approved for third-party payor coverage or reimbursement. Coding and coverage determinations as well as reimbursement levels and conditions are important to the commercial success of an imaging product or offering. The future availability of insurance coverage and reimbursement for newly approved medical devices is highly uncertain, and our future business will be greatly impacted by the level of reimbursement provided by third-party payors. In the United States, third-party payors decide which imaging products and services they will cover, how much they will pay and whether they will continue reimbursement. Third-party payors may not cover or provide adequate reimbursement for the Nanox System or the imaging services using the Nanox System, assuming we are able to fully develop and obtain all regulatory approvals and clearances to market it in geographies in addition to the United States. To date, we have initiated discussions with third-party payors regarding the coding, coverage or reimbursement for imaging services using the Nanox System. Accordingly, unless government and other third-party payors provide coverage and reimbursement for our services, patients and healthcare providers may choose not to use them, which would cause investors to lose their entire investment. A primary trend in the United States healthcare industry and elsewhere is cost containment. Government authorities and other third-party payors have attempted to control costs by limiting coverage and the amount of reimbursement for particular products and services. Reimbursement may not be available, or continue to be available, for the Nanox System or the imaging services using the Nanox System, other products or systems using our X-ray source technology, our AI solutions, teleradiology services, the Nanox.MARKETPLACE or any other products or services we may develop or offer in the future, or even if reimbursement is available, such reimbursement may not be adequate. We also will be subject to foreign reimbursement policies in the international markets we expect to enter. Decisions by health insurers or other third-party payors in these markets not to cover, or to discontinue reimbursing, our products could materially and adversely affect our business. If such decisions are made, they could also have a negative impact on our ability to generate revenues, in which case we may need to obtain additional financing.

Recent changes in the United States related to payment policies for imaging procedures could have a negative impact on the utilization of our imaging services.

In the United States, over the past several years, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (“CMS”), the federal agency responsible for administering the Medicare program, has implemented numerous changes to payment policies for imaging procedures in both the hospital setting and non-hospital settings, which include physician offices and freestanding imaging facilities. Some of these changes have had a negative impact on utilization of imaging services. Examples of these changes include:

Increased regulation and oversight of advanced diagnostic testing may also occur. One provision in the Protecting Access to Medicare Act requires CMS to develop appropriate use criteria (“AUC”) that professionals must consult when ordering advanced diagnostic imaging services (which include magnetic resonance imaging (“MRI”), CT, nuclear medicine (including position emission tomography) and other advanced diagnostic imaging services that the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”) may specify). Under this provision, payment was to be made to the furnishing professional for an applicable advanced diagnostic imaging service only if the claim indicated that the ordering professional consulted a qualified clinical decision support mechanism, as identified by HHS, as to whether the ordered service adhered to the applicable AUC. To the extent these types of changes have the effect of reducing the aggregate number of diagnostic medical imaging procedures performed in the United States, our business, results of operations, financial condition and cash flows would be adversely affected. However, in the 2024 Physician Fee Schedule, CMS announced that, effective January 1, 2024, it paused efforts to implement the AUC program for reevaluation and rescinded its AUC regulations.

In past years, we have recognized impairments in the carrying value of goodwill. Significant impairment charges could negatively affect our results of operations and shareholders’ equity.

In the past we have had a substantial amount of goodwill on our consolidated balance sheet as a result of historical acquisitions. The carrying value of goodwill represents the fair value of an acquired business in excess of identifiable assets and liabilities as of the acquisition date. Goodwill that is expected to contribute indefinitely to our cash flows is not amortized but must be evaluated for impairment at least annually. If the carrying value exceeds current fair value as determined based on the discounted future cash flows of the related business, the goodwill or intangible asset is considered impaired and is reduced to fair value via a non-cash charge to earnings. Events and conditions that could result in impairment include adverse changes in the regulatory environment, a reduced market capitalization or other factors leading to reduction in expected long-term growth or profitability. Goodwill impairment analysis and measurement is a process that requires significant judgment. Our share price and any control premium are factors affecting the assessment of the fair value of our underlying reporting units for purposes of performing any goodwill impairment assessment. For the years ended December 31, 2023 and 2022, we recorded goodwill impairment in an amount of $7.4 million and $50.9 million, respectively, related to the Radiology services and Nanox AI reporting units. Significant impairment charges could negatively affect our results of operations and shareholders’ equity.

Billing complexities associated with obtaining payment or reimbursement may negatively affect our revenue, cash flow and profitability.

Payment for our imaging-based offerings is, and is expected to be, provided by individual patients and from a variety of payors, such as commercial insurance carriers, managed care organizations and governmental programs. Each payor typically has different billing requirements, and the billing requirements of many payors have become increasingly stringent.

Among the factors complicating our customers’ ability to bill and receive reimbursement from third-party payors are:

In addition, we may be required to seek new billing codes for imaging services using the Nanox System or any other imaging-based offering that we may provide, and regulatory authorities may not approve the creation of separate codes. Additionally, even if we are successful, existing or future billing codes or the payment amounts associated with such codes may change in the future.

These billing complexities, and the related uncertainty in obtaining payment for our imaging-based offerings, could negatively affect our revenue, cash flow and profitability.

Any collaborative and MSaaS arrangements that we have established or may establish in the future may not be successful or we may otherwise not realize the anticipated benefits from these collaborations. We do not control third parties with whom we have or may have collaborative or MSaaS arrangements, and we will rely on them to achieve results which may be significant to us. In addition, any current or future collaborative and MSaaS arrangements may place the development and commercialization of our technology outside our control, may require us to relinquish important rights or may otherwise be on terms unfavorable to us.

We have entered into certain, and expect to enter into additional, collaborative arrangements and MSaaS agreements with respect to the research, development, manufacture and commercialization of our technology with different relevant industry participants, including, among others, local operators, integrators, radiologists, cloud storage providers and medical AI software providers and third-party payors. See “Item 4. Information on the Company—B. Business Overview—MSaaS Agreements” and “Item 4. Information on the Company—B. Business Overview—Collaboration Agreements.” Any future potential collaborative or MSaaS arrangements may require us to rely on external consultants, advisors and experts for assistance in several key functions, including research and development, manufacturing, regulatory, intellectual property, commercialization and distribution. We cannot and will not control these third parties, but we may rely on them to achieve results, which may be significant to us. Relying upon these collaborative arrangements subjects us to a number of risks, including:

In addition, if disputes arise between us and any of our collaborators, it could result in the delay or termination of the development, manufacturing or commercialization of products containing our technology, lead to protracted and costly legal proceedings, or cause collaborators to act in their own interest, which may not be in our interest. As a result, the collaborative arrangements that we may enter into, may not achieve their intended goals.

If any of these scenarios materialize, they could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

We also may have other future products where it is desirable or essential to enter into agreements with a collaborator who has greater financial resources or different expertise than us, but for which we are unable to find an appropriate collaborator or are unable to do so on favorable terms. If we fail to enter into such collaborative agreements on favorable terms, it could materially delay or impair our ability to develop and commercialize, and increase the costs of development and commercialization of, our technology.

We could become subject to product liability claims, product recalls, warranty claims and professional malpractice liability claims that could be expensive, divert management’s attention and harm our business reputation and financial results.

Our business exposes us to potential liability risks that are inherent in the marketing and sale of products used in patient care. We may be held liable if the Nanox System or if any other product that integrates our X-ray source technology causes injury or death or is found otherwise unsuitable during usage. The Nanox System incorporates sophisticated components and computer software. Complex software can contain errors, particularly when first introduced. In addition, new products or enhancements may contain undetected errors or performance problems that, despite testing, are discovered only after installation. Patients and end-users of the Nanox System could allege or possibly prove defects of our products or other products that integrate our technology.

A product liability claim, regardless of its merit or eventual outcome, could result in significant legal defense costs and divert management’s attention. Regardless of merit or eventual outcome, liability claims may result in:

In addition, we may be subject to professional liability claims, including, without limitation, for improper use or malfunction of our diagnostic imaging software.

Further, the radiologists that provide our teleradiology services may occasionally subject us to malpractice claims. For example, a complaint was filed against several defendants, including one of our radiologists and USARAD, alleging that such radiologist, in his capacity as an employee of USARAD, was negligent in the interpretation of a PET/CT scan prior to our acquisition of USARAD. Additional claims, suits or complaints relating to services provided by these radiologists may be asserted against us in the future.

Any of these outcomes may have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations, and may increase the volatility of our share price.

The coverage limits of our insurance policies we may choose to purchase to cover related risks may not be sufficient to cover future claims. If sales of the Nanox System or other products integrating our technology increase or we suffer future product liability claims or malpractice claims, we may be unable to maintain product liability insurance or malpractice insurance at satisfactory rates or with adequate amounts or at all. A product liability claim, any product recalls or excessive warranty claims, whether arising from defects in design or manufacture or otherwise, could negatively affect our sales or require a change in the design or manufacturing process, any of which could harm our relationship with our customers and partners, and have a material adverse impact on our reputation and business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

In addition, if the Nanox System or other products integrating our technology are defective, we, our future customers or partners may be required to notify regulatory authorities and/or to recall the products. See “—Risks Related to Government Regulation—Our products may cause or contribute to adverse medical events or be subject to failures or malfunctions that we are required to report to the FDA, and if we fail to do so, we would be subject to sanctions that could harm our reputation, business, financial condition and results of operations. The discovery of serious safety issues with our products, or a recall of our products either voluntarily or at the direction of the FDA or another governmental authority, could have a negative impact on us.” Any recall would divert management’s attention and financial resources and harm our reputation with customers, patients, medical professionals and third-party payors. A recall involving the Nanox System would be particularly harmful to our business. The adverse publicity resulting from any of these actions could adversely affect the perception of our customers or partners. These investigations or recalls, especially if accompanied by unfavorable publicity, could result in our incurring substantial costs, losing revenues and damaging our reputation, each of which would harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

We are highly dependent on key members of our executive management team. Our inability to retain these individuals could impede our business plan and growth strategies, which could have a negative impact on our business and the value of your investment.

Our ability to implement our business plan depends on the continued services of key members of our senior management. In particular, and to a critical extent, we are dependent on the continued efforts and services of the members of management named under “Item 6. Directors, Senior Management and Employees,” as well as the senior management of our significant subsidiaries. If we lose the services of such key members of our management team, we would likely be forced to expend significant time and money in the pursuit of replacement individuals, which may result in a delay in the implementation of our business plan and plan of operations. We may not be able to find satisfactory replacements on terms that would not be unduly expensive or burdensome to us. We do not currently carry a key-man life insurance policy that would assist us in recouping our costs in the event of the death or disability of a member of our management team. The loss of members of our management team, or our inability to attract or retain other qualified individuals, could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

The mishandling or the perceived mishandling of sensitive information, or the occurrence of data security breaches, could harm our business.

We expect that our business operations will enable us to accumulate a significant amount of highly sensitive and/or confidential information, including medical images and other medical and personal information. While employee contracts generally contain standard confidentiality provisions, our employees, customers or collaborators may not properly handle or process sensitive or confidential data. The improper handling of sensitive or confidential data, or even the perception of such mishandling (whether or not valid), or other security lapses by us, our customers or collaborators, could reduce demand for our offerings or otherwise expose us to financial or reputational harm or legal liability.

In addition, any security breach, including personal data breaches, or incident, including cybersecurity incidents, that we experience could result in unauthorized access to, misuse of or unauthorized acquisition of the sensitive or confidential information and data (including medical information), the loss, corruption, or alteration of this data, interruptions in our operations, or damage to our systems. Any such incidents, or any failure to make adequate or timely disclosures to the public, regulators or law enforcement agencies following any such incident, could subject us or our service providers to substantial system downtimes, operational delays, other detrimental impacts on our operations or ability to provide products and services to our customers, the compromising of confidential or otherwise protected information, including personal data, the destruction or corruption of data, other manipulation or improper use of our systems and networks, violations of applicable privacy, data collection and protection and cybersecurity laws and regulations or notification obligations, legal claims, regulatory scrutiny or enforcement actions, financial losses from remedial actions, loss of business or potential liability and/or damage to our reputation, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our business operations, cash flows, competitive position, financial condition and results of operations.

An increasing number of digital platforms have disclosed breaches of their security, some of which have involved sophisticated and highly targeted attacks on portions of their services. Because the techniques used to obtain unauthorized access, disable or degrade service, or sabotage systems change frequently and often are not foreseeable or recognized until launched against a target, we may be unable to anticipate these techniques or to implement adequate preventative measures. If an actual or perceived breach of our security occurs, public perception of the effectiveness of our security measures and brand could be harmed and our results of operations could be negatively affected. Data security breaches and other incidents may also result from non-technical means (e.g., actions by employees or contractors). Any compromise of our security could result in a violation of applicable security, privacy or data protection, consumer and other laws, regulatory or other governmental investigations, enforcement actions, and legal and financial exposure, including potential contractual liability. Any such compromise could also result in damage to our reputation and a loss of confidence in our security and privacy or data protection measures. Any of these effects could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Our business and operations would suffer in the event of computer system failures, cyber-attacks or deficiencies in our cyber-security.

Our ability to execute our business strategy depends, in part, on the continued and uninterrupted performance of our information technology systems, which support our operations. Despite the implementation of security measures, our internal computer systems, and those of third parties on which we rely, are vulnerable to damage from, among others, computer viruses, malware, natural disasters, terrorism, war, telecommunication and electrical failures, cyber-attacks or cyber-intrusions over the internet, attachments to emails, persons inside our organization, or persons with access to systems inside our organization or similar disruptive problems. The risk of a security breach or disruption, particularly through cyber-attacks or cyber intrusion, including by computer hackers, foreign governments and cyber terrorists, has generally increased as the number, intensity and sophistication of attempted attacks and intrusions from around the world have increased. Our systems are also subject to compromise from internal threats such as improper action by employees, including phishing attacks or malicious insiders, or by vendors, counterparties and other third parties with otherwise legitimate access to our systems. Our policies, employee training, procedures and technical safeguards may not prevent all improper access to our network or proprietary or confidential information by employees, vendors, counterparties or other third parties. For example, in January 2024, we became aware that we were subject to what we believe was a spear phishing attempt. Although the phishing attack did not have a material adverse effect on our business, a similar event in the future could have a material adverse effect on our business operations, cash flows and financial condition. If any other similar event were to occur and cause interruptions in our operations, it could result in a material disruption of our product development programs. We may not be able to anticipate data breaches, cyber-attacks or other similar incidents, detect or react to such incidents in a timely manner, implement effective preventive measures against such incidents, or adequately remediate any such incident. In addition, we cannot be certain that our insurance coverage will be adequate for cybersecurity liabilities actually incurred, that insurance will continue to be available to us on economically reasonable terms, or at all, or that our insurer will not deny coverage as to any future claim.

Any such security breach may compromise information stored on our networks and may result in significant data losses or theft of personally identifiable information. A cybersecurity breach could also hurt our reputation by adversely affecting the patients’ perception of the security of their information. A number of proposed and enacted federal, state and international laws and regulations obligate companies to notify individuals of security breaches involving particular personally identifiable information, which could result from breaches experienced by us or by third parties, including collaborators, vendors, contractors or other organizations with which we expect to form strategic relationships. In addition, a cybersecurity attack could result in other negative consequences, including disruption of our internal operations, increased cyber security protection costs, lost revenue, regulatory actions or litigations.

If we lose a significant number of our radiologists, our revenue from our teleradiology services and financial results could be adversely affected.

There is a shortage of qualified radiologists in some of the regional markets that we serve. In addition, competition in recruiting radiologists may make it difficult for us to maintain adequate levels of radiologists. If a significant number of radiologists terminate their relationships with us and we cannot recruit sufficient qualified radiologists, our ability to generate revenue from teleradiology services and our financial results could be adversely affected.

We may not receive payment from some of our customers for our AI solutions as a result of financial hardship.

We contract with hospitals, imaging centers, urgent care and other facilities to provide reading services. Some of our customers for our AI solutions may not have significant financial resources, liquidity or access to capital. If these customers experience financial difficulties, they may be unable to pay us for the services that we provide. A significant deterioration in industry conditions could have a material adverse effect on the financial health of some of our customers. If our customers suffer financial hardship, they could delay or default on their payment obligations to us, negatively impacting our operations.

Exchange rate fluctuations between the U.S. dollar, the New Israeli Shekel and the KRW and inflation may negatively affect our results of operations, and we may not be able to hedge our currency exchange risks successfully.

The U.S. dollar is our functional and reporting currency. However, a portion of our operating expenses, including personnel and facilities related expenses, are incurred in NIS or KRW. As a result, we are exposed to the risks that the NIS and KRW may appreciate relative to the U.S. dollar, or, if the NIS and KRW instead devalues relative to the U.S. dollar, that the inflation rate in Israel or Korea may exceed such rate of devaluation of the NIS or KRW, or that the timing of such devaluation may lag behind inflation in Israel or Korea. In any such event, the dollar cost of our operations in Israel or Korea would increase and our dollar-denominated results of operations would be adversely affected. Given our general lack of currency hedging arrangements to protect us from fluctuations in the exchange rates of the NIS and KRW and other foreign currencies in relation to the U.S. dollar (and/or from inflation of such foreign currencies), we may be exposed to adverse effects from such movements. Our exchange rate exposure may change over time as our business evolves and could result in increased costs or reduced revenue and could affect our actual cash flow. Changes in the relative values of currencies occur regularly and, in some instances, may have a significant impact on our operating results. The rate of inflation in Israel or Korea or in currency exchange rates may materially change and we might not be able to effectively mitigate these risks.

We may be subject to claims, litigation and investigations in the future, all of which will require significant management attention, could result in significant legal expenses and may result in unfavorable outcomes, all or any of which could have a material adverse impact on our financial condition and results of operations, harm our reputation or otherwise negatively impact our business.

We have been, and may in the future become, subject to litigation or claims arising in or outside the ordinary course of business that could negatively affect our business operations and financial condition, including securities class actions and shareholder derivative actions, both of which are typically expensive to defend. Such claims and litigation proceedings may be brought by third parties, including our customers, competitors, advisors, service providers, partners or collaborators, employees, and governmental or regulatory bodies.

For example, as previously disclosed, we had two securities class action complaints against us and certain former officers and a director, asserting violations of federal securities laws and seeking unspecified damages. On June 2, 2023, the Company entered into a formal settlement agreement to settle those actions for $8 million. On February 15, 2024, Magistrate Judge Kuo preliminarily requested the parties provide additional information, pursuant to which settlement claims information was submitted by letter on February 29, 2024, and on April 17, 2024, Magistrate Judge Kuo issued a report and recommendation recommending that Judge Kovner grant the motion for final approval of the settlement. The settlement remains subject to court approval among other conditions. In addition, the Division of Enforcement of the SEC previously conducted an investigation to determine whether there had been any violations of the federal securities laws, relating to the development cost of the Company’s Nanox.ARC prototypes, as well as the Company’s estimate for the cost of assembling the final Nanox.ARC product at scale, among other things. The Company and Ran Poliakine, former Chairman of the Board of Directors of the Company who passed away in January 2024, reached final agreements with the SEC staff to settle this matter, which agreements were approved by the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York in October 2023. The Company paid a civil penalty in the amount of $650,000 and is permanently enjoined from violating Section 17(a)(2) of the Securities Act and Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange and Rules 12b-20 and 13a-1 thereunder. Mr. Poliakine paid disgorgement of $240,000, together with prejudgment interest of $26,836.39, a civil penalty of $150,000, and was permanently enjoined from violating Section 17(a)(2) of the Securities Act and aiding and abetting any violation of Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act and Rules 12b-20 and 13a-1 thereunder. A complaint was also recently filed against several defendants, including one of our radiologists and USARAD, alleging that such radiologist, in his capacity as an employee of USARAD, was negligent in the interpretation of a PET/CT scan prior to our acquisition of USARAD. In addition, a claim was recently filed in Israel against the Company, Nanox Imaging PLC (“Nanox Gibraltar”) and the deceased Mr. Ran Poliakine, the Company’s previous Chairman, alleging a breach of a consulting agreement between the plaintiff and Nanox Gibraltar. See “Item 4. Information on the Company—B. Business Overview—Legal Proceedings.”

The outcome of any litigation and SEC investigation, regardless of its merits, is inherently uncertain and may differ substantially from our expectations. Any claims and lawsuits, and the disposition of such claims and lawsuits, or SEC investigation could be time-consuming and expensive to resolve, divert management attention and resources, and lead to attempts on the part of other parties to pursue similar claims. We may not be able to determine the amount of any potential losses and other costs we may incur due to the inherent uncertainties of litigation and settlement negotiations. In the event we are required or decide to pay amounts in connection with any claims, lawsuits or SEC investigation, such amounts could be significant and could have a material adverse impact on our liquidity, business, financial condition and results of operations. In addition, the outcome of any litigation and SEC investigation, including the collateral effects of the Company’s recent settlement with the SEC as described above, may increase the likelihood of us being subject to potential claims, litigations and investigations, and could have a material adverse impact on our business, liquidity and financing. In addition, depending on the nature and timing of any such dispute, a resolution of a legal matter could materially affect our future operating results, our cash flows or both.

\If significant tariffs or other restrictions related to “trade wars” are placed on Chinese imports or any related counter-measures are taken by China, our revenue and results of operations may be materially harmed.

The Nanox.ARC production process is expected to involve manufacturers and/or suppliers in China for the production of certain components of the Nanox.ARC. If significant tariffs or other restrictions are placed by the United States government on Chinese imports or any related counter-measures are taken by China, our business, financial condition and results of operations may be materially harmed. Throughout 2018 and 2019, former President Trump called for substantial changes to foreign trade policy with China and raised, and proposed to further raise in the future, tariffs on several Chinese goods in order to reverse what he perceived as unfair trade practices that have negatively impacted U.S. businesses. The announcement of such tariffs has triggered retaliatory actions from foreign governments, including China, and may trigger retaliatory actions by other foreign governments, resulting in a “trade war.” On January 15, 2020, the United States and China signed the Phase One Deal, which took effect on February 14, 2020, agreeing to the rollback of tariffs, expansion of trade purchases and renewed commitments on intellectual property, technology transfer and currency practices deescalating the trade war. U.S. President Biden has stated that there are no immediate plans to cancel the Phase One Deal, but the administration is expected to make changes to the U.S.-China tariff policies. If any forms of duties or tariffs are imposed on the Nanox.ARC or its components, we may be required to charge higher prices in the United States than we expect, which may result in fewer customers and harm our operating performance. Alternatively, we or our contractors may seek manufacturers and/or suppliers outside of China, resulting in significant costs and disruption to our operations and business. Our business could also be impacted by retaliatory trade measures taken by China or other countries in response to existing or future tariffs, causing us to raise prices or make changes to our operations, any of which could materially harm our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Our business may be impacted by changes in general economic conditions.

Our business is subject to risks arising from changes in domestic and global economic conditions, including adverse economic conditions in markets in which we operate, which may harm our business. For example, the existence of inflation in the economy has resulted in, and may continue to result in, high interest rates and capital costs, limited availability of credit, liquidity shortages and constrained capital spending, increased costs of labor, fluctuations in foreign currency exchange rates, challenging and delayed sales cycles, slower adoption of new technologies, increased price competition and other similar effects. A failure to adequately respond to these risks could have a material adverse impact on our financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.

If our future customers significantly reduce spending in areas in which our technology and products are utilized, or prioritize other expenditures over our technology and products, our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects would be materially adversely affected.

Disruption to the global economy could also result in a number of follow-on effects on our business, including a possible slow-down resulting from lower customer expenditures; inability of customers to pay for products, solutions or services on time, if at all; an increase in the amount of accounts receivable we are required to write off; more restrictive export regulations which could limit our potential customer base; negative impact on our liquidity, financial condition and share price, which may impact our ability to raise capital in the market, obtain financing and secure other sources of funding in the future on terms favorable to us.

In addition, the occurrence of catastrophic events, such as hurricanes, storms, earthquakes, tsunamis, floods, medical epidemics and other catastrophes that adversely affect the business climate in any of our markets could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. Some of our operations are located in areas that have been in the past, and may be in the future, susceptible to such occurrences.

Our business, financial condition and results of operations may be materially adversely affected by adverse developments with respect to geopolitical disputes and financial institutions and associated liquidity risk.

Geopolitical risks, including those arising from trade tension and/or the imposition of trade tariffs, terrorist activity or acts of civil or international hostility, are increasing. Similarly, the ongoing military conflict between Russia and Ukraine has had negative impacts on the global economy, including by contributing to rapidly rising costs of living (driven largely by higher energy prices) and created uncertainty in the global capital markets and is expected to have further global economic consequences, including disruptions of the global supply chain and energy markets. The Russian military actions and the resulting sanctions could have a negative impact on supply chains, our MSaaS agreements relating to Russia and Belarus or the region and adversely affect the global economy and financial markets. Any of the abovementioned factors could affect our business, prospects, financial condition and operating results. The extent and duration of the military action, sanctions and resulting market disruptions are impossible to predict, but could be substantial. Any such disruptions may also magnify the impact of other risks described in this Annual Report on Form 20-F.

We do not expect to carry any business interruption insurance or any other insurance (except for director and officer, property, product and professional liability, malpractice and clinical trials insurance). As a result, we may incur uninsured losses, increasing the possibility that you would lose your entire investment in our company.

Our products and services are in the medical imaging field and so may be subject to claims. We are not immune from product liability or other product claim risks, and we may not be able to maintain insurance on acceptable terms against such risks or that such insurance will be sufficient to protect us against potential claims or that insurance will be available in the future in amounts sufficient to protect us. A product liability claim, malpractice or other claim, as well as any claims for uninsured liabilities or in excess of insured liabilities, could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Certain of our directors and/or officers may have interests that compete with or may differ from ours.

Certain of our directors currently own, operate and manage other entities, which may have similar or different objectives than ours. Such activities could detract from the time these people have to allocate to our affairs. Certain of our directors and officers are affiliated with our current shareholders, and may have different interests than other shareholders. For additional information regarding related party transactions and potential conflicts of interest, see “Item 7. Major Shareholders and Related Party Transactions—B. Related Party Transactions.” Under the Israeli Companies Law, 5759-1999 (the “Companies Law”), office holders must promptly disclose to us any direct or indirect personal interest (within the meaning of the Companies Law) that he or she may have and all related material information or documents known to him or her relating to any existing or proposed transaction by us. In addition, we have adopted a code of ethics and conduct that requires our employees, officers and directors to disclose any situation that reasonably would be expected to give rise to a conflict of interest.

Our management team has limited experience managing a public company.

Most members of our management team have limited experience managing a publicly traded company, interacting with public company investors and complying with the increasingly complex laws pertaining to public companies in the United States. Our management team may not successfully or efficiently manage our operations a public company subject to significant regulatory oversight and reporting obligations under the U.S. federal securities laws and the continuous scrutiny of securities analysts and investors. These obligations and constituents require significant attention from our senior management and could divert their attention away from the day-to-day management of our business, which could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Environmental, social and corporate governance (“ESG”) issues, including those related to climate change and sustainability, may have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations and damage our reputation.

There is an increasing focus from certain investors, customers, consumers, employees and other stakeholders concerning ESG matters. Additionally, public interest and legislative pressure related to public companies’ ESG practices continue to grow. If our ESG practices fail to meet regulatory requirements or investor, employee or other stakeholders’ evolving expectations and standards for responsible corporate citizenship in areas including environmental stewardship, support for local communities, Board of Directors and employee diversity, human capital management, employee health and safety practices, product quality, supply chain management, corporate governance and transparency, our reputation and employee retention may be negatively impacted, and our suppliers may be unwilling to continue to do business with us.

Investors and other stakeholders are increasingly focusing on environmental issues, including climate change, energy and water use, plastic waste and other sustainability concerns. Concern over climate change may result in new or increased legal and regulatory requirements to reduce or mitigate impacts to the environment. Increased regulatory requirements may result in increased demands or requirements regarding components of our products and their environmental impact on sustainability. Complying with these demands or requirements could cause us to incur additional manufacturing, operating or product development costs.

In addition, new sustainability rules and regulations have been adopted and may continue to be introduced in various states and other jurisdictions. For example, on March 6, 2024, the SEC adopted final rules under SEC Release No. 33-11275: The Enhancement and Standardization of Climate-Related Disclosures for Investors, requiring companies to provide significantly expanded climate-related disclosures in their periodic reporting, which may require us to incur significant additional costs to comply and impose increased oversight obligations on our management and board of directors. On April 4, 2024, the SEC determined to voluntarily stay the final rules pending certain legal challenges.

If we do not adapt to or comply with new regulations, or fail to meet evolving investor, industry or stakeholder expectations and concerns regarding ESG issues, investors may reconsider their capital investment in our Company, which could have a material adverse effect on our business or financial condition.

Risks Related to Our Intellectual Property

It is difficult and costly to protect our intellectual property and our proprietary technologies, and we may not be able to ensure their protection.

We rely upon a combination of patents and trade secrets to protect the intellectual property related to our proprietary technologies. Our success depends significantly on our ability to obtain and maintain intellectual property protection with respect to our technology and products. Patents and other proprietary rights provide uncertain protections, and we may be unable to protect our intellectual property for reasons including those that result from complex factual and legal issues such as those that create uncertainty as to the validity, scope and enforceability of any particular patent that we hold or for which we have applied. As a result, we may be unsuccessful in defending our patents and other proprietary rights against third-party challenges, which could have a material adverse effect on our business.

We generally enter into confidentiality and invention assignment agreements with our employees and contractors, and confidentiality agreements with parties with whom we conduct business, in order to limit access to, and the disclosure and use of, our proprietary information. However, we may not be successful in executing these agreements with every party who has access to our confidential information or contributes to the development of our intellectual property. In addition, those agreements that we do execute may be breached, and we may not have adequate remedies for any such breach. Further, these contractual arrangements would not prevent independent development of similar intellectual property by others.

Although we are attempting to obtain patent coverage for our technology where available and where we believe appropriate, there are aspects of the technology for which patent coverage may never be sought or received. Additionally, we have obtained, and may in the future obtain, certain intellectual property related to our technology from third parties, and we cannot be certain that such third parties took the necessary actions to maintain such rights or that the transfer of such rights to us was proper and effective. We may, as a result, be subject to claims challenging the ownership or enforceability of such rights. Furthermore, we may not possess the resources to, or for other reasons may not choose to, pursue patent protection on every invention or in any or every country where we may eventually decide to sell our future products. Our ability to prevent others from making or selling duplicate or similar technologies will be impaired for those technologies with respect to which, and in those countries where, we have no patent protection. In addition, there is no assurance that all potentially relevant prior art relating to our patents and patent applications has been found, which can prevent a patent from issuing from a pending patent application or later invalidate or narrow the scope of an issued patent. Even if patents do successfully issue and even if such patents cover our technology, third parties may challenge their validity, enforceability or scope, which may result in such patents being narrowed, invalidated, or held unenforceable. Any successful challenge to these patents or any other patents owned by or licensed to us could deprive us of rights necessary for the successful commercialization of our technology.

In addition, for patents that we do issue based on our applications or future applications, any issued patents may not provide us with any competitive advantages. Competitors may be able to design around our patents and develop products that provide outcomes comparable or superior to ours. Any changes we make to our product or any future products, including designs that may be required for commercialization or that cause them to have what we view as more advantageous properties, may not be covered by patents and patent applications we have licensed or own, and we may be required to file new applications and/or seek other forms of protection for any such altered products if any such protection is available. In addition, the patent prosecution process is expensive, time-consuming and complicated, and we and our current or future licensors, licensees or collaborators may not be able to prepare, file, prosecute and maintain all necessary or desirable patents or patent applications at a reasonable cost or in a timely manner. It is also possible that we or our current or future licensors, licensees or collaborators will fail to identify patentable aspects of inventions before it is too late to obtain patent protection for them. In addition, if we choose to and are able to secure patent protection in countries outside the U.S., the laws of some foreign countries may not protect our intellectual property rights to the same extent as do the laws of the United States. For instance, the legal systems of some countries, including India, China and other developing countries, do not favor the enforcement of patents and other intellectual property rights. This could make it difficult for us to stop the infringement of our patents or the misappropriation of our other intellectual property rights.

Some countries also have compulsory licensing laws under which a patent owner may be compelled to grant licenses to third parties. In addition, some countries limit the enforceability of patents against government agencies or government contractors. In these countries, the patent owner may have limited remedies, which could materially diminish the value of such patent. If we or any of our licensors is forced to grant a license to third parties with respect to any patents relevant to our business, our competitive position may be impaired.

Changes in either the patent laws or their interpretation in the United States and other countries may diminish our ability to protect our inventions and enforce our intellectual property rights, and more generally could affect the value of our intellectual property. Our efforts to seek patent protection for our technology could be negatively impacted by any such changes, which could have a material adverse effect on our existing patent rights and our ability to protect and enforce our intellectual property in the future. In particular, our ability to stop third parties from making, using, selling, offering to sell or importing products that infringe our intellectual property will depend in part on our success in obtaining and enforcing patent claims that cover our technology, inventions and improvements.

We may come to believe that third parties are infringing on, or otherwise violating, our patents or other proprietary rights. To prevent infringement or unauthorized use, we may need to file infringement and/or misappropriation suits, which are very expensive and time-consuming, could result in meritorious counterclaims against us and would distract management’s attention. Also, in an infringement or misappropriation proceeding, a court may decide that one or more of our patents is invalid, unenforceable, or both, in which case third parties may be able to use our technology without paying license fees or royalties. Even if the validity of our patents is upheld, a court may refuse to stop the other party from using the technology at issue on the grounds that the other party’s activities are not covered by our patents.

In addition to patents, we rely on trade secrets to protect our technology; however, the policies we use to protect our trade secrets may not be effective in preventing misappropriation of our trade secrets by others. In addition, confidentiality agreements executed by our employees, consultants and advisors may not be enforceable or may not provide meaningful protection for our trade secrets or other proprietary information in the event of unauthorized use or disclosure. Litigating a trade secret claim is expensive and time consuming, and the outcome may be unexpected. In addition, courts outside the United States are sometimes less willing to protect trade secrets. Moreover, our competitors may independently develop knowledge, methods and know-how that allow them to create substantially similar products or services without misappropriating our trade secrets. If we are unable to protect our trade secrets, we may be unable to prevent competitors from using our own inventions and intellectual property to compete against us, and our business may be harmed.

Patent terms may be inadequate to protect our competitive position on our future products for an adequate amount of time.

Patents have a limited lifespan. In the United States, if all maintenance fees are timely paid, the natural expiration of a patent is generally 20 years from its earliest U.S. non-provisional filing date. Various extensions may be available, but the life of a patent, and the protection it affords, is limited. Even if patents covering our future products are obtained, once the patent life has expired, we may be open to competition from competitive products.

Given the amount of time required for the development, testing and regulatory review of new products, patents protecting our future products might expire before or shortly after we or our future partners commercialize those products. As a result, our owned and licensed patent portfolio may not provide us with sufficient rights to exclude others from commercializing products similar or identical to ours for a sufficient amount of time, and, as a result, we may not be able to obtain adequate protection from our patent portfolio against competition, in spite of the time and effort invested in the commercialization of our future products.

Claims that our technology or our future products or the sale or use of our future products infringe the patents or other intellectual property rights of third parties could result in costly litigation or could require substantial time and money to resolve, even if litigation is avoided.

Because our industry is characterized by competing intellectual property, we may be subject to legal actions for violating the intellectual property rights of others, including claims that former employees, collaborators or third parties have an interest in our patents, trade secrets or other intellectual property. For example, we may have inventorship or ownership disputes arising from conflicting obligations of employees, consultants or others who are involved in developing our technology or our products.

We also may be required to participate in interference, derivation or opposition proceedings that concern disputes regarding priority of inventions disclosed in our patents. Determining whether a product infringes a patent, as well as priority of inventions and other patent-related disputes, involves complex legal and factual issues and the outcome is often uncertain. We have not conducted any significant search of patents issued to third parties, and third-party patents containing claims covering our technology or methods that predate our patents may exist. Because of the number of patents issued and patent applications filed in our technical areas or fields (including some pertaining specifically to medical imaging technologies), our competitors or other third parties may assert that our technology and the methods we employ in the use of products incorporating our technology are covered by United States or foreign patents held by them. In addition, because patent applications can take many years to issue and because publication schedules for pending applications vary by jurisdiction, there may be applications now pending of which we are unaware, and which may result in issued patents that our technology or other future products would infringe. Also, because the claims of published patent applications can change between publication and patent grant, there may be published patent applications that may ultimately issue with claims that we infringe.

As the number of competitors in the market for medical imaging technologies increases, and as the number of patents issued in this area grows, the possibility of patent infringement claims against us increases. Some of our competitors may be able to sustain the costs of complex patent litigation more effectively than we can, including if they have substantially greater resources. Defending against such litigation is costly and time consuming, and would distract our management from our business. In addition, any uncertainties resulting from the initiation and continuation of any litigation could have a material adverse effect on our ability to raise the funds necessary to continue our operations.

In the event that we become subject to a patent infringement or other intellectual property lawsuit and if the relevant patents or other intellectual property were upheld as valid and enforceable and we were found to infringe or violate those rights or the terms of a license to which we are a party, we could be prevented from selling any infringing products of ours unless we could obtain a license or were able to redesign the product to avoid infringement. If we were unable to obtain a license or successfully redesign, we might be prevented from selling our technology or other future products. If we are able to redesign, we may need to invest substantial resources in the redesign process. If there is an allegation or determination that we have infringed the intellectual property rights of a competitor or other person, we may be required to pay damages, or a settlement or ongoing royalties, or we may be required to enter into cross-licenses with our competitors. In any of these circumstances, we may be unable to sell our products at competitive prices or at all, and our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects could be harmed.

In addition, we may be required to indemnify our customers and distributors against claims relating to the infringement of intellectual property rights of third parties related to our products. Third parties may assert infringement claims against our customers or distributors. These claims may require us to initiate or defend protracted and costly litigation on behalf of our customers or distributors, regardless of the merits of these claims. If any of these claims succeed, we may be forced to pay damages on behalf of our customers or distributors, or may be required to obtain licenses for the products or services they use. If we cannot obtain all necessary licenses on commercially reasonable terms, our distributors may be forced to stop distributing our products or services, and our customers may be forced to stop using our products or services.

Furthermore, because of the substantial amount of discovery required in connection with intellectual property litigation, there is a risk that some of our confidential information could be compromised by disclosure during discovery. There could also be public announcements of the results of hearings, motions or other interim proceedings or developments, which could have a material adverse effect on the price of our ordinary shares. If securities analysts or investors perceive these results to be negative, it could have a material adverse effect on the price of our ordinary shares.

Obtaining and maintaining patent protection depends on compliance with various procedural, document submission, fee payment and other requirements imposed by governmental patent agencies, and our patent protection could be reduced or eliminated if we or our future licensors do not comply with these requirements.

Periodic maintenance fees, renewal fees, annuity fees and various other government fees on a patent and patent application are due to be paid to the patent offices and agencies in several stages over the lifetime of the patent and patent application. The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office and various foreign governmental patent agencies require compliance with a number of procedural, documentary, fee payment and other similar provisions during the patent application process. In certain circumstances, we may be required to rely on our licensing partners to take the necessary action to comply with these requirements with respect to patents or other intellectual property they have licensed to us. While an inadvertent lapse can in many cases be cured by payment of a late fee or by other means in accordance with the applicable rules, there are situations in which noncompliance, which could include failure to respond to official actions within prescribed time limits, non-payment of fees and failure to properly legalize and submit formal documents, can result in abandonment or lapse of the patent or patent application, resulting in partial or complete loss of patent rights in the relevant jurisdiction. In such an event, our competitors may be able to enter the market and compete with our products, which would have a material adverse effect on our business.

We may be subject to claims that our employees, consultants or advisers have wrongfully used or disclosed alleged trade secrets of their former employers or claims asserting ownership of what we regard as our own intellectual property.

Many of our employees, consultants and advisers, including our senior management, were previously employed at other companies that may have proprietary rights related to our business. Some of these employees, consultants and advisers, including members of our senior management, executed proprietary rights, non-disclosure and non-competition agreements in connection with such previous employment. Although we try to ensure that such individuals do not use the proprietary information or know-how of others in their work for us, we may be subject to claims that we or these employees have used or disclosed intellectual property, including trade secrets or other proprietary information, of any such individual’s former employer. We are not aware of any such disclosures, or threatened or pending claims related to these matters, but in the future, litigation may be necessary to defend against such claims. If we fail in defending any such claims, we may lose valuable intellectual property rights or personnel, in addition to possibly paying monetary damages and being enjoined from conducting our business as contemplated. Even if we are successful in defending against such claims, litigation could result in substantial costs and be a distraction to management.

Additionally, a licensor, collaborator, employee, consultant, adviser or other third party may dispute our or our licensor’s ownership of certain intellectual property rights. We seek to address these concerns in our contractual agreements; however, we may not have contractual arrangements with the party in question and/or such provisions may not be effective. If these provisions prove to be ineffective, we may not be able to achieve our business objectives. If we or our licensors fail in defending any such claims, we may have to pay monetary damages and may lose valuable intellectual property rights, such as exclusive ownership of, or right to use, intellectual property, which could adversely impact our business, financial condition and results of operations.

If our trademarks and trade names are not adequately protected, then we may not be able to build name recognition in our markets of interest and our business may be adversely affected.

Our registered and unregistered trademarks or trade names are valuable assets and may be challenged, infringed, circumvented or declared generic or determined to infringe third party’s marks. We may not be able to protect our rights to these trademarks and trade names, which may be necessary to build name recognition among potential collaborators or customers in our markets of interest. At times, competitors may adopt trade names or trademarks similar to ours, thereby impeding our ability to build brand identity and possibly leading to market confusion. For example, the Sheba Fund for Health Services and Research filed four trademark applications for the word ARC and for three additional logos, and Intel Corporation filed a trademark application for the work ARC, with the Israeli Patent Office. These applications were published for possible opposition, and the Company filed oppositions, claiming that the marks are confusingly similar to its own trademark. The Company is currently negotiating with both Sheba and Intel, but such efforts by the Company to protect its trademarks may be ineffective. In addition, there could be potential trade name or trademark infringement claims brought by owners of other trademarks or trademarks that incorporate variations of our unregistered trademarks or trade names. We have not conducted any registrability studies for possible future trademarks to assess whether such marks would be successfully registered. Over the long term, if we are unable to establish name recognition based on our trademarks and trade names, then we may not be able to compete effectively and our business may be adversely affected. In addition, we may license our trademarks and trade names to third parties, such as distributors. Though these license agreements may provide guidelines for how our trademarks and trade names may be used, a breach of these agreements or misuse of our trademarks and tradenames by our licensees may jeopardize our rights in or diminish the goodwill associated with our trademarks and trade names. Our efforts to enforce or protect our proprietary rights related to trademarks, trade names, trade secrets, domain names, copyrights or other intellectual property may be ineffective and could result in substantial costs and diversion of resources and adversely affect our competitive position, business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Our rights to develop and commercialize our products may be subject to the terms and conditions of licenses and sublicenses granted to us by third parties.

We rely on licenses and sublicenses to certain patent rights and other intellectual property from third parties that are important or necessary to the development of our products, including the software modules that we expect to integrate into the Nanox.CLOUD. These and other licenses may not provide exclusive rights to use such intellectual property in all relevant fields of use and in all territories in which we may wish to develop or commercialize our products and the underlying patents may fail to provide the intended exclusivity. As a result, we may not be able to prevent competitors from developing and commercializing competitive products in the markets that we hope to address. Moreover, we would not own at least some of the underlying intellectual property rights related to these products, and as a result our rights would be subject to the continuation and compliance with the terms of those agreements. If such in-licenses were terminated, competitors would have the freedom to develop, seek regulatory approval of, and to market, products similar or identical to ours.

In addition, these license agreements may not grant us the right to control the preparation, filing, prosecution or maintenance of patents and patent applications covering our products. Therefore, we cannot be certain that these patents and patent applications will be prepared, filed, prosecuted or maintained in a manner consistent with the best interests of our business. If our current or future licensing partners fail to file, prosecute or maintain such patents, including the payment of applicable fees, or otherwise lose rights to those patents or patent applications, the intellectual property we have licensed or exclusivity we have been granted may be reduced or eliminated, and our right to develop and commercialize any of our future products that are subject of such licensed rights, and our ability to prevent competitors from developing or commercializing such products, could be adversely affected. In addition, even where we have the right to control patent prosecution and maintenance of patents and patent applications we have licensed from third parties, we may still be adversely affected or prejudiced by actions or inactions of our licensees, our licensors and their counsel that took place prior to the date upon which we assumed control over patent prosecution.

Pursuant to the terms of such license agreements, the licensors may also have the right to control enforcement of our licensed patents or defense of any claims asserting the invalidity or unenforceability of these patents. Even if we are permitted to pursue the enforcement or defense of our licensed patents, we may require the cooperation of our future licensors or collaboration partners and any other applicable patent owners and we cannot be certain that such cooperation will be provided to us. We also cannot be certain that our licensors will allocate sufficient resources or prioritize their or our enforcement of such patents or defense of such claims to protect our interests in the licensed patents. Even if we are not a party to these legal actions, an adverse outcome could harm our business because it might prevent us from continuing to license intellectual property that we may need to operate our business. If we lose any of our licensed intellectual property, our right to develop and commercialize any of our products that are subject of such licensed rights could be adversely affected.

In addition, our future licensors may rely on third-party consultants or collaborators or on funds from third parties such that our licensors are not the sole and exclusive owners of the patents we in-license. If other third parties have ownership rights to our in-licensed patents, they may be able to license such patents to our competitors, and our competitors could market competing products and technologies. In addition, if our licensors have not obtained adequate rights from these third parties, we may need to obtain additional rights from these third parties or we could be prevented from developing and commercializing the related products. This could have a material adverse effect on our competitive position, business, financial conditions, results of operations and prospects.

In spite of our best efforts, our licensors might conclude that we have materially breached our license agreements and might therefore terminate the license agreements, in which event we may have to cease developing, manufacturing or marketing any product covered by these agreements and we may face other additional penalties or be required to grant our licensors additional rights. In addition, we may seek to obtain additional licenses from our licensors and, in connection with obtaining such licenses, we may agree to amend our existing licenses in a manner that may be more favorable to the licensors, including by agreeing to terms that could enable third parties (potentially including our competitors) to receive licenses to a portion of the intellectual property that is subject to our existing licenses. Any of these events could have a material adverse effect on our competitive position, business, financial conditions, results of operations and prospects.

We may be required to pay certain milestones and royalties and fulfill other obligations under our license agreements with third-party licensors.

We may be required to pay milestones and royalties related to our development or commercialization activities of our products utilizing the technologies licensed or sublicensed from third parties under license agreements we may enter into with them. These payments could adversely affect our overall profitability related to any future products that we may seek to develop or commercialize. In order to maintain our license rights under our license agreements, we may need to meet certain specified milestones or fulfill certain obligations, including to devote a certain amount of resources, in the development of our products. In addition, we may be required to pay certain percentages of our revenues, relating to certain supply agreements we are party to. Failure to satisfy such obligations could result in the termination of our rights under such agreements.

If we choose to license our technology to third parties, this could result in disputes or otherwise limit our future operations.

We may also in the future, as one of our strategies, deploy our technology into the market and license patents and other intellectual proprietary rights to third parties. Disputes with our licensees may arise, including regarding the scope and content of these licenses. Additionally, a licensee may use our intellectual property without our permission, dispute our ownership of certain intellectual property rights or argue that our intellectual property does not cover our product. Regardless of whether we pursue legal action to enforce any such dispute, a dispute with a licensee or customer over intellectual property rights may damage our relationship with that licensee or customer and may also harm our reputation in the industry. Our ability to expand into additional fields with our technologies also may be restricted by licenses or other rights we may grant to third parties in the future, including if the licenses are exclusive, the licensee is assigned ownership of intellectual property that we develop or rights of first negotiation or refusal are granted.

We may become subject to claims for remuneration or royalties for assigned service invention rights by our employees, which could result in litigation and adversely affect our business.

A significant portion of our intellectual property has been developed by our employees in the course of their employment for us. Under the Israeli Patent Law, 5727-1967 (the “Patent Law”), inventions conceived by an employee in the course and as a result of, or arising from, his or her employment with a company are regarded as “service inventions,” which belong to the employer, absent a specific agreement between the employee and employer giving the employee service invention rights. The Patent Law also provides that if there is no such agreement between an employer and an employee, the Israeli Compensation and Royalties Committee (the “Committee”), a body constituted under the Patent Law, shall determine whether the employee is entitled to remuneration for his or her inventions. An employee may waive the right to receive consideration for “service inventions” and case law has held that in certain circumstances, such waiver does not necessarily have to be explicit. The Committee will examine, on a case-by-case basis, the general contractual framework between the parties in accordance with general Israeli contract law. Further, there is no specific formula for calculating this remuneration. Although we generally enter into assignment-of-invention agreements with our employees pursuant to which such individuals assign to us all rights to any inventions created in the scope of their employment or engagement with us, we may still face claims demanding remuneration in consideration for assigned inventions. As a consequence of such claims, we could be required to pay additional remuneration or royalties to our current and/or former employees, or be forced to litigate such claims, which could negatively affect our business.

Risks Related to Government Regulation

Our product candidates and operations are subject to extensive government regulation and oversight both in the United States and abroad, and our failure to comply with applicable requirements could harm our business.

We expect the Nanox.ARC (including the Nanox.CLOUD) and other future products we develop to be regulated by the FDA as medical devices. Our product candidate is subject to extensive regulation in the United States and elsewhere, including by the FDA and its foreign counterparts, the U.S. Department of Justice (the “DOJ”) and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services-Office of the Inspector General. The FDA and foreign regulatory agencies regulate, among other things, with respect to medical devices: design, development and manufacturing; testing, labeling, content and language of instructions for use and storage; clinical trials; product safety; establishment registration and device listing; marketing, sales and distribution; pre-market clearance and approval; conformity assessment procedures; record keeping procedures; advertising and promotion; recalls and field safety corrective actions; post-market surveillance, including reporting of deaths or serious injuries and malfunctions that, if they were to occur, could lead to death or serious injury; post-market approval studies; and product import and export.

The regulations our product candidate is subject to are complex and have tended to become more stringent over time. Regulatory changes could result in restrictions on or additional requirements affecting our ability to develop our products, carry on or expand our operations, higher than anticipated costs or lower than anticipated sales for any approved product. Failure to comply with applicable regulations could jeopardize our ability to sell our future products, following receipt of clearance from the FDA, and if cleared or approved in other jurisdictions, and result in enforcement actions such as: warning or untitled letters; fines; injunctions; consent decrees; civil penalties; customer notifications; termination of distribution; recalls or seizures of products; administrative detention of medical devices believed to be adulterated or misbranded; delays in the introduction of products into the market; operating restrictions; total or partial suspension of production; refusal to grant future clearances or approvals for new products, new intended uses or modifications to our products; withdrawals or suspensions of current approvals, resulting in prohibitions on sales of our products; and in the most serious cases, criminal prosecution or penalties. The occurrence of any of these events would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations and could result in shareholders losing their entire investment.

We may not receive, or may be delayed in receiving, the necessary clearances or approvals for our future products, and failure to timely obtain necessary clearances or approvals for our future products would adversely affect our ability to grow our business.

In the United States, before we can market a new medical device, or a new use of, new claim for or significant modification to an existing product, we must first receive either clearance under Section 510(k) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the “FDCA”) or approval of a pre-market approval application (a “PMA”) from the FDA, unless an exemption applies. In the 510(k) clearance process, before a device may be marketed, the FDA must determine that a proposed device is “substantially equivalent” to a legally-marketed “predicate” device, which includes a device that has been previously cleared through the 510(k) process, a device that was legally marketed prior to May 28, 1976 (pre-amendments device), a device that was originally on the U.S. market pursuant to an approved PMA and later down-classified, or a 510(k)-exempt device. To be “substantially equivalent,” the proposed device must have the same intended use as the predicate device, and either have the same technological characteristics as the predicate device or have different technological characteristics and not raise different questions of safety or effectiveness than the predicate device. Clinical data are sometimes required to support substantial equivalence. In the process of obtaining PMA approval, the FDA must determine that a proposed device is safe and effective for its intended use based, in part, on extensive data, including, but not limited to, technical, pre-clinical, clinical trial, manufacturing and labeling data. The PMA process is typically required for devices that are deemed to pose the greatest risk, such as life-sustaining, life-supporting or implantable devices.

Modifications to products that are approved through a PMA application generally require FDA approval. Similarly, certain modifications made to products cleared through a 510(k) may require a new 510(k) clearance. Both the PMA approval and the 510(k) clearance process can be expensive, lengthy and uncertain. The FDA’s 510(k) clearance process usually takes from three to 12 months, but can last longer. The process of obtaining a PMA is generally much more costly and uncertain than the 510(k) clearance process and generally takes from one to three years, or even longer, from the time the application is submitted to the FDA. In addition, a PMA generally requires the performance of one or more clinical trials. Despite the time, effort and cost, a device may not be approved or cleared by the FDA. Any delay or failure to obtain necessary regulatory clearances or approvals could harm our business. Furthermore, even if we are granted regulatory clearances or approvals, they may include significant limitations on the indicated uses for the device or other restrictions or requirements, which may limit the market for the device.

We continue to implement a multi-step approach to the regulatory clearance process. We submitted a 510(k) premarket notification for the Nanox Cart X-Ray System, a single-source version of the Nanox.ARC, to an accredited Review Organization under the Third Party Review Program in January 2020. On April 1, 2021, we received clearance from the FDA to market our Nanox Cart X-Ray System. On April 28, 2023, we received a 510(k) clearance from the FDA to market the Nanox.ARC (including the Nanox.CLOUD), a multi-source Nanox.ARC 3D digital tomosynthesis system, as a stationary X-ray system intended to produce tomographic images of the human musculoskeletal system adjunctive to conventional radiography, on adult patients. This device is intended to be used in professional healthcare facilities or radiological environments, such as hospitals, clinics, imaging centers and other medical practices by trained radiographers, radiologists and physicians. We plan to seek additional clearances or approvals for additional uses of the currently cleared Nanox System, or for future versions of the Nanox System.

We are in the early stages of commercializing the FDA-cleared Nanox.ARC and the Nanox.CLOUD as the Nanox System, and we may also commercialize one or more future versions of our Nanox System, once cleared or approved. Any modification to these systems that has not been previously cleared may require us to submit a new 510(k) premarket notification and obtain clearance, or submit De-novo or PMA and obtain FDA approval prior to implementing the change. Specifically, any modification to a 510(k)-cleared device that could significantly affect its safety or effectiveness, or that would constitute a major change in its intended use, design or manufacture, requires a new 510(k) clearance or, possibly, approval of De-novo or a PMA. The FDA requires every manufacturer to make this determination in the first instance, but the FDA may review any manufacturer’s decision. The FDA may not agree with our decisions regarding whether new clearances or approvals are necessary. We may make modifications or add additional features in the future that we believe do not require a new 510(k) clearance or approval of a PMA. If the FDA disagrees with our determination and requires us to submit new 510(k) notifications or PMA applications for modifications to our previously cleared products for which we have concluded that new clearances or approvals are unnecessary, we may be required to cease marketing or to recall the modified product until we obtain clearance or approval, and we may be subject to significant regulatory fines or penalties. If the FDA requires us to go through a lengthier, more rigorous examination for future products or modifications to existing products than we had expected, including new or additional clinical trial requirements, product introductions or modifications could be delayed or canceled, which could adversely affect our ability to grow our business.

The FDA can delay, limit or deny clearance or approval of a medical device for many reasons, including:

In order to sell our products in member countries of the European Economic Area (“EEA”), our products must comply with the essential requirements of the EU Medical Devices Regulation (EU) 2017/745. Compliance with these requirements is a prerequisite to be able to affix the Conformité Européene (“CE”) mark to our products, without which they cannot be sold or marketed in the EEA. To demonstrate compliance with the essential requirements we must undergo a conformity assessment procedure, which varies according to the type of medical device and its classification. Except for low-risk medical devices (Class I non-sterile, non-measuring devices), where the manufacturer can issue a European Community (“EC”) Declaration of Conformity based on a self-assessment of the conformity of its products with the essential requirements of the EU Medical Devices Directive, a conformity assessment procedure requires the intervention of an organization accredited by a member state of the EEA to conduct conformity assessments, or a Notified Body. Depending on the relevant conformity assessment procedure, the Notified Body would typically audit and examine the technical file and audit the quality system of the manufacturer and manufacturing sites of our devices. The Notified Body issues a certificate of conformity following successful completion of a conformity assessment procedure conducted in relation to the medical device and its manufacturer and their conformity with the essential requirements. This certificate entitles the manufacturer to affix the CE mark to its medical devices after having prepared and signed a related EC Declaration of Conformity.

As a general rule, demonstration of conformity of medical devices and their manufacturers with the essential requirements must be based, among other things, on the evaluation of clinical data supporting the safety and performance of the products during normal conditions of use. Specifically, a manufacturer must demonstrate that the device achieves its intended performance during normal conditions of use, that the known and foreseeable risks, and any adverse events, are minimized and acceptable when weighed against the benefits of its intended performance, and that any claims made about the performance and safety of the device are supported by suitable evidence. If we fail to remain in compliance with applicable European laws and directives, we would be unable to affix the CE mark, which we intend to obtain for some of our products, which would prevent us from selling them within the EEA.

Failure to comply with post-marketing regulatory requirements could subject us to enforcement actions, including substantial penalties, and might require us to recall or withdraw a product from the market.

Even though we received clearance from the FDA to market the Nanox.ARC (including the Nanox.CLOUD), and if we receive regulatory clearance or approval of other future products, we remain subject to ongoing and pervasive regulatory requirements governing, among other things, the manufacture, marketing, advertising, medical device reporting, sale, promotion, import, export, registration, and listing of devices. For example, we are required to submit periodic reports to the FDA as a condition of 510(k) clearance. These reports include information about failures and certain adverse events associated with the device after its clearance. Failure to submit such reports, or failure to submit the reports in a timely manner, could result in enforcement action by the FDA. Following its review of the periodic reports, the FDA might ask for additional information or initiate further investigation.

The regulations to which we are subject are complex and have become more stringent over time. Regulatory changes could result in restrictions on our ability to continue or expand our operations, higher than anticipated costs, or lower than anticipated sales. Even after we have obtained the proper regulatory clearance or approval to market a device, we have ongoing responsibilities under FDA regulations and applicable foreign laws and regulations. The FDA, state and foreign regulatory authorities have broad surveillance and enforcement powers. Our failure to comply with applicable regulatory requirements could result in enforcement action by the FDA, state or foreign regulatory authorities, which may include any of the following sanctions:

Any of these sanctions could result in higher than anticipated costs or lower than anticipated sales and have a material adverse effect on our reputation, business, financial condition and results of operations.

In addition, the FDA or state or foreign authorities may change their clearance and approval policies, adopt additional regulations or revise existing regulations, or take other actions, which may prevent or delay clearance or approval of our future products under development on a timely basis. Such policy or regulatory changes could impose additional requirements upon us that could delay our ability to obtain new clearances or approvals, increase the costs of compliance or restrict our ability to maintain any approvals we are able to obtain. For example, the FDA has announced steps that the FDA intends to take to modernize the premarket notification pathway under Section 510(k) of the FDCA. For more information, see “—Legislative or regulatory reforms in the United States or the EU may make it more difficult and costly for us to obtain regulatory clearances or approvals for our products or to manufacture, market or distribute our products after clearance or approval is obtained.”

Our products must be manufactured in accordance with federal, state and foreign regulations, and we could be forced to recall our devices or terminate production if we fail to comply with these regulations.

The methods used in, and the facilities used for, the manufacture of our products must comply with the Quality System Regulation (“QSR”), which is a complex regulatory scheme that covers the procedures and documentation of the design, testing, production, process controls, quality assurance, labeling, packaging, handling, storage, distribution, installation, servicing and shipping of medical devices. As manufacturers of electron radiation-emitting products, we are also responsible for compliance with the radiological health regulations and certain radiation safety performance standards.

Furthermore, we are required to verify that our suppliers maintain facilities, procedures and operations that comply with our quality standards and applicable regulatory requirements. The FDA enforces the QSR through periodic announced or unannounced inspections of medical device manufacturing facilities, which may include the facilities of subcontractors. Our products are also subject to similar state regulations and various laws and regulations of foreign countries governing manufacturing.

Our third-party manufacturers may not take the necessary steps to comply with applicable regulations, which could cause delays in the delivery of our products. In addition, failure to comply with applicable FDA or state or foreign requirements or later discovery of previously unknown problems with our products or manufacturing processes could result in, among other things: warning letters or untitled letters; fines, injunctions or civil penalties; suspension or withdrawal of approvals; seizures or recalls of our products; total or partial suspension of production or distribution; administrative or judicially imposed sanctions; the FDA’s refusal to grant pending or future clearances or approvals for our products; clinical holds; refusal to permit the import or export of our products; and criminal prosecution of us, our suppliers or our employees.

Any of these actions could significantly and negatively affect supply of our products. If any of these events occurs, our reputation could be harmed, we could be exposed to product liability claims and we could lose customers and experience reduced sales and increased costs.

The misuse or off-label use of our products may harm our reputation in the marketplace, result in injuries that lead to product liability suits or result in costly investigations, fines or sanctions by regulatory bodies if we are deemed to have engaged in the promotion of these uses, any of which could be costly to our business.

Advertising and promotion of our future products that obtains approval in the United States may be heavily scrutinized by the FDA, the DOJ, HHS, state attorneys general, members of Congress, and the public. In addition, advertising and promotion of any future product that obtains approval outside of the United States will be heavily scrutinized by comparable foreign regulatory authorities.

Our existing products are, and we expect our future products will be, cleared by the requisite regulatory authorities for specific indications. For example, on April 28, 2023, we received a 510(k) clearance from the FDA to market the Nanox.ARC (including the Nanox.CLOUD) as a stationary X-ray system intended to produce tomographic images of the human musculoskeletal system adjunctive to conventional radiography, on adult patients. This device is intended to be used in professional healthcare facilities or radiological environments, such as hospitals, clinics, imaging centers, and other medical practices by trained radiographers, radiologists, and physicians. We train our marketing personnel and direct sales force to not promote our devices for uses outside of the FDA-approved indications for use, known as “off-label uses.” We cannot, however, prevent a physician from using our devices off-label, when in the physician’s independent professional medical judgment he or she deems it appropriate. There may be increased risk of injury to patients if physicians attempt to use our devices off-label. Furthermore, the use of our devices for indications other than those approved by the FDA or approved by any foreign regulatory body may not effectively treat such conditions, which could harm our reputation in the marketplace among healthcare providers and patients.

If the FDA or any state or foreign regulatory body determines that our promotional materials or training constitute promotion of an off-label use, it could request that we modify our training or promotional materials or subject us to regulatory or enforcement actions, including the issuance or imposition of an untitled letter, which is used for violators that do not necessitate a warning letter, injunction, seizure, civil fine or criminal penalties. It is also possible that other federal, state or foreign enforcement authorities might take action under other regulatory authority, such as false claims laws, if they consider our business activities to constitute promotion of an off-label use, which could result in significant penalties, including, but not limited to, criminal, civil and administrative penalties, damages, fines, disgorgement, exclusion from participation in government healthcare programs and the curtailment of our operations. We may become subject to such actions and, if we are not successful in defending against such actions, those actions may have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. Equivalent laws and potential consequences exist in foreign jurisdictions.

In addition, if our products are cleared or approved, healthcare providers may misuse our products or use improper techniques if they are not adequately trained, potentially leading to injury and an increased risk of product liability. If our devices are misused or used with improper technique, we may become subject to costly litigation by our customers or their patients. As described above, product liability claims could divert management’s attention from our core business, be expensive to defend and result in sizeable damage awards against us that may not be covered by insurance.

Our products may cause or contribute to adverse medical events or be subject to failures or malfunctions that we are required to report to the FDA, and if we fail to do so, we would be subject to sanctions that could harm our reputation, business, financial condition and results of operations. The discovery of serious safety issues with our products, or a recall of our products either voluntarily or at the direction of the FDA or another governmental authority, could have a negative impact on us.

Because the Nanox.ARC (including the Nanox.CLOUD) received clearance from the FDA, we are subject to the FDA’s medical device reporting regulations and similar foreign regulations, which require us to report to the FDA when we receive or become aware of information that reasonably suggests that one or more of our products may have caused or contributed to a death or serious injury or malfunctioned in a way that, if the malfunction were to recur, could cause or contribute to a death or serious injury. The timing of our obligation to report is triggered by the date we become aware of the adverse event as well as the nature of the event. We may fail to report adverse events of which we become aware within the prescribed timeframe. We may also fail to recognize that we have become aware of a reportable adverse event, especially if it is not reported to us as an adverse event or if it is an adverse event that is unexpected or removed in time from the use of the product. If we fail to comply with our reporting obligations, the FDA or other regulatory bodies could take action, including warning letters, untitled letters, administrative actions, criminal prosecution, imposition of civil monetary penalties, revocation of our device clearance or approval, seizure of our products or delay in clearance or approval of future products.

The FDA and foreign regulatory bodies have the authority to require the recall of commercialized products in the event of material deficiencies or defects in design or manufacture of a product or in the event that a product poses an unacceptable risk to health. The FDA’s authority to require a recall must be based on a finding that there is reasonable probability that the device could cause serious injury or death. We may also choose to voluntarily recall a product if any material deficiency is found. A government-mandated or voluntary recall by us could occur as a result of an unacceptable risk to health, component failures, malfunctions, manufacturing defects, labeling or design deficiencies, packaging defects or other deficiencies or failures to comply with applicable regulations. Product defects or other errors may occur in the future.

Depending on the corrective action we take to redress a product’s deficiencies or defects, the FDA may require, or we may decide, that we will need to obtain new clearances or approvals for the device before we may market or distribute the corrected device. Seeking such clearances or approvals may delay our ability to replace the recalled devices in a timely manner. Moreover, if we do not adequately address problems associated with our devices, we may face additional regulatory enforcement action, including FDA warning letters, product seizure, injunctions, administrative penalties or civil or criminal fines.

Companies are required to maintain certain records of recalls and corrections, even if they are not reportable to the FDA. We may initiate voluntary withdrawals or corrections for our products in the future that we determine do not require notification of the FDA. If the FDA disagrees with our determinations, it could require us to report those actions as recalls and we may be subject to enforcement action. A future recall announcement could harm our reputation with customers, potentially lead to product liability claims against us and negatively affect our sales. Any corrective action, whether voluntary or involuntary, as well as defending ourselves in a lawsuit, will require the dedication of our time and capital, distract management from operating our business and may harm our reputation and financial results.

Our relationships with customers and third-party payors will be subject to applicable anti-kickback, fraud and abuse and other healthcare laws and regulations, which could expose us to criminal sanctions, civil penalties, contractual damages, reputational harm and diminished profits and future earnings.

Physicians, other healthcare providers, and third-party payors will play a primary role with respect to any future products for which we obtain marketing approval. Our arrangements with third-party payors and customers may expose us to broadly applicable fraud and abuse and other healthcare laws and regulations that may constrain the business or financial arrangements and relationships through which we market, sell and distribute our product. Restrictions under applicable federal and state healthcare laws and regulations include the following:

Efforts to ensure that our business arrangements with third parties will comply with applicable healthcare laws and regulations involve substantial costs. Additionally, it is possible that governmental authorities will conclude that our business practices may not comply with current or future statutes, regulations or case law involving applicable fraud and abuse or other healthcare laws and regulations. If our operations are found to be in violation of any of these laws or any other governmental regulations that may apply to us, we may be subject to significant civil, criminal and administrative penalties, damages, fines, exclusion from government funded healthcare programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, and the curtailment or restructuring of our operations. Exclusion, suspension and debarment from government funded healthcare programs would significantly impact our ability to commercialize, sell or distribute any product. If any of the physicians or other providers or entities with whom we expect to do business are found not to be in compliance with applicable laws, they may be subject to criminal, civil or administrative sanctions, including exclusions from government funded healthcare programs.

Changes in laws or regulations relating to data protection, or any actual or perceived failure by us to comply with such laws and regulations or our privacy policies, could materially and adversely affect our business or could lead to government enforcement actions and significant penalties against us, and adversely impact our operating results.

Compliance with continuously evolving privacy laws and regulations, including laws and regulations governing processing of personal information, and our actual or perceived failure to comply with such laws and regulations may result in significant liability, negative publicity, and/or erosion of trust and could have an adverse effect on our revenues, our results of operations and financial condition.

We expect to receive health information and other highly sensitive or confidential information and data of patients and other third parties (e.g., healthcare providers who refer patients for scans), which we expect to compile and analyze. While we have adopted measures to ensure that any such data will be transferred to us, to the extent possible, in a de-identified or anonymized manner, collection and use of this data may still raise privacy and data protection concerns, which could negatively impact our business. There are numerous federal, state and international laws and regulations regarding privacy, data protection, information security, and the collection, storing, sharing, use, processing, transfer, disclosure, and protection of personal information and other data. These laws and regulations are becoming more complex and/or prevalent in the United States, Europe, Israel, and elsewhere. The regulatory framework for privacy and data protection worldwide is, and is likely to remain for the foreseeable future, uncertain and complex, and this or other actual or alleged obligations may be interpreted and applied in a manner that we may not anticipate or that is inconsistent from one jurisdiction to another and may conflict with other rules or practices including ours. Further, any significant change to applicable laws, regulations, or industry practices regarding the collection, use, retention, security, or disclosure of data, or their interpretation, or any changes regarding the manner in which the consent of relevant users for the collection, use, retention, or disclosure of such data must be obtained, could increase our costs and require us to modify our services and products, possibly in a material manner, which we may be unable to complete, and may limit our ability to store and process patients’ data or develop new services and features.

In particular, there have been laws and regulations adopted throughout the United States and in Israel that impose new obligations in areas such as privacy. In the United States, privacy and data security laws are also complex and changing rapidly. Further, laws in all 50 states require businesses to provide notice to consumers whose personal information has been disclosed as a result of a data breach, and compliance with them in the event of a widespread data breach is complex and costly. Both federal and state legislation, U.S. Congress and individual states also govern the collection, use and other processing of personal data. For example, the California Consumer Privacy Act (“CCPA”), provides data privacy rights for California residents and operational requirements for covered companies. Among other things, companies covered by the CCPA must provide new disclosures to California residents and afford such residents the ability to opt-out of certain sales of personal information. The CCPA provides for civil penalties for violations, as well as a private right of action for data breaches that is expected to increase data breach litigation. In addition, the California Privacy Rights Act (“CPRA”), which took effect in January 2023, has expanded the rights granted under the CCPA and imposes additional requirements. Additional U.S. states have implemented, or are in the process of implementing, similar new laws or regulations (for example, the Virginia Consumer Data Protection Act (“VCDPA”), which took effect on January 1, 2023,the Colorado Privacy Act (“CPA”), which took effect on July 1, 2023, the Connecticut Data Privacy Act (“CDPA”) which took effect on July 1, 2023 and the Utah Consumer Privacy Act (“UCPA”), which took effect on December 31, 2023) that impose new privacy rights and obligations that resemble the CCPA and CPRA. More generally, some observers have noted that the CCPA, CPRA, VCDPA, CPA, CDPA and UCPA could mark the beginning of a trend toward more stringent United States federal privacy legislation, which could increase our potential liability and adversely affect our business.

Most of the new regulations exempt personal information which is subject to the HIPAA and HITECH regulations. Nonetheless, new legislation may affect our operations and business conduct, as it applies to our general conduct, marketing efforts and where we process data that is not health-related by nature (and, therefore, not subject to HIPAA), and may increase our compliance costs and potential liability.

In addition, we expect to obtain health information that is subject to privacy and security requirements under HIPAA and HITECH and its implementing regulations. The Privacy Standards and Security Standards under HIPAA establish a set of standards for the protection of individually identifiable health information by health plans, health care clearinghouses and certain health care providers, referred to as Covered Entities, and the business associates with whom Covered Entities enter into service relationships pursuant to which individually identifiable health information may be exchanged. As part of our normal operations, we expect to collect, process and retain personal identifying information regarding patients, including as a Business Associate of Covered Entities under HIPAA. Therefore, we expect to be subject to HIPAA, including changes implemented through HITECH, and we could be subject to criminal penalties if we knowingly obtain or disclose individually identifiable health information in a manner that is not authorized or permitted by HIPAA. A data breach affecting sensitive personal information, including health information, also could result in significant legal and financial exposure and reputational damages that could potentially have an adverse effect on our business.

HIPAA requires Covered Entities (like many of our potential customers) and Business Associates, like us, to develop and maintain policies and procedures with respect to protected health information that is used or disclosed, including the adoption of administrative, physical and technical safeguards to protect such information. HITECH expands the notification requirement for breaches of patient-identifiable health information, restricts certain disclosures and sales of patient-identifiable health information and provides for civil monetary penalties for HIPAA violations. HITECH also increased the civil and criminal penalties that may be imposed against Covered Entities and business associates and gave state attorneys general new authority to file civil actions for damages or injunctions in federal courts to enforce HIPAA and its implementing regulations and seek attorney’s fees and costs associated with pursuing federal civil actions. Additionally, certain states have adopted comparable privacy and security laws and regulations, some of which may be more stringent or broader in scope than HIPAA.

Another example of recent U.S. data security requirements is the Food and Drug Omnibus Reform Act (“FDORA”), enacted in December 2022, which, among other provisions, requires developers of certain “cyber devices” to design and implement plans to monitor, identify and address cybersecurity vulnerabilities of those devices and to submit those plans to the FDA as part of every new product application for a cyber device. “Cyber devices” are defined as devices that include software, connect to the internet, and contain any technological features that could be vulnerable to cybersecurity threats. This provision entered into effect on March 29, 2023, and the FDA expects sponsors of cyber devices to comply with these requirements as of October 1, 2023.

Internationally, many jurisdictions have or are considering enacting privacy or data protection laws or regulations relating to the collection, use, storage, transfer, disclosure and/or other processing of personal data, as well as certification requirements for the hosting of health data specifically. For example, the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation (2016/679) (“EU GDPR”) governs certain collection and other processing activities involving personal data about data subjects in the European Economic Area (“EEA”). The EU GDPR, supplemented by national laws and further implemented through binding guidance from the European Data Protection Board, imposes stringent European Union data protection requirements and provides for significant penalties for noncompliance, ranging from €10 million to €20 million or 2% to 4% of our annual global revenue, whichever is higher. In the UK, we are subject to the UK General Data Protection Regulation and the United Kingdom’s Data Protection Act 2018 (the “UK GDPR”), under which penalties for noncompliance range from £8.7 million to £17.5 million or 2% to 4% of our annual global revenue, whichever is higher. Our UK and EEA operations are exposed to two parallel regimes, each of which may subject us to increased compliance risk based on differing, and potentially inconsistent or conflicting, interpretation and enforcement by regulators and authorities. The UK GDPR is currently substantially unvaried from the EU GDPR but is likely to be subject to divergence from the EU GDPR over time as demonstrated by the Data Protection and Digital Information (No. 2) Bill which is under the UK Parliament’s consideration and expected to come into force in 2024. Given the EU GDPR and UK GDPR are separate regimes, fines could arise under each in respect of a single incident, to the extent it affects European Economic Area (EEA) and UK personal data.

Under the EU GDPR and the UK GDPR, our processing of health data and other highly sensitive data (referred to as “special category data” in those regulations) exposes us to further compliance risk. We carry out records or processing activity mapping (“ROPA”) and prior to processing personal sensitive data from EEA or UK individuals, we will conduct a data protection impact assessment (“DPIA”) in connection with our high-risk processing activities and implement appropriate safeguards and mechanisms to ensure adequate protection of the personal data, in order to comply with GDPR/UK GDPR.

Additionally, the EU GDPR and the UK GDPR (collectively, the “GDPR”) includes restrictions on cross-border data transfers of personal data outside of the EEA and the UK (as applicable) to third countries whose laws do not ensure an adequate level of protection, unless a valid data transfer mechanism has been implemented or an Article 49 GDPR derogation applies. The GDPR may increase our responsibility and liability in relation to personal data that we process where such processing is subject to the GDPR, and we may be required to put in place additional mechanisms to ensure compliance with the GDPR, including as implemented by individual countries. In July 2020, the EU-US Privacy Shield was invalidated as a valid personal data transfer mechanism and on June 27, 2021, June 27, 2021, the European Commission published a new set of modular standard contractual clauses (the “New SCCs”). The New SCCs must be used for all relevant transfers of personal data outside the EEA (since December 27, 2022). Although the European Commission adopted an adequacy decision for the UK on 28 June 2021, allowing the continued flow of personal data from the EEA to the UK, this decision will automatically expire in June 2025 unless the European Commission re-assesses and renews or extends that decision. The decision will be regularly reviewed by the European Commission going forward and may be revoked if the UK diverges from its current data protection laws and the European Commission deems the UK to no longer provide adequate protection of personal data. On March 21, 2022, the UK implemented its own UK-specific international data transfer agreement (“IDTA”) and addendum to the New SCCs (“UK Addendum”). For all contracts involving transfers of UK-originated data entered into after September 21, 2022, organizations which transfer UK personal data are required to use the IDTA, or the New SCCs together with the UK Addendum. Existing contracts involving transfers of UK-originated data relying on standard contractual clauses must be migrated to the IDTA, or the New SCCs together with the UK Addendum by March 21, 2024. On July 11, 2023, the European Commission entered into force its adequacy decision for the EU-US Data Privacy Framework (a new framework for transferring personal information from the EEA to the United States), having determined that such framework ensures that the protection of personal information transferred from the EEA to the US will be comparable to the protection offered in the EU. The UK has also approved a UK extension to the EU-US Data Privacy Framework, which were laid before Parliament on 21 September 2023 and come into force on 12 October 2023. However, this decision will likely face legal challenges and ultimately may be invalidated by the Court of Justice of the European Union (“CJEU”), just as the EU-US Privacy Shield was. The cross-border data transfer landscape in the EEA and UK is continually developing, and we are monitoring these developments. We may, in addition to other impacts, experience additional costs associated with increased compliance burdens and be required to engage in new contract negotiations with third parties that aid in processing data on our behalf or localize certain data.

The GDPR also imposes conditions on obtaining valid consent for cookies, such as a prohibition on pre-checked consents and a requirement to ensure separate consents are sought for each type of cookie or similar technology. Recent European court decisions and regulators’ recent guidance are driving increased attention to cookies and tracking technologies and the online behavioral advertising ecosystem. This could lead to substantial costs, require significant systems changes, limit the effectiveness of our marketing activities, divert the attention of our technology personnel, adversely affect our margins, increase costs and subject us to additional liabilities. In addition, regulation of cookies and similar technologies, and any decline of cookies or similar online tracking technologies as a means to identify and potentially target users, may lead to broader restrictions and impairments on our marketing and personalization activities and may negatively impact our efforts to understand users. Finally, the current national laws that implement the e-Privacy Directive are highly likely to be replaced across the EU (but not the UK) with a EU regulation known as the e-Privacy Regulation which, though still in development, will if adopted, impose new obligations on the use of personal data in the context of electronic communications, particularly in relation to online tracking technologies, and significantly increase regulators’ ability to impose fines for non-compliance.

Further, the European Commission regularly re-examines its adequacy decisions, including its Decision 2011/61/EU regarding the adequacy of Israeli law. On January 15, 2024, the European Commission successfully concluded its review of 11 existing adequacy decisions. These decisions had been adopted under the EU data protection legislation that preceded the EU GDPR. The European Commission has determined that personal data transferred from the European Union to Andorra, Argentina, Canada, Faroe Islands, Guernsey, the Isle of Man, Israel, Jersey, New Zealand, Switzerland and Uruguay, continues to benefit from adequate data protection safeguards. Therefore, the adequacy decisions adopted for these eleven countries and territories remain in place and data can continue to flow freely to these jurisdictions. In addition, while the European Commission adopted an adequacy decision for the UK on June 28, 2021, allowing the continued flow of personal data from the EEA to the UK, this decision will automatically expire in June 2025 unless the European Commission re-assesses and renews or extends that decision. The decision will be regularly reviewed by the European Commission going forward and may be revoked if the UK diverges from its current data protection laws and the European Commission deems the UK to no longer provide adequate protection of personal data.

Virtually every jurisdiction in which we expect to operate has established its own data security and privacy legal framework with which we must, and our target customers will need to, comply, including the rules and regulation mentioned above. We may also need to comply with varying and possibly conflicting privacy laws and regulations in other jurisdictions. As a result, we could face regulatory actions, including significant fines or penalties, adverse publicity and possible loss of business.

In addition, failure to comply with the Israeli Privacy Protection Law 1981 and its regulations, as well as the guidelines of the Israeli Privacy Protection Authority, may expose us to administrative fines, civil claims (including class actions) and, in certain cases, criminal liability. Current pending legislation may result in a change to the current enforcement measures and sanctions.

While we are preparing to implement various measures intended to enable us to comply with applicable privacy or data protection laws, regulations and contractual obligations, these measures may not always be effective and do not guarantee compliance. Any failure or perceived failure by us to comply with our contractual or legal obligations or regulatory requirements relating to privacy, data protection, or information security may result in governmental investigations or enforcement actions, litigation, claims, or public statements against us by consumer advocacy groups or others and could result in significant liability, cause our customers, partners or patients to lose trust in us, and otherwise materially and adversely affect our reputation and business. Furthermore, the costs of compliance with, and other burdens imposed by, the laws, regulations, and policies that are applicable to the businesses of our customers or partners may limit the adoption and use of, and reduce the overall demand for, our products and services. Additionally, if third parties we work with violate applicable laws, regulations, or agreements, such violations may put the data we have received at risk, could result in governmental investigations or enforcement actions, fines, litigation, claims, or public statements against us by consumer advocacy groups or others and could result in significant liability, cause our customers, partners or patients to lose trust in us, and otherwise materially and adversely affect our reputation and business. Further, public scrutiny of, or complaints about, technology companies or their data handling or data protection practices, even if unrelated to our business, industry or operations, may lead to increased scrutiny of technology companies, including us, and may cause government agencies to enact additional regulatory requirements, or to modify their enforcement or investigation activities, which may increase our costs and risks.

Risks associated with regulation of new and emerging technologies such as artificial intelligence.

There have also been privacy bills enacted in other countries around the world which have introduced new or expanded privacy, security, cyber-security and artificial intelligence (“AI”) requirements and we expect that legislation will continue to evolve in the coming years. For example, the rising adoption of AI and Generative AI in daily operations and products poses additional and new risks, including, without limitation, data privacy and security risks, intellectual property infringement, ownership issues and/or confidentiality issues. Threats include potential data leaks, social engineering attacks, and decision-making based on manipulated information. Growing regulatory requirements for information security and data protection add to the challenge. Therefore, it is difficult to determine whether and how such existing laws and regulations will apply to and impact the internet and our business. As a company that provides AI-based solutions and utilizes AI in our products and services, we are subject to regulatory and legal risks related to the use of AI. The development, deployment and use of AI technologies are subject to a variety of evolving laws and regulations, which may differ across jurisdictions and may evolve over time. Our failure to comply with these laws and regulations could result in legal liability, regulatory enforcement actions, negative publicity and damage to our reputation. For example, the EU Artificial Intelligence Act (the “EU AI Act”) will impose specific obligations on AI manufacturers and developers (including, by listing prohibited activities, high-risk activities and general purposes AI models), which are expected to be effective from Spring 2024, with the bulk of the obligations being in force two years thereafter. Additionally, the AI Liability Directive and AI-specific amendments to the existing EU product liability regime will develop the liability regime for harm caused by the use of an AI model. Among other things, the EU AI Act may require us to implement additional quality assurance controls and measures to be reviewed and approved by regulatory submissions of our products. The UK also published its response to an earlier white paper on AI Regulation on February 6, 2024, setting out proposals for an AI governance framework which existing regulators would apply within their existing remits. Further, on March 25, 2024, the Artificial Intelligence (Regulation) Bill was proposed to the UK Parliament, aimed at establishing an AI authority to oversee the regulatory approach to AI. Any additional costs and penalties associated with increased compliance, enforcement and risk reduction could make certain offerings less profitable or increase the difficulty of bringing certain offerings to market or maintaining certain offerings.

If we do not obtain and maintain international regulatory registrations, clearances or approvals for our products, we will be unable to market and sell our products outside of the United States.

Sales of our products outside of the United States are subject to foreign regulatory requirements that vary widely from country to country. Approval procedures vary among countries and can involve additional testing. The time required to obtain approval outside of the United States may differ substantially from that required to obtain FDA approval. In addition, the FDA regulates exports of medical devices from the United States. While the regulations of some countries may not impose barriers to marketing and selling our products or only require notification, others require that we obtain the clearance or approval of a specified regulatory body. Complying with foreign regulatory requirements, including obtaining registrations, clearances or approvals, can be expensive and time-consuming, and we may not receive regulatory clearances or approvals in each country in which we plan to market our products or we may be unable to do so on a timely basis. The time required to obtain registrations, clearances or approvals, if required by other countries, may be longer than that required for FDA clearance or approval, and requirements for such registrations, clearances or approvals may significantly differ from FDA requirements. If we modify our products, we may need to apply for additional regulatory clearances or approvals before we are permitted to sell the modified product. In addition, we may not continue to meet the quality and safety standards required to maintain the authorizations that we have received. If we are unable to maintain our authorizations in a particular country, we will no longer be able to sell the applicable product in that country.

Regulatory clearance or approval by the FDA does not ensure registration, clearance or approval by regulatory authorities in other countries, and registration, clearance or approval by one or more foreign regulatory authorities does not ensure registration, clearance or approval by regulatory authorities in other foreign countries or by the FDA. However, a failure or delay in obtaining registration or regulatory clearance or approval in one country may have a negative effect on the regulatory process in others.

Legislative or regulatory reforms in the United States or the EU may make it more difficult and costly for us to obtain regulatory clearances or approvals for our products or to manufacture, market or distribute our products after clearance or approval is obtained.

From time to time, legislation is drafted and introduced in Congress that could significantly change the statutory provisions governing the regulation of medical devices. In addition, the FDA may change its clearance and approval policies, adopt additional regulations or revise existing regulations, or take other actions, which may prevent or delay approval or clearance of our future products under development or impact our ability to modify our currently cleared products on a timely basis. Over the last several years, the FDA has proposed reforms to its 510(k) clearance process, and such proposals could include increased requirements for clinical data and a longer review period, or could make it more difficult for manufacturers to utilize the 510(k) clearance process for their products. For example, in September 2023, the FDA issued three draft guidances intended to strengthen and modernize the premarket notification pathway under Section 510(k) of the FDCA. Among other things, the draft guidances recommend best practices for selecting a predicate device to encourage the evolution of safer and more effective medical devices in the 510(k) program and clarify when clinical data may or may not be needed to support a 510(k) submission. These proposals have not yet been finalized or adopted, and the FDA may work with Congress to implement such proposals through legislation. Accordingly, it is unclear the extent to which any proposals, if adopted, could impose additional regulatory requirements on us that could delay our ability to obtain new 510(k) clearances, increase the costs of compliance, or restrict our ability to maintain our current clearances, or otherwise create competition that may negatively affect our business.

In September 2019, the FDA finalized guidance describing an optional “safety and performance based” premarket review pathway for manufacturers of “certain, well-understood device types” to demonstrate substantial equivalence under the 510(k) clearance pathway by showing that such device meets objective safety and performance criteria established by the FDA, thereby obviating the need, in the case of applicable products, for manufacturers to compare the safety and performance of their medical devices to specific predicate devices in the clearance process. The FDA maintains a list of device types appropriate for the “safety and performance based” pathway and will continue to develop product-specific guidance documents that identify the performance criteria for each such device type, as well as the testing methods recommended in the guidance documents, where feasible. The FDA may establish performance criteria for classes of devices for which we or our competitors seek or currently have received clearance, and it is unclear the extent to which such performance standards, if established, could impact our ability to obtain new 510(k) clearances or otherwise create competition that may negatively affect our business.

In addition, FDA regulations and guidance are often revised or reinterpreted by the FDA in ways that may significantly affect our business and our products. Any new statutes, regulations or revisions or reinterpretations of existing regulations may impose additional costs or lengthen review times of any future products or make it more difficult to obtain clearance or approval for, manufacture, market or distribute our products. We cannot determine what effect changes in regulations, statutes, legal interpretation or policies, when and if promulgated, enacted or adopted may have on our business in the future. Such changes could, among other things, require: additional testing prior to obtaining clearance or approval; changes to manufacturing methods; recall, replacement or discontinuance of our products; or additional record keeping.

The FDA’s and other regulatory authorities’ policies may change and additional government regulations may be promulgated that could prevent, limit or delay regulatory clearance or approval of our future products. We cannot predict the likelihood, nature or extent of government regulation that may arise from future legislation or administrative action, either in the United States or abroad. If we are slow or unable to adapt to changes in existing requirements or the adoption of new requirements or policies, or if we are not able to maintain regulatory compliance, we may lose any marketing approval or clearance that we may have obtained and we may not achieve or sustain profitability.

On April 5, 2017, the European Parliament passed the Medical Devices Regulation (Regulation 2017/745), which repeals and replaces the EU Medical Devices Directive. Unlike directives, which must be implemented into the national laws of the EEA member states, the regulations would be directly applicable, i.e., without the need for adoption of EEA member state laws implementing them, in all EEA member states and are intended to eliminate current differences in the regulation of medical devices among EEA member States. The Medical Devices Regulation, among other things, is intended to establish a uniform, transparent, predictable and sustainable regulatory framework across the EEA for medical devices and ensure a high level of safety and health while supporting innovation.

The Medical Devices Regulation will, however, only become applicable three years after publication (in 2020). Once applicable, the new regulations will, among other things:

These modifications may have an effect on the way we conduct our business in the EEA.

Healthcare reform laws and regulatory changes could adversely affect our products and financial condition.

During the past several years, the U.S. healthcare industry has been subject to an increase in governmental regulation, as well as judicial challenges, at both the federal and state levels. Efforts to control healthcare costs, including limiting access to care, alternative delivery models and changes in the methods used to determine reimbursement scenarios and rates, are ongoing at the federal and state government levels. From time to time, changes designed to contain healthcare costs have been implemented, some of which have resulted in decreased reimbursement rates for diagnostic imaging services that may impact our business or may otherwise affect our ability to commercialize or profitably sell any product candidates for which we obtain regulatory approval.

In March 2010, former President Obama signed into law the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, and the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010 (collectively, the “ACA”), which included measures that significantly changed the way healthcare is financed by both governmental and private insurers. While a primary goal of these healthcare reform efforts was to expand coverage to more individuals, it also involved additional regulatory mandates and other measures designed to constrain medical costs. The ACA significantly impacts the medical device industry. Among other things, the ACA:

In addition, the ACA and related healthcare reform laws, regulations and initiatives have significantly increased regulation of managed care plans and decreased reimbursement under Medicare managed care. Moreover, to alleviate budget shortfalls, states have at times reduced or frozen payments to Medicaid managed care plans. We cannot accurately predict the complete impact of these healthcare reform initiatives, but they could lead to a decreased demand for medical devices and other outcomes that could adversely impact our business and financial results.

Some of the provisions of the ACA have yet to be fully implemented, and certain provisions have been subject to judicial and Congressional challenges. For example, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act enacted on December 22, 2017, or TCJA, eliminated the shared responsibility payment for individuals who fail to maintain minimum essential coverage under section 5000A of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, commonly referred to as the “individual mandate,” effective January 1, 2019. On December 14, 2018, a U.S. District Court Judge in the Northern District of Texas, or the Texas District Court Judge, ruled that the individual mandate is a critical and inseverable feature of the ACA, and therefore, because it was repealed as part of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, the remaining provisions of the ACA were invalid as well. On June 17, 2021, the Supreme Court held that state and individual plaintiffs did not have standing to challenge the individual mandate provision of the ACA; in so holding, the Supreme Court did not consider larger constitutional questions about the validity of this provision or the validity of the ACA in its entirety. Another case challenging the ACA’s requirement that private insurers cover certain preventative services is currently pending before the Texas District Court Judge. The Texas District Court Judge struck down this requirement with immediate nationwide effect on March 30, 2023, and the parties appealed the decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. Oral arguments were held on March 2024, and it is unclear when or how the Court will rule or how this decision and appeal, subsequent decisions and appeals, and other efforts to challenge, repeal or replace the ACA, or portions thereof, will affect our future products or our business. It is possible that the ACA, as currently enacted or as it may be amended in the future, and other healthcare reform measures that may be adopted in the future, could have an adverse effect on our industry generally and on our ability to commercialize our future products and achieve profitability.

Disruptions at the FDA and other government agencies caused by funding shortages or global health concerns could hinder their ability to hire, retain or deploy key leadership and other personnel, or otherwise prevent new or modified products from being developed, cleared or approved or commercialized in a timely manner or at all, which could negatively impact our business.

The ability of the FDA to review and clear or approve new products can be affected by a variety of factors, including government budget and funding levels, statutory, regulatory, and policy changes, the FDA’s ability to hire and retain key personnel and accept the payment of user fees, and other events that may otherwise affect the FDA’s ability to perform routine functions. Average review times at the FDA have fluctuated in recent years as a result. In addition, government funding of other government agencies that fund research and development activities is subject to the political process, which is inherently fluid and unpredictable.

Disruptions at the FDA and other agencies may also slow the time necessary for new medical devices or modifications to cleared or approved medical devices to be reviewed and/or approved by necessary government agencies, which would adversely affect our business. For example, over the last several years, including for 35 days beginning on December 22, 2018, the U.S. government has shut down several times and certain regulatory agencies, such as the FDA, have had to furlough critical FDA employees and stop critical activities.

Separately, in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, beginning in March 2020, the FDA postponed certain inspections of domestic and foreign manufacturing facilities. Since that time, the FDA has resumed on-site inspections of domestic and foreign manufacturing facilities; however, regulatory authorities within or outside the United States may adopt or resume similar restrictions or other policy measures in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. If a prolonged government shutdown occurs, or if global health concerns continue to prevent the FDA or other regulatory authorities from conducting their regular inspections, reviews, or other regulatory activities, it could significantly impact the ability of the FDA or other regulatory authorities to timely review and process our regulatory submissions, which could have a material adverse effect on our business.

Risks Related to Employee Matters

Under applicable employment laws, we may not be able to enforce covenants not to compete and therefore may be unable to prevent our competitors from benefiting from the expertise of some of our former employees.

Our employment agreements generally include covenants not to compete. These agreements prohibit our employees, if they cease working for us, from competing directly with us or working for our competitors for a limited period. We may be unable to enforce these agreements under the laws of the jurisdictions in which our employees work at all or for a sufficient duration of time to prevent members of our management team from competing with us. For example, Israeli courts have required employers seeking to enforce covenants not to compete to demonstrate that the competitive activities of a former employee will harm one of a limited number of material interests of the employer, such as the secrecy of a company’s confidential commercial information or the protection of its intellectual property. In Israel, if we cannot demonstrate that such an interest will be harmed, we may be unable to prevent our competitors from benefiting from the expertise of our former employees or consultants and our competitiveness may be diminished.

We may not be able to attract and retain the highly skilled employees we need to support our planned growth.

To continue to execute our business and our growth plan, we must attract and retain highly qualified personnel. Competition for these personnel is intense. We may not be successful in attracting and retaining qualified personnel. If we fail to attract new personnel or fail to retain and motivate our current personnel, our business, financial condition, results of operations and future growth prospects could be severely harmed.

Risks Related to Owning Our Ordinary Shares

Our share price may be volatile, and you may lose all or part of your investment.

The market price for our shares may be volatile and subject to wide fluctuations in response to factors including the following:

In particular, the market prices of pre-commercial-stage companies like ours have been highly volatile due to factors, including, but not limited to:

These and other market and industry factors may cause the market price and demand for our ordinary shares to fluctuate substantially, regardless of our actual operating performance, which may limit or prevent investors from readily selling their ordinary shares and may otherwise negatively affect the liquidity of our ordinary shares. In addition, the stock market in general, and Nasdaq Global Market and emerging growth companies in particular, have experienced extreme price and volume fluctuations that have often been unrelated or disproportionate to the operating performance of these companies. Such broad market fluctuations, and other factors (such as variations in quarterly and yearly operating results, general trends in the medical imaging industry, and changes in state, federal or other applicable regulations affecting us and our industry) may adversely affect the market price of our ordinary shares, if a market for them develops.

In the past, when the market price of shares has been volatile, holders of those shares have instituted securities class action litigation against the company that issued the shares. If any of our shareholders brought a lawsuit against us, we could incur substantial costs defending the lawsuit. Such a lawsuit could also divert resources and the time and attention of our management.

As a foreign private issuer, we are exempt from certain requirements that apply to domestic issuers and we are permitted to follow certain home country corporate governance practices instead of applicable SEC and Nasdaq requirements, which may result in less protection than is accorded to shareholders under rules applicable to domestic issuers.

We report under the Exchange Act as a non-U.S. company with foreign private issuer status. Because we qualify as a foreign private issuer under the Exchange Act, we are exempt from certain provisions of the Exchange Act that are applicable to U.S. domestic public companies, including (1) the sections of the Exchange Act regulating the solicitation of proxies, consents or authorizations in respect of a security registered under the Exchange Act, (2) the sections of the Exchange Act requiring insiders to file public reports of their share ownership and trading activities and liability for insiders who profit from trades made in a short period of time and (3) the rules under the Exchange Act requiring the filing with the SEC of quarterly reports on Form 10-Q containing unaudited financial and other specified information, although we intend to furnish comparable quarterly information on Form 6-K. In addition, foreign private issuers are not required to file their annual report on Form 20-F until 120 days after the end of each fiscal year, while U.S. domestic issuers that are accelerated filers are required to file their annual report on Form 10-K within 75 days after the end of each fiscal year and U.S. domestic issuers that are large accelerated filers are required to file their annual report on Form 10-K within 60 days after the end of each fiscal year. Foreign private issuers are also exempt from Regulation FD, which is intended to prevent issuers from making selective disclosures of material information.

In addition, as a foreign private issuer, we are permitted to follow certain home country corporate governance practices instead of those otherwise required under the listing rules of the Nasdaq Stock Market for domestic issuers. For instance, we follow home country practice in Israel with regard to, among other things, the director nomination procedure, approval of compensation of officers, and quorum at shareholder meetings. In addition, we follow our home country law, instead of the listing rules of the Nasdaq Stock Market, which require that we obtain shareholder approval for certain dilutive events, such as for the establishment or amendment of certain equity based compensation plans, an issuance that will result in a change of control of the company, certain transactions other than a public offering involving issuances of a 20% or more interest in the company and certain acquisitions of the stock or assets of another company. As foreign private issuer we are also permitted to follow home country practice in Israel with regard to composition of the board of directors.

As a result of all of the above, you may not have the same protections afforded to shareholders of a company that is not a foreign private issuer.

We may lose our foreign private issuer status which would then require us to comply with the Exchange Act’s domestic reporting regime and cause us to incur significant legal, accounting and other expenses.

As discussed above, we are a foreign private issuer and therefore we are not required to comply with all of the periodic disclosure and current reporting requirements of the Exchange Act applicable to U.S. domestic issuers. We will remain a foreign private issuer until our board determines that we no longer meet the qualification set forth in Securities Act Rule 405 and Exchange Act Rule 3b-4, with such determinations to be made on an annual basis as of the end of our second fiscal quarter. In order to maintain our current status as a foreign private issuer, either (a) a majority of our ordinary shares must be either directly or indirectly owned of record by non-residents of the United States or (b)(i) a majority of our executive officers or directors must not be U.S. citizens or residents, (ii) more than 50 percent of our assets cannot be located in the United States and (iii) our business must be administered principally outside the United States. If we lose this status, we would be required to comply with the Exchange Act reporting and other requirements applicable to U.S. domestic issuers, which are more detailed and extensive than the requirements for foreign private issuers. We may also be required to make changes in our corporate governance practices in accordance with various SEC and Nasdaq rules. The regulatory and compliance costs to us under U.S. securities laws if we are required to comply with the reporting requirements applicable to a U.S. domestic issuer may be significantly higher than the costs we would incur as a foreign private issuer. As a result, we expect that a loss of foreign private issuer status would increase our legal and financial compliance costs and would make some activities highly time consuming and costly. We also expect that if we were required to comply with the rules and regulations applicable to U.S. domestic issuers, it would make it more difficult and expensive for us to obtain director and officer liability insurance, and we may be required to accept reduced coverage or incur substantially higher costs to obtain coverage. These rules and regulations could also make it more difficult for us to attract and retain qualified members of our board of directors.

We have not paid dividends in the past and have no immediate plans to pay dividends.

We plan to reinvest all of our future earnings, to the extent we have earnings, in order to develop and commercialize our technology and products and to cover operating costs, finance operations and to otherwise become and remain competitive. We have never declared or paid any dividends on our ordinary shares and we do not plan to pay any cash dividends with respect to our securities in the foreseeable future. As we are an initial launch-stage company with limited operating history, we may not be able to generate, at any time, sufficient surplus cash that would be available for distribution to the holders of our ordinary shares as a dividend. Therefore, you should not expect to receive cash dividends on the ordinary shares we are offering. Consequently, investors may need to rely on sales of their ordinary shares after price appreciation, which may never occur, as the only way to realize any future gains on their investment. In addition, the Companies Law imposes restrictions on our ability to declare and pay dividends. See “Item 8. Financial Information—A. Consolidated Statements and Other Financial Information—Dividend Policy” for additional information. Payment of dividends may also be subject to Israeli withholding taxes. See “Item “10. Additional Information—E. Taxation—Taxation of Our Shareholders—Dividends” for additional information.

We incur significant increased costs as a result of operating as a public company that reports to the SEC and our management is required to devote substantial time to meet compliance obligations.

As a public company reporting to the SEC, we incur significant legal, insurance, director compensation, accounting and other expenses that we did not incur as a private company. We are subject to reporting requirements of the Exchange Act and the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, as well as rules subsequently implemented by the SEC that impose significant requirements on public companies, including requiring establishment and maintenance of effective disclosure and financial controls and changes in corporate governance practices. In addition, the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (the “Dodd-Frank Act”) imposes various other requirements on public companies. There are significant corporate governance and executive compensation-related provisions in the Dodd-Frank Act that may increase our legal and financial compliance costs, make some activities more difficult, time-consuming or costly and may also place undue strain on our personnel, systems and resources. Our management and other personnel may need to devote a substantial amount of time to these compliance initiatives. In addition, we expect these rules and regulations to make it more difficult and more expensive for us to obtain director and officer liability insurance, and we may be required to accept reduced policy limits and coverage or incur substantially higher costs to obtain the same or similar coverage. As a result, it may be more difficult and expensive for us to attract and retain qualified people to serve on our board of directors, our board committees or as executive officers.

We also incur costs associated with corporate governance requirements, including requirements under rules implemented by the SEC and the Nasdaq Global Market, and provisions of Israeli corporate law applicable to public companies. These rules and regulations have and will continue to increase our legal and financial compliance costs, introduce costs such as investor relations and stock exchange listing fees, and make some activities more time-consuming and costly. Our board and other personnel continue to devote a substantial amount of time to these initiatives. To the extent we are not in compliance with the Companies Law or Nasdaq Global Market rules, we may be subject to additional costs or delisting. We are continuously evaluating and monitoring developments with respect to these rules, and we cannot estimate the amount of additional costs we may incur or the timing of such costs.

We have incurred and expect to continue to incur additional expenses and devote increased management effort toward ensuring compliance with the auditor attestation requirements of Section 404 of the Sarbanes Oxley Act (and the rules and regulations of the SEC thereunder) because we no longer qualify as an “emerging growth company.” We cannot estimate the amount of additional costs we may incur as a result of being a public company or the timing of such costs.

Pursuant to Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act and the related rules adopted by the SEC and the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, our management is required to report on the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting. To maintain the effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures and our internal control over financial reporting, we expect that we will need to continue enhancing existing, and implement new, financial reporting and management systems, procedures and controls to manage our business effectively and support our growth in the future. The process of evaluating our internal control over financial reporting requires an investment of substantial time and resources, including by our Chief Financial Officer and other members of our senior management. As a result, this process may divert internal resources and take a significant amount of time and effort to complete. In addition, as we no longer qualify as an “emerging growth company” under the JOBS Act, our independent registered public accounting firm must attest to the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting under Section 404. Irrespective of compliance with Section 404, any failure of our internal controls could have a material adverse effect on our stated results of operations and harm our reputation. As a result, we may experience higher than anticipated operating expenses, as well as higher independent auditor fees during and after the implementation of these changes. If we are unable to implement any of the required changes to our internal control over financial reporting effectively or efficiently or are required to do so earlier than anticipated, it could adversely affect our operations, financial reporting and/or results of operations and could result in an adverse opinion on internal controls from our independent auditors.

Shares eligible for future sale may adversely affect the market for our ordinary shares and the issuance of additional ordinary shares as a result of the exercise of our outstanding warrants and options will dilute the percentage ownership of our other shareholders.

From time to time, certain of our shareholders are eligible to sell all or some of their ordinary shares by means of ordinary brokerage transactions in the open market pursuant to Rule 144, promulgated under the Securities Act, subject to certain limitations. In general, pursuant to Rule 144, non-affiliate shareholders may sell freely after six months subject only to the current public information requirement (which disappears after one year). Of the 57,779,033 ordinary shares outstanding as of March 31, 2024, approximately 51,627,021 ordinary shares have been registered under the Securities Act and are freely transferable by persons other than our “affiliates” without restriction or additional registration; the remaining shares outstanding have not been registered under the Securities Act and may be offered or sold only pursuant to an effective registration statement or pursuant to an available exemption from the registration requirements. As of March 31, 2024, approximately 52,529,467 of our ordinary shares are held by “non-affiliates” and are freely tradable without restriction pursuant to Rule 144. In addition, a certain shareholder has the ability to cause us to register the resale of its shares issuable upon exercise of certain warrants under the Registration Rights Agreement (as defined below). See “Item 10. Additional Information—C. Material Contracts” for a description of the registration rights. Any substantial sale of our ordinary shares pursuant to Rule 144 or pursuant to any resale prospectus may have a material adverse effect on the market price of our ordinary shares.

In addition, as of March 31, 2024, there were three outstanding warrants to purchase a total of 4,455,301 ordinary shares, with exercise prices ranging from $18.00 per share to $20.87 per share. As of March 31, 2024, there were 5,105,030 ordinary shares issuable upon the exercise of options to purchase ordinary shares outstanding under our 2019 Equity Incentive Plan (as defined below), at a weighted average exercise price of $13.25 per share, and 1,218,520 additional ordinary shares reserved for future issuance under our 2019 Equity Incentive Plan. The warrants are exercisable immediately and expire on various dates. More convertible securities may be granted in the future to the Company’s officers, directors, employees or consultants or as part of future financings. The exercise of outstanding options and warrants will dilute the percentage ownership of the Company’s other shareholders.

The purchase price of the ordinary shares may not reflect our actual value.

The price of our ordinary shares may not be indicative of our actual value or any future market price for our securities. This price may not accurately reflect the value of the ordinary shares or the value that potential investors will realize upon their disposition of ordinary shares. The price does not necessarily bear any relationship to our assets, earnings, book value per share or other generally accepted criteria of value.

If equity research analysts discontinue research or reports about us or our business or if they issue unfavorable commentary or downgrade our ordinary shares, or if other market participants such as short sellers issue unfavorable reports about us, the price of our ordinary shares could decline.

The trading market for our ordinary shares relies in part on the research and reports that equity research analysts publish about us and our business. The analysts’ estimates are based upon their own opinions and are often different from our estimates or expectations. If our results of operations are below the estimates or expectations of public market analysts and investors, the price of our ordinary shares could decline. Moreover, the price of our ordinary shares could decline if one or more securities analysts downgrade our ordinary shares or if those analysts issue other unfavorable commentary or cease publishing reports about us or our business.

Our management conducted an evaluation of the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting and concluded that our internal control over financial reporting was effective as of December 31, 2023. If we fail to maintain an effective system of internal control over financial reporting, we may not be able to accurately report our financial results or prevent fraud. As a result, shareholders could lose confidence in our financial and other public reporting, which would harm our business and the trading price of our ordinary shares.

Effective internal controls over financial reporting are necessary for us to provide reliable financial reports and, together with adequate disclosure controls and procedures are designed to prevent fraud. Our management is required to assess the effectiveness of our internal controls and procedures and disclose changes in these controls on an annual basis and our independent registered public accounting firm is required to attest to the effectiveness of our internal controls over financial reporting pursuant to Section 404.

Any failure to implement required new or improved controls, or difficulties encountered in their implementation could cause us to fail to meet our reporting obligations. In addition, any testing by us conducted in connection with Section 404, or any subsequent testing by our independent registered public accounting firm, may reveal deficiencies in our internal controls over financial reporting that are deemed to be material weaknesses or that may require prospective or retroactive changes to our financial statements or identify other areas for further attention or improvement. Inferior internal controls could also cause investors to lose confidence in our reported financial information, which could have a negative effect on the trading price of our ordinary shares.

Our management conducted an evaluation of the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting and concluded that our internal control over financial reporting was effective as of December 31, 2023.

The process of determining whether our existing internal controls are compliant with Section 404 and sufficiently effective will require the investment of substantial time and resources, including by our chief financial officer and other members of our senior management. As a result, this process may divert internal resources and take a significant amount of time and effort to complete. In addition, we cannot predict the outcome of this process and whether we will need to implement remedial actions in order to implement effective controls over financial reporting. The determination of whether or not our internal controls are sufficient and any remedial actions required could result in us incurring additional costs that we did not anticipate, including the hiring of outside consultants. Irrespective of compliance with Section 404, any failure of our internal controls could have a material adverse effect on our stated results of operations and harm our reputation. As a result, we may experience higher than anticipated operating expenses, as well as higher independent auditor fees during and after the implementation of these changes. If we are unable to implement any of the required changes to our internal control over financial reporting effectively or efficiently or are required to do so earlier than anticipated, it could adversely affect our operations, financial reporting or results of operations and could result in an adverse opinion on internal controls from our independent auditors.

Furthermore, if we are unable to certify that our internal control over financial reporting is effective and in compliance with Section 404, we may be subject to sanctions or investigations by regulatory authorities, such as the SEC or stock exchanges, and we could lose investor confidence in the accuracy and completeness of our financial reports, which could hurt our business, the price of our ordinary shares and our ability to access the capital markets.

It is likely that we will be classified as a passive foreign investment company (“PFIC”) for U.S. federal income tax purposes for our taxable year ended December 31, 2023, and possibly for the current taxable year and future taxable years, which could result in adverse U.S. federal income tax consequences to U.S. Holders of our ordinary shares.

A non-U.S. corporation will be a PFIC for any taxable year if either (1) at least 75% of its gross income for such year consists of certain types of passive income; or (2) at least 50% of the value of its assets (generally determined based on an average of the quarterly values of the assets) during such year is attributable to assets that produce passive income or are held for the production of passive income. For this purpose, cash and assets readily convertible into cash are categorized as passive assets and our goodwill and other unbooked intangibles will generally be taken into account in determining our asset value.

A non-U.S. corporation’s PFIC status is a factual determination made annually after the close of each taxable year. Because the PFIC income test described above is based on a non-U.S. corporation’s gross income and not its net income, a non-U.S. corporation in the early stages of its business, such as our company, can be treated as a PFIC in those taxable years before it has sufficient operating revenue as a result of earning any amount of interest or other passive income. As a result, we believe that we will technically be classified as a PFIC for the taxable year ended December 31, 2023. Depending upon the composition of our income and assets and the market price of our ordinary shares during 2024 and subsequent taxable years and whether we start generating a substantial amount of active revenue, we could continue to be classified as a PFIC for 2024 and subsequent taxable years if we are classified as a PFIC for 2023. In addition, it is possible that any subsidiary that we own would also be classified as a PFIC for such taxable years.

If we were classified as a PFIC for any taxable year during which a U.S. Holder (as defined below) holds our ordinary shares, certain adverse U.S. federal income tax consequences could apply to such U.S. Holder. See “Item 10. Additional Information—E. Taxation—U.S. Federal Income Tax Considerations.”

Risks Related to Our Operations in Israel

Conditions in Israel, including the ongoing war between Israel and Hamas and other conflicts in the region, may adversely affect our operations and limit our ability to market our products, which would lead to a decrease in revenues.

Because a significant part of our operations are conducted in Israel and a majority of the members of our board of directors and management as well as many of our employees and consultants, including employees of our service providers, are located in Israel, our business and operations are directly affected by economic, political, geopolitical and military conditions in Israel. Since the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948, a number of armed conflicts have occurred between Israel and its neighboring countries and terrorist organizations active in the region. These conflicts have involved missile strikes, hostile infiltrations and terrorism against civilian targets in various parts of Israel, which have negatively affected business conditions in Israel.

In October 2023, Hamas terrorists infiltrated Israel’s southern border from the Gaza Strip and conducted a series of attacks on civilian and military targets. Hamas also launched extensive rocket attacks on the Israeli population and industrial centers. These attacks resulted in extensive deaths, injuries, and kidnapping of civilians and soldiers, as well as evacuations of tens of thousands of civilians from their homes. Following the attacks, Israel’s security cabinet declared war against Hamas and commenced a military campaign. Since the commencement of these events, there have been additional active hostilities, including with Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Houthi movement which controls parts of Yemen, and most recently with Iran. It is possible that these hostilities will escalate in the future into a greater regional conflict, and that additional terrorist organizations and countries will actively join the hostilities.

The scope, intensity and duration of the current war are difficult to predict, as are the economic implications on our business and operations and on Israel’s economy in general. For example, these events may be intertwined with wider macroeconomic factors relating to a deterioration of Israel’s economic standing that may involve, for instance, a downgrade in Israel’s credit rating by rating agencies (such as the recent downgrade by Moody’s of its credit rating of Israel from A1 to A2, as well as the downgrade of its outlook rating from “stable” to “negative”). Any of these implications on Israel’s economy or financial conditions may have an adverse effect on our ability to effectively conduct our operations.

Further, as an Israeli company, there is a heightened risk of cyberattacks on our and our supply chain’s IT networks by our adversaries in general, and more so as a result of a war. Although the current war has not materially impacted our business or operations as of the date of this report, any escalation or expansion of the war could have a negative impact on both global and regional conditions and may adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

As a result of the war, several hundred thousand Israeli military reservists were drafted to perform immediate military service. As of March 31, 2024, 12 of our employees (out of 164 employees as of such date) have been called to service, of which none were part of the executive management of one of our subsidiaries. Additional employees may be called for service in the current or future wars or other armed conflicts in which Israel is or may become engaged and such persons may be absent for an extended period of time. As a result, our operations may be disrupted by such absences, which disruptions may materially and adversely affect our business and results of operations. Additionally, the absence of employees of our Israeli suppliers and contract manufacturers due to their military service in the current or future wars or other armed conflicts may disrupt their operations, which in turn may materially and adversely affect our ability to deliver or provide products and services to customers.

The current hostilities with Hamas, Hezbollah, Iran and other organizations and countries have included and may include various methods of armed attacks that have already caused and may cause further damage to private and public facilities, infrastructure, utilities, and telecommunication networks. This may require the temporary closure of our offices or facilities or affect our employees’ ability to work, negatively impacting our operational capacity and disrupting supply chains that impact our ability to conduct business efficiently, thereby leading to increased costs associated with alternative solutions or contingency measures. Such attacks may also pose risks to the safety and effectiveness of our workforce and impair our ability to maintain business continuity, which would likely result in substantial direct and indirect costs that may not be recoverable from our commercial insurance. Although the Israeli government currently covers the reinstatement value of direct damages that are caused by terrorist attacks or acts of war, we cannot be assured that such government coverage will be maintained or that it will sufficiently cover our potential damages. Any losses or damages incurred by us could have a material adverse effect on our business.

In addition, some countries around the world restrict doing business with Israel and Israeli companies, and additional countries may impose restrictions on doing business with Israel and Israeli companies if hostilities in Israel or political instability in the region continue or increase. These restrictions may limit materially our ability to obtain raw materials from these countries or sell our products and provide our services to companies and customers in these countries. In addition, there have been increased efforts by activists to cause companies and consumers to boycott Israeli goods and services. Such efforts, particularly if they become more widespread, may materially and adversely impact our ability to sell and provide our products and services outside of Israel.

Furthermore, following Hamas’ attack on Israel and Israel’s security cabinet declaration of war against Hamas, the Houthi movement, which controls parts of Yemen, launched a number of attacks on marine vessels traversing the Red Sea, which marine vessels were thought to either be in route towards Israel or to be partly owned by Israeli businessmen. The Red Sea is a vital maritime route for international trade traveling to or from Israel. As a result of such disruptions, we may experience in the future delays in supplier deliveries, extended lead times, increased cost of freight, increased insurance costs, and increased materials and manufacturing labor costs. The risk of ongoing supply disruptions may further result in delayed deliveries of our products.

Further, Israel has held five general elections between 2019 and 2022, and prior to the Hamas attack in October 2023, the Israeli government had been pursuing legislative changes, which, if adopted, will alter the current state of separation of powers among the three branches of government and, as a result, have sparked a considerable political debate. Many individuals, organizations and institutions, within and outside of Israel, voiced concerns over the potential negative impacts of such changes and the controversy surrounding them on the business and financial environment in Israel. Such negative impacts may include, among other things, increased interest rates, currency fluctuations, inflation, civil unrest and volatility in the securities markets, which could adversely affect the conditions in which we operate and potentially deter foreign investors and organizations from investing or transacting business with Israeli-based companies. To date, these initiatives have been substantially put on hold, but if such changes to Israel’s judicial system are again pursued by the government and approved by the parliament, or if any of the foregoing negative impacts were to materialize, it may have an adverse effect on our business, our results of operations and our ability to raise additional funds.

The termination or reduction of tax and other incentives that the Israeli government provides to Israeli companies may increase our costs and taxes.

The Israeli government currently provides tax and capital investment incentives to Israeli companies, as well as grant and loan programs relating to research and development and marketing and export activities (see “Item 10. Additional Information—E. Taxation—Israeli Tax Considerations and Government Programs”). In recent years, the Israeli government has reduced the benefits available under these programs and the Israeli governmental authorities may in the future further reduce or eliminate the benefits of these programs. We may take advantage of these benefits and programs in the future; however, there can be no assurance that such benefits and programs will be available to us. If we qualify for such benefits and programs and fail to meet the conditions thereof, the benefits could be canceled and we could be required to refund any benefits we might already have enjoyed and become subject to penalties. Additionally, if we qualify for such benefits and programs and they are subsequently terminated or reduced, it could have an adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

It may be difficult to enforce a U.S. judgment against us, our officers and directors named in this annual report on Form 20-F in Israel or the United States, or to assert U.S. securities laws claims in Israel or serve process on our officers and directors.

We are incorporated in Israel. Many of our directors and officers are not residents of the United States and a significant portion of their and our assets are located outside the United States. Service of process upon us or our non-U.S. resident directors and officers may be difficult to obtain within the United States. We have been informed by our legal counsel in Israel that it may be difficult to assert claims under U.S. securities laws in original actions instituted in Israel or obtain a judgment based on the civil liability provisions of U.S. federal securities laws. Israeli courts may refuse to hear a claim based on a violation of U.S. securities laws against us or our directors and officers because Israel may not be the most appropriate forum to bring such a claim. In addition, even if an Israeli court agrees to hear a claim, it may determine that Israeli law and not U.S. law is applicable to the claim. If U.S. law is found to be applicable, the content of applicable U.S. law must be proved as a fact, which can be a time-consuming and costly process. Certain matters of procedure will also be governed by Israeli law. There is little binding case law in Israel addressing the matters described above. Additionally, Israeli courts might not enforce judgments obtained in the United States against us or our directors and officers, which may make it difficult to collect on judgments rendered against us or our directors and officers.

Moreover, an Israeli court will not enforce a non-Israeli judgment if it was given in a state whose laws do not provide for the enforcement of judgments of Israeli courts (subject to exceptional cases), if its enforcement is likely to prejudice the sovereignty or security of the State of Israel, if it was obtained by fraud or in the absence of due process, if it is at variance with another valid judgment that was given in the same matter between the same parties, or if a suit in the same matter between the same parties was pending before a court or tribunal in Israel at the time the foreign action was brought.

Your rights and responsibilities as our shareholder will be governed by Israeli law, which may differ in some respects from the rights and responsibilities of shareholders of U.S. corporations.

We are incorporated under Israeli law. The rights and responsibilities of holders of our ordinary shares are governed by our amended and restated articles of association and the Companies Law. These rights and responsibilities differ in some respects from the rights and responsibilities of shareholders in typical U.S. corporations. In particular, pursuant to the Companies Law, each shareholder of an Israeli company has to act in good faith and in a customary manner in exercising his or her rights and fulfilling his or her obligations toward the company and other shareholders and to refrain from abusing his or her power in the company, including, among other things, in voting at the general meeting of shareholders on amendments to a company’s articles of association, increases in a company’s authorized share capital, mergers and certain transactions requiring shareholders’ approval under the Companies Law. In addition, under Israeli law, a controlling shareholder of an Israeli company or a shareholder who knows that it possesses the power to determine the outcome of a shareholder vote or who has the power to appoint or prevent the appointment of a director or officer in the company or has other powers toward the company has a duty of fairness toward the company. However, Israeli law does not define the substance of this duty of fairness. There is little case law available in Israel to assist in understanding the implications of these provisions that govern shareholder behavior.

Our amended and restated articles of association contain exclusive forum provisions for certain claims, which could limit our shareholders’ ability to obtain a favorable judicial forum for disputes with us or our directors, officers or employees.

Our amended and restated articles of association provides that the federal district courts of the United States of America will, to the fullest extent permitted by law, be the exclusive forum for resolving any complaint asserting a cause of action arising under the Securities Act (the “Federal Forum Provision”). Our decision to adopt a Federal Forum Provision followed a decision by the Supreme Court of the State of Delaware holding that such provisions are facially valid under Delaware law. While there can be no assurance that U.S. federal or state courts or Israeli courts will follow the holding of the Delaware Supreme Court or determine that the Federal Forum Provision should be enforced in a particular case, application of the Federal Forum Provision means that suits brought by our shareholders to enforce any duty or liability created by the Securities Act must be brought in federal court and cannot be brought in state court. Section 27 of the Exchange Act creates exclusive federal jurisdiction over all claims brought to enforce any duty or liability created by the Exchange Act or the rules and regulations thereunder and the Federal Forum Provision does not apply to suits brought to enforce any duty or liability created by the Exchange Act. Accordingly, actions by our shareholders to enforce any duty or liability created by the Exchange Act or the rules and regulations thereunder must also be brought in federal court. Our shareholders will not be deemed to have waived our compliance with the federal securities laws and the regulations promulgated thereunder.

Any person or entity purchasing or otherwise acquiring or holding any interest in any of our securities shall be deemed to have notice of and consented to the Federal Forum Provision. This provision may limit our shareholders’ ability to bring a claim in a judicial forum they find favorable for disputes with us or our directors, officers or other employees, which may discourage lawsuits against us and our directors, officers and other employees. Alternatively, if a court were to find the Federal Forum Provision contained in our amended and restated articles of association to be inapplicable or unenforceable in an action, we may incur additional costs associated with resolving such action in other jurisdictions, which could harm our business, operating results and financial condition.

Provisions of our amended and restated articles of association and Israeli law and tax considerations may delay, prevent or make difficult an acquisition of us, which could prevent a change of control and negatively affect the price of our ordinary shares.

Israeli corporate law regulates mergers, requires tender offers for acquisitions of shares if such acquisitions cause the acquirer to hold more than specified thresholds, requires special approvals for certain transactions involving directors, officers or significant shareholders and regulates other matters that may be relevant to these types of transactions. For example, under Israeli law, a merger may not be consummated unless at least 50 days have passed from the date that a merger proposal was filed by each merging company with the Israel Registrar of Companies and at least 30 days have passed from the date that the shareholders of both merging companies approved the merger.

Furthermore, Israeli tax considerations may make potential transactions unappealing to us or to our shareholders, such as for those shareholders whose country of residence for tax purposes does not have a tax treaty with Israel which exempts such shareholders from Israeli tax. For example, Israeli tax law does not recognize tax-free share exchanges to the same extent as U.S. tax law. With respect to mergers, Israeli tax law allows for tax deferral in certain circumstances but makes the deferral contingent on the fulfillment of a number of conditions, including, in some cases, a holding period of two years from the date of the transaction during which sales and dispositions of shares of the participating companies are subject to certain restrictions. Moreover, with respect to certain share swap transactions, the tax deferral is limited in time, and when such time expires, the tax becomes payable even if no disposition of the shares has occurred. In order to benefit from the tax deferral, a pre-ruling from the Israel Tax Authority may be required.

These provisions of Israeli law and Israeli tax laws may delay, prevent or make difficult a merger with, or an acquisition of us, or all or a significant portion of our assets, which could prevent a change of control and may make it more difficult for a third party to acquire us, even if doing so would be beneficial to our shareholders. These provisions may limit the price that investors may be willing to pay in the future for our ordinary shares and therefore depress the price of our shares.

Our amended and restated articles of association provide that our directors (other than external directors) are elected on a staggered basis, such that a potential acquirer cannot readily replace our entire board of directors at a single annual general shareholder meeting.

Item 4. Information on the Company

A. History and Development of the Company

NANO-X IMAGING LTD was incorporated under the laws of the State of Israel on December 20, 2018 and commenced operations on September 3, 2019.

Substantially all of our assets at the time of commencement of our operations were acquired or assigned (the “Asset Purchase”) from our predecessor company, Nanox Imaging PLC (“Nanox Gibraltar”), a Gibraltar public company, under an Asset Purchase Agreement, dated as of September 3, 2019 and as amended on December 3, 2019 and December 31, 2019, between Nanox Gibraltar and us.

On November 2, 2021, the Company completed the acquisition of 100% of the shares of USARAD Holdings, Inc., a Delaware corporation (“USARAD”), pursuant to the terms of the Stock Purchase Agreement, dated October 25, 2021 (the “USARAD SPA”), among the Company, USARAD, Dr. Michael Yuz, other holders of capital stock of USARAD and holders of USARAD options. USARAD is a U.S.-based teleradiology company with approximately 60 U.S. certified radiologists in its network. At closing, the Company (through a wholly-owned subsidiary) purchased 100% of the shares of USARAD on a fully diluted basis for $7,300,000 in cash and 496,545 ordinary shares. In addition, upon the successful achievement of certain milestones related to profitability, EBITDA and other operational performance metrics, the Company undertook to pay additional cash consideration in the amount of up to $2,000,000 and stock consideration in the amount of up to $6,500,000 at a per share value determined by the average of: (i) the volume weighted average closing share price of the 30 trading days prior to the relevant milestone completion, and (ii) the volume weighted average closing share price of the 30 trading days ending on August 6, 2021.

On April 28, 2023, the Company and Dr. Michael Yuz, as the representative of the former stockholders of USARAD, entered into the first amendment to the USARAD SPA, according to which the parties to the USARAD SPA agreed that (i) the Company shall pay to the former stockholders of USARAD an aggregate amount of $290,063 in cash and 45,392 ordinary shares, in consideration for the achievement of certain milestones in connection with the first earn out period, as defined in and in accordance with the USARAD SPA; and (ii) the rights and obligations under the USARAD SPA regarding the remaining earn out periods were amended such that the parties agreed that the Company shall pay to the former stockholders of USARAD an aggregate amount of $500,000 in cash and 210,000 ordinary shares as consideration for the remainder of the milestones and applicable earn-outs under the USARAD SPA. As a result of the amendment to the USARAD SPA, obligations of the Company and the rights of the former stockholders of USARAD relating to the purchase price (including the earn-outs) under the USARAD SPA have been satisfied in full.

On November 3, 2021, the Company completed the acquisition of the platform and other assets of MDWEB, pursuant to the terms of the Asset Purchase Agreement, dated October 21, 2021, between the Company and MDWEB, a USARAD-related company. Pursuant to the acquisition, we acquired the MDW platform, now known as the Nanox.MARKETPLACE, a decentralized marketplace connecting imaging facilities with radiologists. At closing, the Company issued 64,715 ordinary shares to MDWEB. In addition, upon the successful achievement of certain milestones related to technical integration of the Nanox.MARKETPLACE with the Nanox.CLOUD and achieving certain other operational targets, the Company undertook to pay additional stock consideration in the amount of up to $1,500,000 at a per share value determined by the average of: (i) closing price of the 30 trading days ending on the applicable milestone’s achievement date: and (ii) the volume weighted average closing share price of the 30 trading days prior to the closing date.

On November 4, 2021, the Company consummated its purchase of 100% of the equity of Zebra Medical Vision Ltd., an Israeli company (“Zebra”) pursuant to the terms of the Agreement and Plan of Merger, dated August 9, 2021, as amended (the “Zebra Merger Agreement”), among the Company, Zebra and Perryllion Ltd., as representative of Zebra’s equity holders. Zebra, now known as Nanox AI, is a leading medical AI developer, with eight FDA-cleared and 11 CE-marked AI solutions for medical imaging. At closing, the Company issued 3,249,142 ordinary shares of the Company and committed to issue 70,211 employee options to the equity holders of Zebra, which represented (a) the basic purchase price of $100,000,000; minus (b) certain transaction costs; plus (c) deferred closing consideration in the amount of $3,333,333 as a result of Zebra entering into a designated commercial agreement prior to closing; plus (d) $6,300,000 as a result of Zebra achieving a designated milestone of obtaining a new FDA clearance for its population health product. All shares, except for the shares issued for the designated milestone, were issued at a deemed per share value of $33.18 and the shares issued for the designated milestone were issued at a per share value of $25.01. In addition, according to the terms of the Zebra Merger Agreement, under certain circumstances, the Company was obligated to issue additional ordinary shares as deferred closing consideration and certain milestone consideration (should such be achieved) representing an aggregate amount of up to $100,000,000 within three years following the closing. An aggregate of $9,633,333 of such consideration was paid at closing as described above. In addition, on January 19, 2022, we issued 89,286 additional ordinary shares to the former shareholders of Nanox AI due to partial achievement of a milestone that occurred post-closing. On December 29, 2022, the parties entered into a settlement with respect to any additional amount that could be granted under the Zebra Merger Agreement, according to which the Company issued Nanox AI’s former shareholders an additional 2,648,424 ordinary shares. As a result of the settlement, both parties’ performance obligations under the agreement have been satisfied in full.

Our principal executive offices are located at Ofer Tech Park, 94 Shlomo Shmeltzer Road, Petach Tikva, Israel 4970602, and our telephone number is +972 3 37359202. Our website address is http://www.nanox.vision. The information contained therein or connected thereto shall not be deemed to be incorporated into this annual report on Form 20-F. Our agent for service of process in the United States is CT Corporation System.

Public Offerings

In August 2020, we completed our initial public offering of 10,555,556 ordinary shares at a public offering price of $18 per share, including 1,376,812 additional ordinary shares purchased by the underwriters at the public offering price, less the underwriting discount, pursuant to the exercise in full of their option to purchase additional ordinary shares. Our ordinary shares are listed on the NASDAQ Global Market under the symbol “NNOX.”

On February 10, 2021, certain of our shareholders sold an aggregate of 3,091,635 ordinary shares in a public offering pursuant to an Underwriting Agreement by and among us, Cantor Fitzgerald & Co., acting as representative of the underwriters, and the selling shareholders named therein (the “Selling Shareholders”). We did not receive any of the proceeds from the sale of ordinary shares offered by the Selling Shareholders.

On July 23, 2023, we entered into a securities purchase agreement with a single institutional investor for the purchase and sale of 2,142,858 of the Company’s ordinary shares together with warrants to purchase up to 2,142,858 ordinary shares at a combined purchase price of $14.00 per share, in a registered direct offering. The warrants have an exercise price of $19.00 per share, are exercisable immediately upon issuance and will expire five years from issuance. The closing of the offering occurred on July 26, 2023, and the gross proceeds from the offering were approximately $30 million, excluding any proceeds that may be received upon the exercise of the warrants, before deducting placement agent fees and other offering expenses payable by the Company.

B. Business Overview

Overview

Early detection saves lives—and we at Nanox are focused on applying our proprietary medical imaging technology and solutions to make diagnostic medicine more accessible and affordable across the globe. We are developing an end-to-end imaging service solution, which includes the Nanox System, comprised of the Nanox.ARC, our FDA cleared medical device, using our novel MEMs X-ray source technology, and the Nanox.CLOUD, a companion cloud software. Our offerings also include AI solutions and teleradiology services. Our vision is to increase early detection of medical conditions that are discoverable by X-ray by improving access to imaging, reducing imaging costs and enhancing imaging efficiency, which we believe is key to increasing early prevention and treatment, improving health outcomes and, ultimately, saving lives.

Our imaging solution is designed as a modular open system, and we are exploring the expansion of the solution to include additional components, which may be developed by us or third parties. We are exploring additional collaboration opportunities as well.

Our holistic imaging solution is currently comprised of the following four principal components:

The Nanox System. As a first step to producing a new class of accessible and affordable medical imaging systems, we focused on identifying and developing a novel digital X-ray source, which we refer to as the Nanox.SOURCE. Our X-ray source is based on a novel digital MEMs semiconductor cathode that we believe can achieve the same functionalities as legacy X-ray analog cathodes, while allowing for lower-cost production than existing medical imaging systems. We have been developing this technology over ten years towards the goal of commercial applicability. This novel digital X-ray source is the basis of core technology in the imaging system we are developing, and we believe it also has the potential to replace the legacy X-ray source in other existing imaging systems. Our technology aims to disrupt medical imaging by providing accessibility and affordability on a global scale. Our goal is to enable medical institutions and other significant medical players to either employ our solutions as a closed end-to-end system or to adopt a modular approach to our technologies, by acquiring or licensing our different components and integrating our technologies into their specific product.

The Nanox System includes two integrated components—hardware (Nanox.ARC), a medical imaging system incorporating our novel digital X-ray source, and software (Nanox.CLOUD). We developed, and continue to improve, the multi-source Nanox.ARC, a 3D tomosynthesis imaging system, which received a 510(k) clearance from the FDA and remains subject to regulatory clearance and approval in other jurisdictions. Tomosynthesis is an imaging technique used for early detection, that is designed to produce a high-resolution, 3D, X-ray image reconstruction of the scanned human body part for review by a professional diagnostics expert. In parallel, we have developed, and continue to improve, the Nanox.CLOUD, a companion cloud-based software to which scanned images may be securely uploaded to the cloud system. By integrating the Nanox.CLOUD with the Nanox.ARC, we believe the Nanox System could provide a streamlined process and end-to-end medical imaging service, including services such as image repository, radiologist matching, online and offline diagnostics review and annotation, connectivity to diagnostic assistive AI systems, billing, monitoring and reporting.

Following clearance from the FDA, and if cleared by similar regulatory agencies in other jurisdictions, we plan to market and deploy the Nanox System globally at a substantially lower cost than currently available medical imaging systems, such as legacy X-ray and Computerized Tomography (“CT”) systems, because our digital X-ray source allows the Nanox.ARC to have a simpler structure without the costly cooling equipment used in legacy X-ray systems or the complex rotating mechanism used in CT devices. See “—Our Technology—The Nanox System.” We believe that the Nanox System could increase the accessibility and affordability of early-detection medical imaging systems worldwide, substantially reduce wait-times for imaging results and increase early detection rates compared to currently employed imaging process protocol.

We continue to implement a multi-step approach to the regulatory clearance process for the Nanox System. On April 1, 2021, we received clearance from the FDA to market our Nanox Cart X-Ray System, a single-source version of the Nanox.ARC. On April 28, 2023, we received a 510(k) clearance from the FDA to market the Nanox.ARC (including the Nanox.CLOUD), a multi-source 3D digital tomosynthesis system, as a stationary X-ray system intended to produce tomographic images of the human musculoskeletal system adjunctive to conventional radiography, on adult patients. This device is intended to be used in professional healthcare facilities or radiological environments, such as hospitals, clinics, imaging centers and other medical practices by trained radiographers, radiologists and physicians. We plan to seek additional clearances or approvals for additional uses of the currently cleared Nanox System, or for future versions of the Nanox System.

On November 22, 2023, Nanox.ARC received approval from the Medical Device Division of the Ministry of Health in Israel (the regulatory body that oversees medical devices in Israel). As such, Nanox.ARC is now registered as a commercial medical device in the Israeli market. Following this approval, the Israeli Ministry of Health granted Nanox.ARC a free sale certificate which is a requirement for regulatory submission in some markets. In addition, in Ghana, our local partner has obtained approval from the Ghana Food and Drug Authority (the GFDA), and started the clinical scanning of patients.

We have also initiated the process to obtain CE marking for the marketing and sale of our Nanox.ARC (including the Nanox.CLOUD) in the European Union. We have engaged with BSI Group, an accredited Notified Body in the United Kingdom, for an eventual CE marking review and approval.

We expect that the Nanox System will enable us to accumulate a significant number of medical images, which have the potential to be used by collaborators, such as medical AI-analytics companies, through machine learning algorithms to increase the probability of early disease detection.

U.S. go-to-market. Based on market analysis of the U.S. market by clinicians, imaging administrators and directors, stakeholders recognize the clinical benefits of the Nanox System and its more affordable approach to advanced imaging technology. Furthermore, outpatient facilities, such as skilled nursing facilities, freestanding emergency clinics, and pulmonary clinics showed interest in adopting the Nanox System. Specifically, because such facilities typically do not have CT capabilities, we believe such facilities view the Nanox System as a more affordable way to keep patients in-house for advanced imaging needs, combined with a 2D X-ray. Outpatient facilities also expressed potential interest in our MSaaS business model, which we believe could reduce the risk of an upfront purchase because the cost is based on actual use. We believe that gathering further clinical evidence will strengthen the support for our technology. Our current U.S. go-to-market strategy is comprised of three primary components: customer targeting, building a sales team and using a hybrid business model.

In terms of customer targeting, we believe several factors impact willingness to adopt our system, including the type of facility, its current imaging capabilities and imaging volumes, and geographic location, namely rural vs. urban. We aim to strategically engage segments that show early adoption potential, such as orthopedic clinics, skilled nursing facilities, freestanding emergency departments and urgent care facilities. We intend to continue to build clinical evidence particularly within the U.S. market, to support the adoption of our system, as well as reimbursement mechanisms, specifically with commercial payers. We’ve strategically realigned our focus to enhance our presence in the U.S. market, such that our initial efforts in commercialization and deployment within the U.S. will be concentrated on select states. This approach allows us, in the near term, to optimize customer service, delivery and support. To execute our strategy, we have allocated internal sales resources and we are planning to leverage the USARAD network, in order to accelerate our initial penetration in the market. Furthermore, we are in the process of expanding a U.S.-based sales and service team that will seek to generate leads, close sales, manage relationships, and provide services for the Nanox System installed base. We are also in the process of engaging with independent service providers to provide service in remote areas and to decrease equipment downtime. We expect that other operational needs (such as medical affairs, regulatory, billing, finance and contracting) will be supported by the existing international Nanox organization.

For our business model in the U.S., we intend to use a hybrid approach combining a usage-based MSaaS model with a CapEx model to help promote adoption, based on different segments. We have designed a training program to promote the Nanox System. We also intend to use a combination of pilot sites, training, sales and marketing efforts to help meet customer needs. These aspects of our business strategy will require us to hire additional experienced healthcare business-development professionals who will be charged with raising awareness of the Nanox System among physicians, hospitals, urgent care operators, and large health systems throughout the U.S.

Following a U.S. Reimbursement Landscape Assessment for Nanox.ARC, it was found that the existing CPT code 76100 “Radiologic examination, single plane body section (eg, tomography), other than with urography” would be a viable option to report tomosynthesis procedures utilizing the Nanox.ARC. Nanox.ARC users would be able to report with appropriate ICD-10-PCS code(s). These ICD-10-PCS codes are for reporting services and procedures performed in the inpatient hospital site of service. For the Nanox.ARC, clinics or hospitals operating it can use the CPT code 76100 for reporting. Regarding reimbursement rates, for physicians using the Nanox.ARC, the Medicare national average payment was $87.75 (using Conversion Factor $32.7442, from the National Physician Fee Schedule Relative Value File January Release, January 3, 2024). For hospital outpatients, the 2023 Medicare national average payment was $104.87. Third-party payors may impose limits on coverage or reimbursement for diagnostic imaging services, including denying reimbursement for tests that do not follow recommended diagnostic procedures or can only be billed using an unlisted or miscellaneous code. Prior authorization is required for certain advanced imaging services through CMS’ Appropriate Use Criteria (AUC) program and private payer prior authorization programs. Currently, although there are no AUCs for tomosynthesis in general radiography, we plan to monitor the CMS AUC Program and Private Payers Prior Authorization process for radiology procedures for any change.

The Nanox Systems have been installed at several medical imaging and diagnostic testing centers in New Jersey, New York, Florida and Kansas as well as in a technical and training center in Georgia. The Nanox System serves patients awaiting referral in New Jersey and Kansas, having passed all required tests for each state conducted by a licensed and certified physicist. Clinical operation of the Nanox System will begin in the remaining sites, pending certification from the corresponding state’s regulatory body.

Nanox.MARKETPLACE. Nanox.MARKETPLACE (formerly known as the MDW platform), which we acquired from MDWEB in November 2021, is our proprietary decentralized marketplace that connects imaging facilities with radiologists and enables radiologists to provide, and customers to obtain, remote interpretations of imaging data. The platform was designed by radiologists for the imaging industry. The radiologists connecting to Nanox.MARKETPLACE include those radiologists who are part of our network and provide teleradiology services through USARAD, as well as other radiologists, all of whom undergo an accreditation process that we perform and are required to be certified by the American Board of Radiology. Based primarily on customer location and area of specialization, radiologists will be matched to conduct the imaging interpretation. The radiologist receives payment through the platform from the customer upon the delivery of the imaging interpretation. The Nanox.MARKETPLACE service is currently offered on a standalone basis. Additionally, we are in the last stages of incorporating the Nanox.MARKETPLACE into the Nanox System, such that images that were generated by the Nanox.ARC and uploaded to the Nanox.CLOUD, can be streamlined and referred through the Nanox.MARKETPLACE to radiologists for remote reading.

Nanox.CONNECT. In August 2022, we entered into a supply agreement with Re-medi Co Ltd. in order to integrate Remedi’s two-dimensional (“2D”) imaging systems (using traditional X-ray tubes) to the Nanox.CLOUD and the Nanox.MARKETPLACE, creating a mobile 2D X-ray system that enables remote readings of scans with third parties AI-powered imaging analysis and a global teleradiology solution, which we refer to as the “Nanox.CONNECT.” The Nanox.CONNECT is currently deployed in several beta sites worldwide in order to receive local regulatory approvals and explore and evaluate the business model and the potential service.

AI Imaging Solutions. Nanox AI (previously known as Zebra), which we acquired in November 2021, develops machine learning platforms based on its database of over 500 million imaging scans, which facilitates the development of AI medical imaging solutions. Nanox AI has FDA clearance for six radiology AI solutions, CE mark in Europe for five radiology AI solutions and regulatory approvals in other countries for its radiology AI solutions. Nanox AI has been granted over one dozen patents in the field of radiology AI. Nanox AI gathers underutilized image data from CT scans and helps medical service providers focus on patients that, upon findings generated by use of our AI solutions, require additional medical attention.

In February 2024, we received FDA clearance for HealthFLD, an AI software that provides automated qualitative and quantitative analysis of liver attenuation from routine contrast and non-contrast chest and abdomen CT scans in patients between the ages of 18 to 75. HealthFLD is intended to support clinicians in the detection of fatty liver, correlated with hepatic steatosis, an early sign of metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD), formerly referred to as non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD).

We offer FDA cleared AI-based software imaging solutions to hospitals, health maintenance organizations (“HMOs”), integrated delivery networks (“IDNs”), marketplaces, pharmaceutical companies and insurers that are designed to identify or predict undiagnosed or underdiagnosed medical conditions, through the mining of data of existing CT scans. We have entered into collaboration agreements with marketplaces for access and distribution of our Nanox AI solutions, and agreements with IDNs and hospitals with respect to our AI imaging solutions. We currently offer AI imaging population health solutions aimed at identifying underlying findings, which are correlated to osteoporosis, cardiovascular disease and fatty liver to help detect patients at risk for more advanced liver disease such as NASH. With our AI imaging population health solutions, we aim to further our mission to enable preventative healthcare through early detection.

We have received positive feedback from our AI solution collaborators. For example, Corewell Health (formerly Spectrum), a large integrated health system that began using our population health solutions in mid-2022, has fully integrated Nanox AI into their standard of care. Our partnership has demonstrated to be productive and has been extended for an additional term.

The HealthFLD clearance is the third product across the Nanox.AI suite of population health solutions to receive FDA clearance. The FDA previously cleared HealthCCSng, a solution that detects coronary artery calcium (CAC) that presents a risk for coronary artery disease, and HealthOST, a solution that assesses vertebral compression fractures and bone mineral density to support clinicians in the evaluation and assessment of musculoskeletal disease of the spine (such as osteoporosis).

In addition, since the acquisition and completion of integration with Nanox AI, we have begun to develop AI-based features to enhance the images generated by the Nanox System, with the goal of improving diagnostic capabilities for the Nanox System in chest and musculoskeletal imaging. Ultimately, we expect to integrate these AI imaging capabilities, which we refer to as Robodiology, into the Nanox System. Subject to completion of the development and receipt of requisite regulatory approvals, we plan to offer these AI imaging solutions as an optional service to our MSaaS partners.

Teleradiology Services. Following our acquisition of USARAD in November 2021, we offer teleradiology services to customers in the U.S. market and an additional six countries by U.S.-based radiologists, certified by the American Board of Radiology. We offer imaging interpretation services for radiology practices, hospitals, medical clinics, diagnostic imaging centers, urgent care facilities and multi-specialty physician groups and USARAD contracts directly with these customers. In addition, we provide second opinion radiology readings, primarily to consumers and imaging centers. We have a network of approximately 60 independent radiologists in our marketplace, of which 29 are accredited by us through a formal process and are actively providing teleradiology services with us. We provide our teleradiology services to approximately 161 customers representing approximately 232 facilities. We allocate images that we receive from our customers, through our picture archiving and documentation system, to radiologists in our network based on the radiologist’s area of specialization. Payment is made by the customer directly to us based on the number of monthly readings and we pay the radiologist a predetermined fixed fee per reading.

Currently, our teleradiology services are offered as a standalone product through USARAD. In the future, we plan to incorporate our teleradiology services as part of our Nanox System offering.

Limitation of Current Medical Imaging Solutions and Our Market Opportunity

The main categories of current medical imaging systems that use X-ray sources include legacy X-ray systems, CT, mammography, fluoroscopy and angiogram. The analog X-ray source used by these systems produces X-rays by accelerating electrons to high energies, causing them to hit a metal target from which the X-rays are emitted. This requires a significant amount of electrical energy to be transferred to the X-ray tube. Due to the heat generated by this process, one of the most complex mechanical challenges is cooling the analog X-ray source. In addition, for CTs, the mechanical structure is even more complex because the analog X-ray source needs to rotate in a heavy gantry at high speed. We believe these are key factors leading to the high cost and complexity of existing medical imaging systems, which in turn significantly limits the availability of medical imaging for early detection globally.

According to a report from the Pan American Health Organization and World Health Organization (“WHO”) in 2012, approximately two-thirds of the world population did not have access to medical imaging. Further, many people with access to medical imaging face substantial wait times for scanning. For example, in Canada, access to medical imaging procedures is a growing problem with months of reported wait times for MRI and CT screening. Long wait times not only negatively impact patient outcomes but also add significant costs to the Canadian healthcare system each year due to delays in detection and treatment. Wait times for a CT scan can be longer than six weeks in Scotland, over 12 months in Ireland, and in the UK, tens of thousands of suspected cancer patients face month-long wait times to discover whether they have a particular illness due to delays in analyzing scans and X-rays.

In addition, most market participants, including medical imaging manufacturing companies, medical imaging providers and radiologists, among others, have not provided the same level of end-to-end medical imaging services. One of the reasons is that the scanning process is currently not integrated with the diagnostics process, which contributes to extended wait times for image diagnostics by experts.

According to a report of Fortune Business Insights from January 2022, the global medical imaging market size was $36.19 billion in 2020, and the market is expected to grow from $37.97 billion in 2021 to $56.53 billion in 2028 at a CAGR of 5.8% in the 2021-2028 period. The X-ray equipment segment held a dominant market share in 2020, accounting for 33.9% of the global medical imaging market share in such period. Further, according to such report, increasing use of advanced AI-enabled diagnostic equipment for the rapid diagnosis and predictive analysis in developed countries is one of the major factors anticipated to contribute to the rising product demand during the forecast period. Currently, only a handful of players operating in the market are providing AI-enabled imaging technologies to the healthcare industry.

The Nanox Ecosystem

The Nanox System

We have developed, and continue to improve, the Nanox System, which has two integrated components — hardware (Nanox.ARC) and software (Nanox.CLOUD). The Nanox.ARC, a 3D tomosynthesis imaging system, is designed to integrate our proprietary and novel digital X-ray source, known as Nanox.SOURCE. Our X-ray source is based on a novel digital MEMs semiconductor cathode that we believe can achieve the same functionalities as legacy X-ray analog cathodes, while allowing for lower-cost production than existing medical imaging systems. We have been developing this technology over ten years towards the goal of commercial applicability.

Our technology aims to disrupt the medical imaging market by providing accessibility and affordability on a global scale. Our goal is to enable medical institutions and other significant medical players to either employ our solutions as a closed end-to-end system or to adopt a modular approach to our technologies, by acquiring or licensing our different components and integrating our technologies into their specific product.

Legacy Analog X-ray Source and Limitations of Existing Medical Imaging Systems

The X-ray tube technology has essentially remained unchanged since its inception in 1895. For any type of imaging system to generate X-rays, the system must use X-ray tubes as a source for the X-rays. The X-ray tube converts electrical power into X-rays by accelerating electrons to high energies, causing them to hit a metal target from which the X-rays are emitted. X-rays can only be produced if the X-ray tube is energized, which has historically required a significant amount of electrical energy to be transferred to the X-ray tube. However, only a small amount of the energy deposited into the X-ray tube is actually converted into X-rays; the majority of the energy turns into heat.

Traditionally, an X- ray system (or tube) is based on a thermionic (heat-based) mode of operation where a metal filament needs to be heated up to approximately 2,000°C to generate the electron stream (a “cathode”) that will hit a metal target (an “anode”) to generate the photon-based X-ray stream resulting from that high-energy impact.

Heating the filament to approximately 2,000°C requires the mechanical cathode support systems to withstand high temperatures within a high vacuum, high voltage environment. Tungsten was introduced into the X-ray tube in 1925 for its properties of a high melting point and ductility. The tungsten filaments still used today are critical components of X-ray tubes, but they limit the lifetime of the X-ray tube due to the progressive evaporation of filament material under these high temperatures. At temperatures of up to 2,000°C, the filament evaporates in hot spots close to the peak temperature locations which over time can cause a catastrophic failure of the filament.

Nanox’s technology exhibits the capability to swiftly switch between ON and OFF states within microseconds, a notable advancement compared to traditional filament-based systems that operate in seconds. This feature positions the Nanox.ARC as a formidable solution for both industrial and security applications. Furthermore, the cathode module operates at low voltage, enhancing the overall simplicity of tube operation with the focus grid. The design allows for the incorporation of multiple sources, providing versatility and adaptability to various scenarios and applications.

We believe that the use of the legacy analog X-ray source is one of the key factors for the high cost of existing medical imaging systems. The main categories of medical imaging systems that use X-ray sources include legacy X-ray systems, CT (3D cross-sectional 360° “slicing” X-ray imaging), mammography (2D and 3D breast X-ray imaging), fluoroscopy (real-time X-ray video imaging) and angiogram (blood vessels, contrast X-ray imaging). CT scanners, for example, are complex diagnostic imaging systems that use X-rays to take images of a patient’s internal structures and organs. Due to the limitations of the analog X-ray source described above, general radiographic X-ray tubes are not well suited for use in a CT scanner. CT scanners instead use a specialized X-ray tube designed to withstand the excessive amount of heat produced by continuous energization. This X-ray tube is located in the gantry, which is the largest part of a CT scanner and consists of the X-ray detectors, the mechanical supports and the scanner housing. Due to the heat generated by this process, one of the most complex mechanical challenges is cooling the analog X-ray source while rotating it in a heavy gantry at high-speed. One solution used is the rotating anode, where a tungsten metal disk rotates at high revolutions per minute so the electron beam hits a different spot on the disk on a continuous basis to prevent the concentration of heat in one spot on the disk and reduce the likelihood of overheating or burning. In addition, CT scanners require a long continuous exposure time to create 3D images of the patient’s body using multiple X-ray images, which means that the X-ray tube must be continually energized and that patients are continuously exposed to radiation throughout that period. As a result of these complexities, most high-quality X-ray tubes for a CT scanner weigh between approximately 50 and 100 kilograms with the cooling mechanism.

Our Novel Digital X-ray Source

Realizing that the X-ray tube technology has essentially not changed in more than 100 years and remains a significant source of complexity and cost-driver of existing X-ray-based medical imaging systems, we developed a novel digital X-ray source that we believe addresses these drawbacks and will enable a new class of medical imaging systems that can be produced at a significantly lower cost than the existing systems.

Our technology has its roots in field emission display (“FED”) technology. FED technology was originally developed by Sony with other technology partners, for television screens and monitors, offering a novel way of lighting screen pixels compared to traditional cathode-ray tubes that were based on a one-source electron gun beam. The field emission display innovation used multiple nano-scale electron guns to achieve a much higher quality image with significantly reduced motion blur effects. In 2009, after having invested substantial resources in the development of this technology for over a decade including through a joint venture called Field Emission Technologies, Inc. (“FET”), Sony ceased development of the project.

In 2009, FET dissolved and transferred certain assets to FET Japan Inc. (“FETJ”). Scientists on our team, who worked at FETJ, applied their expertise to develop non-display related applications, including our X-ray source technology. In 2011, our predecessor company acquired certain non-display related know-how from FETJ and certain members of the FETJ technical team joined us.

After acquiring the technology, we spent over eight years developing a digital X-ray source for the medical imaging industry that could be produced on a commercial scale. Our X-ray source is a MEMs-based semiconductor cathode that achieves electron emission by a non-thermionic low-voltage trigger to approximately 100 million nano-scale molybdenum cones that act as multiple electron “guns,” instead of a single heated filament. The cathode is housed in a customized X-ray tube.

We believe our X-ray source has the following technological advantages over the analog X-ray source:

Reduced duration of radiation exposure. Our X-ray source uses a digital chip that is designed to provide better control and enables near-instantaneous on/off toggling of the electron beam. This source control also enables a precise “stop and start” operation, which we believe can potentially result in significantly reduced duration of radiation exposure compared to an analog X-ray source.

X-ray source KvP / mA decoupling. Our X-ray source is designed to create imaging using one X-ray source chip because there is complete independence and separation between the strength of X-ray penetration and the amount of photons for illumination (referred to as “KvP / mA”). KvP represents the speed of electrons that gives the X-ray its penetrating power, and higher KvP means the X-rays can penetrate higher density materials such as bones. mA represents the amount of photons or brightness levels of the X-ray image. For legacy X-ray sources, KvP / mA ratios were codependent in a linear relationship and each X-ray source could only produce one set of KvP / mA combinations dedicated for a particular use (for example, either tissue images or bone images, but not both simultaneously). We believe our X-ray source technology can produce multi-spectral imaging from one X-ray source, which allows for variable energy levels to be controlled during one scan. Therefore, one source chip can be used for multiple types of scans, such as head-scans, abdomen, mammography and angiograms, involving both soft and hard tissues at variable densities, simultaneously. We believe this multi-spectral imaging could also be applied to real-time video imaging. Our latest working prototype uses up to 160 KvP / mA under lab conditions, and we commercialize the multi-source Nanox.ARC with a range of 40 – 110 KvP / mA.

Longer lifetime. Our X-ray source is based on a field of multiple electron guns on our MEMs-based cathode that spread the load of electron generation among many “producers” compared to a single filament that heats to a high temperature in the analog X-ray tube. As a result, our digital X-ray source is designed to produce an electron beam from different locations on the chip towards the anode during each duty cycle without the need for the complex, high precision rotating mechanism. In addition, the near instant on/off toggling feature of our digital X-ray source is designed to allow us to reduce the duration of each operation. As a result, we believe our medical imaging system will have higher stability and a longer lifetime, with a longer mean time between failures.

Simplified hardware structure. Because our chip-based X-ray source and tube are designed to be quickly triggered electronically, we are able to have multiple stationary-anode tubes arranged around the patient as opposed to one larger tube that rotates around the patient. We believe this could reduce the complexity and cost of the Nanox.ARC compared to legacy imaging devices. This current approach to increase durability of the tungsten anode in imaging devices, the rotating anode mechanism requires both a significant increase in tube size and mechanical component cost to allow for the complex movements of the tube. In contrast, we believe by using our X-ray source we will be able to significantly reduce the size of X-ray tubes and simplify the structure of our medical imaging system.

We believe our X-ray source has the potential to replace the legacy X-ray source in other existing imaging systems, as well as the X-ray source in systems used in other industries, such as security scanners.

Nanox System

We have developed, and continue to improve, the multi-source Nanox.ARC, a medical device that integrates our proprietary and novel X-ray source. Subject to receiving requisite regulatory approval, the version of the multi-source Nanox.ARC that is being introduced to the market is a 3D tomosynthesis imaging system that produces a 3D reconstruction of the scanned human body part. The Nanox.ARC, using our X-ray source, is designed to produce partial-body scans of various body parts, with remote operation capability, and to have a full kVp / mA energy throughout range as per industry standards, multi-spectral imaging range, as well as cloud connectivity and standard compliance safety mechanisms. It is designed for easy setup and operation with multiple stationary X-ray tubes arranged around the patient. Part of the software used to run the Nanox.ARC is cloud-computing based and integrated with the Nanox.CLOUD, as further explained below.

In addition to the Nanox.ARC, we have developed, and continue to improve, the Nanox.CLOUD, a companion cloud software that will allow for the delivery of medical screening as a service. With the Nanox.CLOUD, we anticipate that the high-cost components of existing medical imaging systems, such as analytics and computing software that are traditionally installed via multiple licenses on-premise and on a per-system basis, will become centralized through the cloud.

We believe this will significantly reduce on-going software and IT licensing costs and enable a wide range of functionalities, such as multiple AI diagnostics and remote support. By integrating the Nanox.CLOUD with the Nanox.ARC, we believe the Nanox System could provide a streamlined process and end-to-end medical imaging service, including services such as image repository, radiologist matching, online and offline diagnostics review and annotation, connectivity to diagnostic assistive AI systems, billing, monitoring and reporting.

We believe the Nanox System, if cleared and approved by the requisite regulatory authorities in applicable jurisdictions, if successfully deployed, will streamline the entire medical screening process ranging from scanning to support diagnostics, and solve the bottleneck of imaging-to-diagnostics.

We also expect to be able to offer the Nanox System for a substantially lower cost than existing medical imaging systems, which we believe is key to achieving our goal of making early-detection medical imaging systems more accessible globally. We believe our novel X-ray source is crucial to our ability to substantially reduce the manufacturing cost of the Nanox.ARC. Our digital X-ray source generates X-ray radiation that is measurably identical in all key metrics to the X-ray radiation generated by existing analog X-ray sources, but without creating the high temperature that results from the filament used in the analog X-ray tube, thereby eliminating the need for the costly cooling equipment. In addition, our digital X-ray source is designed to enable the Nanox.ARC to have multiple stationary tubes arranged around the patient, which allows for a more simplified structure, as opposed to requiring the heavy, complex, high-precision rotating mechanisms used in legacy CT devices. As a result, we expect that when we will be commercialized at scale, we will be able to offer the Nanox System at a substantially lower cost than the cost of existing medical imaging systems based on analog X-ray sources.

On April 28, 2023, we received a 510(k) clearance from the FDA to market the Nanox.ARC (including the Nanox.CLOUD) as a stationary X-ray system intended to produce tomographic images of the human musculoskeletal system adjunctive to conventional radiography, on adult patients. This device is intended to be used in professional healthcare facilities or radiological environments, such as hospitals, clinics, imaging centers and other medical practices by trained radiographers, radiologists and physicians.

Clinical Sites:

We believe that gathering further clinical evidence will strengthen the support for our technology. We utilize clinical data as needed, for market validation, protocols and professional training. Under the Helsinki permit, we started to collect clinical sample images of multiple human body anatomies with a Nanox System that were deployed in the Shamir hospital in Israel. Additionally, we reached an agreement with Beilinson Hospital, a part of the Clalit Health Services, the largest health service organization in Israel, to conduct a human trial designed to assess the diagnostic capabilities of the Nanox System in detecting chest and lung diseases. This trial is currently ongoing.

We expect that the Nanox System, and other Nanox products will enable us to accumulate a significant number of medical images, which have the potential to be used by collaborators, such as medical AI-analytics companies, through machine learning algorithms to increase the probability of early disease detection.

Business Model

We plan to commercialize our X-ray source technology through three simultaneous business models: (i) the Subscription Model, (ii) the CapEx Model (sales) and (iii) the Licensing Model for OEM. We expect the Subscription Model to be our primary business model for the X-ray source technology and the key vehicle to achieving our vision of increasing early detection of medical conditions that are discoverable by X-ray.

The Subscription Model (MSaaS Model)

The foundation of the Subscription Model is our integrated offering of the Nanox.ARC and the Nanox.CLOUD, which we refer to as the Nanox System. Under the Subscription Model, which we also refer to as the MSaaS model (Medical Software as a Service), we expect to sell the Nanox System, following receipt of the requisite regulatory authorities in applicable jurisdictions, at low cost or to provide the system at no cost, and to receive a portion of the proceeds from each scan as the right-to-use licensing fee, and potentially additional fees for usage of the Nanox.MARKETPLACE, AI capability and teleradiology services, with the remaining amount allocated among our partners, including the local operators, radiologists, cloud storage providers, medical AI software providers and others, on a case by case basis. While the actual pricing charged by local operators may be greater than our suggested retail price, the retail price per scan in all markets other than the United States is still expected to be substantially less than the global average. In the United States, we expect the retail price to represent a significant reduction compared to the average cost of a CT scan. We expect the Nanox System to be operated by local operators independent from us, but we would contract with third parties to provide the day-to-day maintenance of the Nanox System.

While we believe our novel X-ray source could provide existing market participants with the paradigm shift needed for preventive healthcare disruption, we also believe existing market participants are not likely to undertake the change-leadership route and will be slow to adopt the MSaaS model.

The CapEx Model (Sales)

In certain countries, we intend to commercialize our X-ray source technology using the CapEx Model to accommodate specific local regulatory requirements. Under this model, we expect to sell the Nanox System, following receipt of the requisite regulatory authorities in applicable jurisdictions, for a one-time charge. We expect this retail price to be higher than the upfront sales price under the Subscription Model but still lower than the cost of existing medical imaging systems. If required by applicable regulatory requirements in any jurisdiction, we may enter into arrangements with third-party cloud vendors, on a case-by-case basis, which will be responsible for providing the cloud services (instead of the Nanox.CLOUD) and will be paid separately by the owner-operators of the Nanox Systems. In addition, we expect to contract with third-party service providers to provide maintenance services for the Nanox Systems at the owner-operators’ own costs.

The Licensing Model (OEM Model)

While we believe the medical imaging industry will eventually migrate towards the recurring revenue-based MSaaS model, we expect certain leading market participants will be slower to adopt this model. For these market participants, we expect to provide an intermediate solution through which they will adopt our X-ray source technology for their existing systems. Under the Licensing Model, which we also refer to as the OEM (Original Equipment Manufacturer) model, we would be engaged to tailor our X-ray source to the specific systems of medical imaging device manufacturers or other X-ray device manufacturers or to license our X-ray source technology to them to develop new types of imaging systems for a one-time licensing fee upfront for the X-ray source, as well as recurring royalty payments for each system sold that incorporates our X-ray source. The licensees would be responsible for the operation of the medical imaging systems integrating our X-ray source. Although we expect to initially rely on the Licensing Model, in part, we view the Licensing Model as a transitional phase, aimed at maximizing the commercial value of our technology and strategic buy-in from market participants to our vision through partnership and commercial relationships.

Sales and Marketing

X-Ray Technology. We plan to commercialize our X-ray technology using the three simultaneous business models described above broadly across the globe in the next few years, including in the United States and certain countries in Asia, Europe, Africa, Latin America, and Australia. Our sales and marketing strategy varies depending on specific geographical regions, as different regions generally require different marketing approaches.

In most countries, other than the United States, we expect to primarily market through local partnerships with strong national branding and operational market participants in the target region. These local partners would be engaged in deploying and operating our medical imaging systems, training and recruiting a local medical professional workforce to operate the systems and providing medical imaging diagnostics for the systems’ scan results.

U.S. go-to-market. Based on market analysis of the U.S. market of clinicians, imaging administrators and directors, stakeholders recognize the clinical benefits of the Nanox.ARC and its more affordable approach to advanced imaging techniques. Furthermore, outpatient facilities, such as skilled nursing facilities, freestanding emergency clinics, and pulmonary clinics showed interest in adopting the Nanox.ARC. Specifically, because such facilities typically do not have CT capabilities and we believe such facilities view the Nanox.ARC as a more affordable way to keep patients in-house for advanced imaging needs, combined with a 2D X-ray. Outpatient facilities also expressed potential interest in our MSaaS business model, which may reduce the risk of an upfront purchase because the cost is based on actual use. We believe that gathering further clinical evidence will strengthen the support for our technology. Our current U.S. go-to-market strategy is comprised of three primary components: customer targeting, building a sales team and using a hybrid business model.

In terms of customer targeting, we believe several factors impact willingness to adopt our system, including the type of facility, its current imaging capabilities and imaging volumes, and geographic location, namely rural vs. urban. Our aim is to strategically engage segments that show early adoption potential, such as orthopedic clinics, skilled nursing facilities, freestanding emergency departments and urgent care facilities. We intend to continue to build clinical evidence particularly within the U.S. market, to support the adoption of our system, as well as reimbursement mechanisms, specifically with commercial payers. We’ve strategically realigned our focus to enhance our presence in the U.S. market, such that our initial efforts in commercialization and deployment within the U.S. are concentrated on select states. This approach allows us, in the near term, to optimize customer service, delivery and support. To execute our strategy, we have allocated internal sales resources and we are planning to leverage the USARAD network, in order to accelerate our initial penetration in the market. Furthermore, we are in the process of enhancing a U.S. based sales and service team that will seek to generate leads, close sales, manage relationships, and provide services for the Nanox.ARC installed base. We are also in the process of engaging with independent service providers to provide service needs in remote areas and to decrease equipment downtime. To date, other operational needs (such as medical affairs, regulatory, billing, finance and contracting) are supported by the existing international Nanox organization.

For our business model in the U.S., we intend to use a hybrid approach combining a usage based MSaaS model with a CapEx model to help promote adoption, based on different segments. We have designed a training program to promote the Nanox.ARC. We also intend to use a combination of pilot sites, training, sales and marketing efforts to help meet customer needs. These aspects of our business strategy will require us to hire additional experienced healthcare business-development professionals who will be charged with raising awareness of the Nanox.ARC among physicians, hospitals, urgent care operators, and large health systems throughout the U.S.

Following a U.S. Reimbursement Landscape Assessment for Nanox.ARC, it was found that the existing CPT code 76100 “Radiologic examination, single plane body section (eg, tomography), other than with urography” would be a viable option to report Tomosynthesis procedures utilizing the Nanox.ARC. Nanox.ARC users would be able to report with appropriate ICD-10-PCS code(s). These ICD-10-PCS codes are for reporting services and procedures performed in the inpatient hospital site of service. For the Nanox.ARC, clinics, or hospitals operating it can use the CPT code 76100 for reporting. Regarding reimbursement rates, for Physicians using the Nanox.ARC, the National Medicare average Payment was $87.75 (using Conversion Factor $32.7442, from the National Physician Fee Schedule Relative Value File January Release, January 3, 2024). For Hospital Outpatients, the 2023 Medicare National Payment is $104.87. Note, that third-party payors may impose limits on coverage or reimbursement for diagnostic imaging services, including denying reimbursement for tests that do not follow recommended diagnostic procedures or can only be billed using an unlisted or miscellaneous code. Prior Authorization is required for certain advanced imaging services through CMS’ Appropriate Use Criteria (AUC) program and private payer prior authorization programs. Currently, there are no AUCs for tomosynthesis in general radiography, yet we monitor the CMS AUC Program and Private Payers Prior Authorization process for radiology procedures for any change.

AI Solutions. We currently focus our sales and marketing efforts for our AI solutions in the U.S., EU and UK markets and target large hospitals, HMOs, IDNs, marketplaces, pharmaceutical companies and insurers and third-party market places.

Teleradiology Services and Nanox.MARKETPLACE. We currently focus our sales and marketing efforts for our teleradiology services and the Nanox.MARKETPLACE in the U.S. market and target daytime costumers, which include urgent care facilities, stand-alone imaging facilities and outpatient imaging centers, as well as night-time and weekend customers, comprised of hospitals and community hospitals (state and local government).

We are continuing to explore potential synergies and the expansion of our offerings. We aim to integrate the Nanox.ARC and the Nanox.CLOUD with the Nanox.MARKETPLACE, creating a 3D imaging system that enables remote readings of scans with AI-powered imaging analysis and a global teleradiology solution.

Manufacturing and Supply of the Nanox.ARC

We have optimized the MEMs proprietary manufacturing process and initially used our own equipment in the clean rooms located at the University of Tokyo to manufacture the MEMs X-ray chip. We commenced manufacture of the MEMs X-ray chips at our fabrication facility in Korea, which is expected to meet our currently anticipated manufacturing needs. To secure additional chip supply in anticipation of commercialization scale up and acceleration of manufacturing activity, we recently entered into an agreement with CSEM, a chip maker located in Switzerland. We have proceeded to phase two, lab to fab development, which is expected to manufacture sample and provide production of chips.

We have continued to engage third-party manufacturers and suppliers for the commercial production of our digital X-ray tubes for use in the Nanox.ARC, following receipt of clearance from the FDA in 2023. We are in the process of engaging additional third-party manufacturers and suppliers, and we intend to continue engaging third-party manufacturers and suppliers, following additional clearances and approvals by similar regulatory authorities in other jurisdictions, based on, among other things, cost effectiveness. We are currently developing both ceramic and glass-based digital X-ray tubes for use in the Nanox.ARC. We are working with third parties as well as producing digital ceramic tubes at our Korean facility.

In May 2020, we entered into a three-year contract manufacturing agreement with FITI for mass production of the multi-source Nanox.ARC. Under the contract manufacturing agreement, FITI will negotiate and subcontract with other third parties for the commercial supply of the components of the Nanox.ARC in accordance with the pre-approved supplier list and on the terms to be agreed upon by both parties, except for the MEMs X-ray chip and X-ray tube. As we further expand our business in connection with the commercialization of our X-ray technology, we also expect to seek to engage alternative manufacturers of the Nanox.ARC. The agreement will be in effect for three years from the date of the agreement and is renewed for successive terms of one year unless or until either party notifies the other in writing of its intention not to renew with 90 days’ prior notice.

In addition, in September 2023 we entered into a manufacture and supply agreement with Varex Imaging Corporation (“Varex”), under which Varex will supply X-ray tubes utilizing the Nanox digital X-ray source for the Nanox.ARC system. The agreement was entered into after Varex completed an assessment of our digital X-ray source. Under the agreement, we may order X-ray tubes from Varex for use in our Nanox.ARC system. Varex agreed to manufacture and supply the X-ray tubes in exchange for payment therefor in the form of a revenue-sharing fee (subject to a minimum annual amount per system) based on the Company’s pay-per-scan revenue from Nanox.ARC systems using Varex X-ray tubes worldwide. Subject to receipt of requisite local regulatory clearance, Nanox has also agreed to use Varex X-ray tubes in a minimum percentage of all Nanox.ARC systems that are deployed and operating.

In an additional step towards optimizing our mass manufacturing capabilities, we are exploring collaboration with other medical equipment manufacturers for Nanox.ARC system assembly at scale.

MSaaS Agreements for the Nanox System

Outside the U.S. market, we have entered into 13 MSaaS agreements to deploy a total of 7,125 Nanox Systems in 19 regions, including in Europe, South and Central America, Asia, Australia, New Zealand, Russia and Africa. Under the current terms of each agreement, we grant the other party a limited, non-transferable, sub-licensable right to access and operate the Nanox System in the region applicable for such party. We undertake to provide a specified number of Nanox Systems to each entity based on agreed shipment schedules, subject to local regulatory approval and material compliance with acceptance test protocol (the “Conditions Precedent”). The other party undertakes to deploy the Nanox Systems to provide a minimum number of scans per year (generally based on 7 scans per day and 23 days per month) on a pay-per-scan basis, and to pay a minimum annual fee (including payments to our partners) ranging from approximately $2 million to $58 million, or approximately $155 million in total, excluding the payments to our partners. The MSaaS agreements, subject to certain conditions, require each of our counterparties to deliver to us a standby letter of credit or financial guarantee in the amount equal to the minimum annual fee in favor of us after receipt of the Conditions Precedent. However, there can be no guaranty that our counterparties will be able to obtain such letters of credit or financial guarantees. In addition, a majority of our MSaaS agreements are exclusive; however, under several agreements, we may seek alternative partners in the applicable region while maintaining the possibility to eventually resume the agreement, if the requisite regulatory authorizations are received.

The Nanox Systems provided under each agreement will remain our property, and the other party will only have a limited license to use the Nanox Systems. In addition, we must approve in writing any sublicense granted under the applicable agreement. We undertake to provide billing services and training for a local medical professional workforce to operate the Nanox System and typically also undertake to provide radiology and maintenance services to operate the Nanox System.

Each agreement will be in effect for multiple years, ranging from three to seven years from the date of the applicable agreement or the date of fulfilment of the Conditions Precedent, as applicable, and is renewable for an additional multi-year term with both parties’ mutual consent. Each agreement may be terminated by, among other things, notice of the non-breaching party in case of a material breach of a party’s material obligations, or by either party in case of the bankruptcy or insolvency of the other party.

While we have commenced the deployment in the U.S. market, most of the MSaaS agreements are in initial phases. We are collaborating with some of our partners to obtain the applicable regulatory authorizations and other requisite Conditions Precedent in the applicable region, other partners await for our receipt of the applicable approvals. Some of these agreements are being extended or amended and the agreements with Russia and Belarus are on freeze. Accordingly, the terms of the MSaaS agreements described above are subject to change pursuant to ongoing negotiations with such MSaaS agreement counterparties upon agreement extensions, amendments and otherwise. In parallel, we have entered into several memorandums of understanding and/or preliminary agreements with existing and potential partners for evaluation of market penetration and deployment in various regions. Within the scope of these engagements, we have shipped several Nanox System units for purposes of collecting clinical sample images, obtaining regulatory approvals and demonstrations and training.

We believe our MSaaS business model has the potential to expand the total size of the X-ray-based medical imaging market. We plan to measure the success of our MSaaS business model by annual capacity for Above-the-Line (“ATL”) scans which represent the increased capacity of imaging care we can provide to people that originally had no meaningful access to medical imaging. As we expand our operations and deploy more units of the Nanox System in an increasing number of countries using the MSaaS model, we expect our ATL scans metric to increase accordingly.

Collaboration Agreements

We enter into collaboration agreements in the ordinary course of business.

For example, we previously entered into a collaboration agreement, dated September 8, 2019, with Hadasit Medical Research Services and Development Ltd., a wholly owned subsidiary of the Hadassah Medical Organization, to collaborate with respect to our medical imaging technology and resulting medical images devices, by way of (among other things) joint research and development projects.

Given that the Nanox.CLOUD and the Nanox.MARKETPLACE are designed with the capability to receive scans from different imaging sources, in addition to the Nanox.ARC, we intend to explore additional collaboration opportunities in the near future. For example, in 2022, we invested $1.0 million for approximately 1% of the shares of Remedi co Ltd. (“Remedi”), a Korean radiation specialist company in radiography and therapy based on X-ray components. Remedi is a privately owned company, and we have an ongoing collaboration in the development of the high voltage power supply for Nanox.ARC. In August 2022, we entered into a supply agreement with Remedi in order to integrate Remedi’s two-dimensional (“2D”) imaging systems (using traditional X-ray tubes) to the Nanox.CLOUD and the Nanox.MARKETPLACE, creating a mobile 2D X-ray system that enables remote readings of scans with AI-powered imaging analysis and a global teleradiology solution, which we refer to as the “Nanox.CONNECT.” The Nanox.CONNECT is currently deployed in several beta sites in order to receive local regulatory approvals and explore and evaluate the business model and the potential service.

In addition, we entered into a collaboration agreement with AhealthZ, a distributor of healthcare services and devices, and SCL Science, AhealthZ’s affiliated company and subsidiary of Seoul Clinical Laboratories. Under the collaboration AhealthZ plans to assist the Company in efforts to secure local authorizations and licenses to enable the importation, marketing and sales of the Nanox.ARC in South Korea. The collaboration will also include SCL Science integrating the Company’s AI solutions and the Nanox.MARKETPLACE solution into its teleradiology centers in South Korea.

Competition

Several large companies, such as GE Healthcare, Siemens, Philips, Hologic, Varian, Fuji, Toshiba and Hitachi currently dominate the medical imaging market. High regulatory, distribution, manufacturing and service-related long-term contractual costs represent significant barriers to entry for any new player. We expect that the existing market participants will remain key players in the future and we aim to form alliances with several of these leading market participants, including through licensing.

Over time, we anticipate that the evolution in the industry will bring new players into the market. Digital healthcare disruptors such as cloud computing companies or leading IT companies may enter the industry and we believe that they may become partners over time through our Subscription Model.

As a general matter, we view competition on two levels:

In terms of digital X-ray sources, the field emission display technology is known and a wide range of industry leaders have used it to attempt to create an alternative, digital source of X-ray. To our knowledge, the most well-known attempt to achieve a commercial grade, stable digital X-ray source was the use of carbon nano tubes (“CNT”) as the base material for a potential field emission-based solution, and at least one company has recently commercialized an X-ray system based on a CNT solution and there are several other companies currently in the process of developing this technology.

In terms of the MSaaS business model, we currently seek a first-mover advantage by introducing the Subscription Model, as the main pre-requisite for this model is the low cost of the X-ray source (when manufactured at scale). However, the primary competition comes from established market participants. While in developing countries we are experiencing keen interest, the United States and other Western regions already have major market participants that are well entrenched in the market with strong political influence and the ability to delay deployment of our systems.

With respect to our AI imaging solutions, there are a number of companies that currently offer AI radiology solutions, such as Aidoc, which, to our knowledge, are focused on life threatening and urgent cases. In addition, legacy healthcare technology companies are expected in the future to increase development efforts in the field of AI imaging solutions. For example, Siemens Healthineers has developed AI-Rad Companion, which provides automatic post-processing of imaging datasets through AI-powered algorithms for Siemens CTs.

With respect to our teleradiology services, the teleradiology market is highly competitive, rapidly evolving, and fragmented, and is subject to changing technology and market dynamics. The market has recently experienced and is expected to continue to experience competitive pricing pressure and radiologist compensation pressure. We compete directly with both large and small-scale service providers who offer local, regional and national coverage operations. We believe that our principal competitors are StatRad, ONRAD and Radiology Partners. We compete to attract and retain relationships with customers and radiologists in different ways.

Security and Data Privacy

The Nanox System is being designed and developed with personal privacy, data security and protection in mind as a top priority for all development parties. Medical imaging information and other health information is highly personal and sensitive and thus regarded as a prime target for hacks and malicious theft. As part of our normal operations, we expect to collect, process and retain personal identifying information regarding patients.

We believe we will likely be subject to U.S. rules and regulations governing data protection, including HIPAA, HITECH and other privacy and data security regulations. See”—Government Regulation—Healthcare Regulatory Laws—Data Privacy and Security.”

Separate from, and in addition to, the GDPR requirements, certification requirements for the hosting of health data will vary by jurisdiction (and may or may not apply to hosts of health data). As the Nanox System is projected to operate in various EEA countries, we may be required to comply with other national healthcare regulations or regulatory requirements. For example, in France, there is a procedure as of April 1, 2018, for hosts of health data to obtain a prior certification with the competent certification body. Similarly, in Israel, any provision of cloud-based systems to public health sector entities requires certain certifications, such as ISO 27001 and ISO 27799 pertaining to the secured processing of health-related data. Such certifications require further compliance investments and maintenance costs.

We are dedicated to making our systems and software both HIPAA and GDPR compliant. We intend to submit our systems to an independent external audit on a regular basis as required by HHS. We also intend to develop our privacy protocols to comply with the GDPR. In addition, we are undertaking intendant measures to ensure a high-level of imaging data encryption, complete separation between the imaging data and personal information (anonymization) as well as MFA authentication procedures during on-boarding and usage of the Nanox System. We also intend to undertake to perform periodic Pen-Tests by external cyber security professionals and publish the results of such audits publicly and without delay on our website and via public relations channels.

Government Regulation

The Nanox System and our operations are subject to extensive regulation by the FDA, and other federal and state authorities in the United States, as well as comparable authorities in foreign jurisdictions. The Nanox.ARC is subject to regulation as medical devices and radiation-emitting devices in the United States under the FDCA, as implemented and enforced by the FDA, and under comparable regulatory schemes in foreign jurisdictions.

FDA Regulation of Medical Devices

The FDA regulates the development, design, non-clinical and clinical research, manufacturing, safety, efficacy, labeling, packaging, storage, installation, servicing, recordkeeping, premarket clearance or approval, adverse event reporting, advertising, promotion, marketing and distribution, and import and export of medical devices to ensure that medical devices distributed within the United States are safe and effective for their intended uses or are substantially equivalent to a predicate device and otherwise meet the requirements of the FDCA.

FDA Premarket Clearance and Approval Requirements

Subject to certain exceptions, each medical device commercially distributed in the United States requires either FDA clearance of a 510(k) premarket notification, or approval of a PMA application. Under the FDCA, medical devices are classified into one of three classes—Class I, Class II or Class III—depending on the degree of risk associated with each medical device and the extent of manufacturer and regulatory control needed to ensure its safety and effectiveness. Class I includes devices with the lowest risk to the patient and are those for which safety and effectiveness can be assured by adherence to the FDA’s General Controls for medical devices, which include compliance with the applicable portions of QSR, facility registration and product listing, reporting of adverse medical events and truthful and non-misleading labeling, advertising and promotional materials. Class II devices are subject to the FDA’s General Controls, and special controls as deemed necessary by the FDA to ensure the safety and effectiveness of the device. These special controls can include performance standards, post-market surveillance, patient registries and FDA guidance documents.

While most Class I devices are exempt from the 510(k) premarket notification requirement, manufacturers of most Class II devices are required to submit to the FDA a premarket notification under Section 510(k) of the FDCA requesting permission to commercially distribute the device. The FDA’s permission to commercially distribute a device subject to a 510(k) premarket notification is generally known as 510(k) clearance. Devices deemed by the FDA to pose the greatest risks, such as life sustaining, life supporting or some implantable devices, or devices that have a new intended use, or use advanced technology that is not substantially equivalent to that of a legally marketed device, are placed in Class III, requiring approval of a PMA. Some pre-amendment devices are unclassified, but are subject to the FDA’s premarket notification and clearance process in order to be commercially distributed.

510(k) Clearance Marketing Pathway

The Nanox.ARC is a Class II device that was subject to premarket notification and clearance under section 510(k) of the FDCA. To obtain 510(k) clearance, we submitted to the FDA a premarket notification submission demonstrating that the proposed device is “substantially equivalent” to a predicate device already on the market. A predicate device is a legally marketed device that is not subject to premarket approval, i.e., a device that was legally marketed prior to May 28, 1976 (pre-amendments device), and for which a PMA is not required, a device that has been reclassified from Class III to Class II or I, or a device that was found substantially equivalent through the 510(k) process. The FDA’s 510(k) clearance process usually takes from three to twelve months, but often takes longer. In certain cases, the FDA may require additional information, including clinical data, to make a determination regarding substantial equivalence. In addition, the FDA collects user fees for certain medical device submissions and annual fees and for medical device establishments. For fiscal year 2023, the standard user fee for a 510(k) premarket notification application is $19,870.

If the FDA agrees that the device is substantially equivalent to a predicate device currently on the market, it will grant 510(k) clearance to commercially market the device. If the FDA determines that the device is “not substantially equivalent” to a previously cleared device, the device is automatically designated as a Class III device. The device sponsor must then fulfill more rigorous PMA requirements, or can request a risk-based classification determination for the device in accordance with the “de novo” process, which is a route to market for novel medical devices that are low to moderate risk and are not substantially equivalent to a predicate device.

After a device receives 510(k) marketing clearance, any modification that could significantly affect its safety or effectiveness, or that would constitute a major change or modification in its intended use, will require a new 510(k) clearance or, depending on the modification, PMA approval or de novo reclassification. The FDA requires each manufacturer to determine whether the proposed change requires submission of a 510(k), a de novo request or a PMA in the first instance, but the FDA can review any such decision and disagree with a manufacturer’s determination. If the FDA disagrees with a manufacturer’s determination, the FDA can require the manufacturer to cease marketing and/or request the recall of the modified device until 510(k) marketing clearance or until PMA approval is obtained or a de novo request is granted. Also, in these circumstances, the manufacturer may be subject to significant regulatory fines or penalties.

Over the last several years, the FDA has proposed reforms to its 510(k) clearance process, and such proposals could include increased requirements for clinical data and a longer review period, or could make it more difficult for manufacturers to utilize the 510(k) clearance process for their products. For example, in November 2018, the FDA officials announced forthcoming steps that the FDA intends to take to modernize the premarket notification pathway under Section 510(k) of the FDCA. Among other things, the FDA announced that it planned to develop proposals to drive manufacturers utilizing the 510(k) pathway toward the use of newer predicates. These proposals included plans to potentially sunset certain older devices that were used as predicates under the 510(k) clearance pathway, and to potentially publish a list of devices that have been cleared on the basis of demonstrated substantial equivalence to predicate devices that are more than 10 years old. In May 2019, the FDA solicited public feedback on these proposals. The FDA requested public feedback on whether it should consider certain actions that might require new authority, such as whether to sunset certain older devices that were used as predicates under the 510(k) clearance pathway. These proposals have not yet been finalized or adopted, and the FDA may work with Congress to implement such proposals through legislation.

In September 2019, the FDA finalized guidance describing an optional “safety and performance based” premarket review pathway for manufacturers of “certain, well-understood device types” to demonstrate substantial equivalence under the 510(k) clearance pathway by showing that such device meets objective safety and performance criteria established by the FDA, thereby obviating the need, in the case of applicable products, for manufacturers to compare the safety and performance of their medical devices to specific predicate devices in the clearance process. The FDA maintains a list of device types appropriate for the “safety and performance based” pathway and will continue to develop product-specific guidance documents that identify the performance criteria for each such device type, as well as the testing methods recommended in the guidance documents, where feasible. Also in September 2019, the FDA finalized guidance describing its current approach to the “Special 510(k)” program, which provides an optional pathway for certain well-defined device modifications where a manufacturer modifies its own legally marketed device, and design control procedures produce reliable results that can form, in addition to other 510(k) content requirements, the basis for substantial equivalence.

PMA Approval Pathway

Class III devices require PMA approval before they can be marketed, although some pre-amendment Class III devices for which the FDA has not yet required a PMA are cleared through the 510(k) process. The PMA process is more demanding than the 510(k) premarket notification process. In a PMA, the manufacturer must demonstrate that the device is safe and effective, and the PMA must be supported by extensive data, including data from preclinical studies and human clinical trials. The PMA must also contain a full description of the device and its components, a full description of the methods, facilities and controls used for manufacturing and proposed labeling. Following receipt of a PMA, the FDA determines whether the application is sufficiently complete to permit a substantive review. If the FDA accepts the application for review, it has 180 days under the FDCA to complete its review of a PMA, although in practice, the FDA’s review often takes significantly longer, and can take up to several years. An advisory panel of experts from outside the FDA may be convened to review and evaluate the application and provide recommendations to the FDA as to the approvability of the device. The FDA may or may not accept the panel’s recommendation. In addition, the FDA will generally conduct a pre-approval inspection of the applicant or its third-party manufacturers’ or suppliers’ manufacturing facility or facilities to ensure compliance with the QSR. PMA devices are also subject to the payment of user fees, which for fiscal year 2023 includes a standard application fee of $441,547 and an annual establishment registration fee of $6,493.

The FDA will approve the new device for commercial distribution if it determines that the data and information in the PMA constitute valid scientific evidence and that there is reasonable assurance that the device is safe and effective for its intended use(s). The FDA may approve a PMA with post-approval conditions intended to ensure the safety and effectiveness of the device, including, among other things, restrictions on labeling, promotion, sale and distribution and collection of long-term follow-up data from patients in the clinical study that supported PMA approval or requirements to conduct additional clinical studies post-approval. The FDA may condition PMA approval on some form of post-market surveillance when deemed necessary to protect the public health or to provide additional safety and efficacy data for the device in a larger population or for a longer period of use. In such cases, the manufacturer might be required to follow certain patient groups for a number of years and to make periodic reports to the FDA on the clinical status of those patients. Failure to comply with the conditions of approval can result in material adverse enforcement action, including withdrawal of the approval.

Certain changes to an approved device, such as changes in manufacturing facilities, methods or quality control procedures, or changes in the design performance specifications, which affect the safety or effectiveness of the device, require submission of a PMA supplement. PMA supplements often require submission of the same type of information as a PMA, except that the supplement is limited to information needed to support any changes from the device covered by the original PMA and may not require as extensive clinical data or the convening of an advisory panel. Certain other changes to an approved device require the submission of a new PMA, such as when the design change causes a different intended use, mode of operation, and technical basis of operation, or when the design change is so significant that a new generation of the device will be developed, and the data that were submitted with the original PMA are not applicable for the change in demonstrating a reasonable assurance of safety and effectiveness. We do not expect any of our products to be marketed pursuant to a PMA.

Clinical Trials

Clinical trials are almost always required to support a PMA and are sometimes required to support a 510(k) submission. All clinical investigations of devices to determine safety and effectiveness must be conducted in accordance with FDA and other regulatory requirements, including the FDA’s investigational device exemption (“IDE”) regulations which govern investigational device labeling, prohibit promotion of the investigational device and specify an array of recordkeeping, reporting and monitoring responsibilities of study sponsors and study investigators. If the device presents a “significant risk” to human health, as defined by the FDA, the FDA requires the device sponsor to submit an IDE application to the FDA, which must become effective prior to commencing human clinical trials. If the device under evaluation does not present a significant risk to human health, then the device sponsor is not required to submit an IDE application to the FDA before initiating human clinical trials, but must still comply with abbreviated IDE requirements when conducting such trials. A significant risk device is one that presents a potential for serious risk to the health, safety or welfare of a patient and either is implanted, used in supporting or sustaining human life, substantially important in diagnosing, curing, mitigating or treating disease or otherwise preventing impairment of human health, or otherwise presents a potential for serious risk to a subject. An IDE application must be supported by appropriate data, such as animal and laboratory test results, showing that it is safe to test the device in humans and that the testing protocol is scientifically sound. The IDE will automatically become effective 30 days after receipt by the FDA unless the FDA notifies the company that the investigation may not begin. If the FDA determines that there are deficiencies or other concerns with an IDE for which it requires modification, the FDA may permit a clinical trial to proceed under a conditional approval.

Regardless of the degree of risk presented by the medical device, clinical studies must be approved by, and conducted under the oversight of, an Institutional Review Board (“IRB”) for each clinical site. The IRB is responsible for the initial and continuing review of the IDE, and may pose additional requirements for the conduct of the study. If an IDE application is approved by the FDA and one or more IRBs, human clinical trials may begin at a specific number of investigational sites with a specific number of patients, as approved by the FDA. If the device presents a non-significant risk to the patient, a sponsor may begin the clinical trial after obtaining approval for the trial by one or more IRBs without separate approval from the FDA, but must still follow abbreviated IDE requirements, such as monitoring the investigation, ensuring that the investigators obtain informed consent and labeling and record-keeping requirements. Acceptance of an IDE application for review does not guarantee that the FDA will allow the IDE to become effective and, if it does become effective, the FDA may or may not determine that the data derived from the trials support the safety and effectiveness of the device or warrant the continuation of clinical trials. An IDE supplement must be submitted to, and approved by, the FDA before a sponsor or investigator may make a change to the investigational plan that may affect its scientific soundness, study plan or the rights, safety or welfare of human subjects.

During a study, the sponsor is required to comply with the applicable FDA requirements, including, for example, trial monitoring, selecting clinical investigators and providing them with the investigational plan, ensuring IRB review, adverse event reporting, record keeping and prohibitions on the promotion of investigational devices or on making safety or effectiveness claims for them. The clinical investigators in the clinical study are also subject to FDA regulations and must obtain patient informed consent, rigorously follow the investigational plan and study protocol, control the disposition of the investigational device and comply with all reporting and recordkeeping requirements. Additionally, after a trial begins, we, the FDA or the IRB could suspend or terminate a clinical trial at any time for various reasons, including a belief that the risks to study subjects outweigh the anticipated benefits.

Post-market Regulation

After a device is cleared or approved for marketing, numerous and pervasive regulatory requirements continue to apply. These include:

Our manufacturing processes are required to comply with the applicable portions of the QSR, which cover the methods and the facilities and controls for the design, manufacture, testing, production, processes, controls, quality assurance, labeling, packaging, distribution, installation and servicing of finished devices intended for human use. The QSR also requires, among other things, maintenance of a device master file, device history file and complaint files. As a manufacturer, we will be subject to periodic scheduled or unscheduled inspections by the FDA. Our failure to maintain compliance with the QSR requirements could result in the shut-down of, or restrictions on, our manufacturing operations and the recall or seizure of our products, which would have a material adverse effect on our business. The discovery of previously unknown problems with any of our products, including unanticipated adverse events or adverse events of increasing severity or frequency, whether resulting from the use of the device within the scope of its clearance or off-label by a physician in the practice of medicine, could result in restrictions on the device, including the removal of the product from the market or voluntary or mandatory device recalls.

The FDA has broad regulatory compliance and enforcement powers. If the FDA determines that we failed to comply with applicable regulatory requirements, it can take a variety of compliance or enforcement actions, which may result in any of the following sanctions:

Teleradiology

The healthcare industry is highly regulated. Our ability to operate profitably will depend in part upon the ability of us, our affiliated radiologists, and our customers to obtain and maintain all necessary licenses and other approvals to comply with applicable healthcare regulations. We believe healthcare regulations will continue to change. Therefore, we monitor developments in healthcare law and we are likely to be required to modify our operations from time to time as the business and regulatory environment changes. Although we believe that we are operating in compliance with applicable federal and state laws, we cannot assure you that review of our business by courts or regulatory authorities will not result in determination that could adversely affect our operations or that the healthcare regulatory environment will not change in way that restricts our operations. Future changes in healthcare regulation are difficult to predict and may constrain or require us to restructure our operations, which could negatively impact our business and operating results.

Radiological Devices

We and our products are also regulated by the FDA under the Electronic Product Radiation Control provisions of the FDCA because the Nanox.ARC contains radiation emitting components, and because we assemble these components during manufacturing and service activities. The Electronic Product Radiation Control provisions require radiation-producing products to comply with certain regulations and applicable performance standards. Manufacturers are required to certify in product labeling and reports to the FDA that their products comply with all necessary standards as well as maintain manufacturing, testing and sales records for their products. The Electronic Product Radiation Control provisions also require manufacturers to report product defects and affix appropriate labeling to covered products. Failure to comply with these requirements could result in enforcement action by the FDA, which can include any of the sanctions described above.

Healthcare Regulatory Laws

Within the United States, our products and our customers will be subject to extensive regulation by a wide range of federal and state agencies that govern business practices in the medical device industry. These laws include federal and state anti-kickback, fraud and abuse, false claims, transparency and anti-corruption statutes and regulations. Internationally, other governments also impose regulations in connection with their healthcare reimbursement programs and the delivery of healthcare items and services.

In addition to FDA device registration and the tracking of medical X-ray producing equipment installations via Form 2579, the use of any device which produces ionizing radiation (X-Ray) is regulated by individual states. States’ X-Ray performance & safety test rules vary widely. Typically, new equipment must be registered with the state or local radiation control agency by the facility or practice operating the equipment. Registrants must have certain tests performed or allow inspectors to perform such tests to assure compliance with health department requirements. Registration is typically good for one year and must be renewed annually. Changes made to equipment, including replacement of X-Ray tubes, may require additional notifications and/or recertification by a radiation physicist. Facilities must have proper shielding to protect against radiation exposure and states have different requirements for signage, warning sights and interlocks. States typically require X-ray equipment installation, testing and repair only be performed by approved personnel.

U.S. federal healthcare fraud and abuse laws will generally apply to our activities, among other reasons because we expect that our products will be covered under federal healthcare programs such as Medicare and Medicaid. The Anti-Kickback Statute is particularly relevant because of its broad applicability. Specifically, the Anti-Kickback Statute prohibits persons from knowingly and willfully soliciting, offering, receiving or providing remuneration, directly or indirectly, in exchange for, or to induce, either the referral of an individual, or the furnishing, arranging for or recommending a good or service for which payment may be made in whole or part under federal healthcare programs, such as the Medicare and Medicaid programs. A broad range of financial interactions with a healthcare provider, patient or customer may implicate the Anti-Kickback Statute. Statutory exceptions and regulatory safe harbors protect certain interactions if specific requirements are met. However, only those interactions that represent fair market value exchanges generally are protected by a safe harbor or exception. The government can exercise enforcement discretion in taking action against unprotected activities. Further, a person or entity does not need to have actual knowledge of the Anti-Kickback Statute or specific intent to violate it in order to have committed a violation. In addition, the government may assert that a claim involving items or services resulting from a violation of the federal Anti-Kickback Statute also constitutes a false or fraudulent claim for purposes of the federal False Claims Act or federal civil money penalties statute. Penalties for Anti-Kickback Statute violations may include both criminal penalties such as imprisonment and fines and civil sanctions such as civil penalties and possible exclusion from Medicare, Medicaid and other federal healthcare programs. Exclusion would mean that diagnostic tests using our products would no longer be eligible for reimbursement under federal healthcare programs.

Many states have adopted laws similar to the Anti-Kickback Statute. Some of these state prohibitions apply to referral of patients for healthcare items or services reimbursed by any payor, not only federal healthcare programs. Insurance companies may also bring a private cause of action for treble damages against a manufacturer for a pattern of causing false claims to be filed under the federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act. We believe that we are operating in compliance with applicable federal and state anti-kickback laws and that our contractual arrangements with our customers are structured in manner that complies with such laws.

Another development affecting the healthcare industry is the increased use of the federal civil False Claims Act and, in particular, actions brought pursuant to the False Claims Act’s “whistleblower” or “qui tam” provisions. The False Claims Act imposes liability on any person or entity that, among other things, knowingly presents, or causes to be presented, a false or fraudulent claim for payment by a federal healthcare program. The qui tam provisions of the False Claims Act allow a private individual to bring actions on behalf of the federal government alleging that the defendant has submitted a false claim to the federal government, and to share in any monetary recovery. In recent years, the number of suits brought against healthcare providers by private individuals has increased dramatically. In addition, various states have enacted false claim laws analogous to the Civil False Claims Act, although many of these state laws apply where a claim is submitted to any third-party payor and not merely a federal healthcare program.

Under the Federal False Claims Act, we may be liable if we or one of our customers submitted a false claim. If we were found to have violated these laws and regulations and as result submitted or caused our customers to submit a false claim, any sanctions imposed under the Federal False Claims Act could result in substantial fines and penalties or exclusion from participation in federal and state healthcare programs which could have a material adverse effect on our business and financial condition. If we are excluded from participation in federal or state healthcare programs, our customers who participate in those programs could not do business with us. Federal regulatory and law enforcement authorities regularly review and enforce activities with respect to Medicare and Medicaid fraud and abuse regulations and other reimbursement laws and regulations, including laws and regulations that govern our activities and the activities of teleradiologists. These increased enforcement activities may have a direct or indirect adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. We believe that we are operating in compliance with these laws. However, if we are found to have violated such laws, our business, results of operations and financial condition would be harmed.

The federal physician self-referral statute, known as the Stark Law, prohibits physicians from making referrals for certain designated health services, including radiology services, to any entity with which the physician has a financial relationship unless there is an exception in the statute that allows the referral. The entity that receives a prohibited referral from a physician may not submit the bill to Medicare for that service. Federal courts have ruled that violations of the Stark Law, as well as violations of the federal anti-kickback laws described above, can serve as the basis for Federal False Claims Act suits. Many state laws prohibit physician referrals to entities with which the physician has a financial interest or require that the physician provide the patient with notice of the physician’s financial relationship before making the referral. Violation of the Stark Law can result in substantial civil penalties for both the referring physician and any entity that submits a claim for healthcare service made pursuant to a prohibited referral. We believe that all our customer arrangements are in compliance with the Stark Law. However, these laws could be interpreted in a manner inconsistent with our operations. Federal or state self-referral regulation could impact our arrangements with certain customers.

The federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, or HIPAA, among other things, created two new federal crimes: healthcare fraud and false statements relating to healthcare matters. The HIPAA healthcare fraud statute prohibits, among other things, knowingly and willfully executing, or attempting to execute, a scheme to defraud any healthcare benefit program, including private payors. A violation of this statute is a felony and may result in fines, imprisonment and/or exclusion from government-sponsored programs. The HIPAA false statements statute prohibits, among other things, knowingly and willfully falsifying, concealing or covering up a material fact or making any materially false, fictitious or fraudulent statement or representation in connection with the delivery of or payment for healthcare benefits, items or services. A violation of this statute is a felony and may result in fines and/or imprisonment. Similar to the federal Anti-Kickback Statute, a person or entity does not need to have actual knowledge of the statutes or specific intent to violate them in order to have committed a violation.

In addition, HIPAA authorizes the imposition of civil money penalties against entities that employ or enter into contracts with individuals or entities who have been excluded from participation in the Medicare or Medicaid programs. We perform background checks on our affiliated radiologists, and we do not believe that we engage or contract with any excluded individuals or entities. However, a finding that we have violated this provision of HIPAA could have a material adverse effect on our business and financial condition. We believe that our services have not historically been provided in a way that would place either our clients or ourselves at risk of violating HIPAA anti-fraud statutes, including those in which we may be considered to receive an indirect reimbursement, because of the reassignment by us to our customers of the right to collect for final reads. We have entered into agreements, and may in the future enter into agreements, with hospitals that are subject to an integrity order by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Office of the Inspector General (the “HHS-OIG”) that requires the hospital to ensure that each subcontractor to the hospital fully complies with HIPAA and the terms of the integrity order, including written policies and procedures assuring compliance, and subjects each subcontractor to audit at the determination of the HHS-OIG. We could be vulnerable to prosecution under these statutes if any of our customers deliberately or recklessly submits claims that contain false, misleading or incomplete information. In addition, the administrative simplification provisions of HIPAA require the promulgation of regulations establishing national standards for, among other things, certain electronic healthcare transactions, the use and disclosure of certain individually identifiable patient health information and the security of the electronic systems maintaining this information. These are commonly known as the HIPAA transaction and code set standards, privacy rule and security rule, respectively. The administrative simplification provisions of HIPAA direct the federal government to adopt national electronic standards for automated transfer of certain healthcare data among healthcare payers plans and providers, intended to enable healthcare industry participants to communicate electronic data using a single set of standards. We are a covered entity under HIPAA and as such we must operate in compliance with the electronic transaction and code set standards, privacy rule and security rule. We are also a business associate under HIPAA because we provide services for or on behalf of other covered entities. We have developed policies, procedures, and systems for handling patient health information that we believe comply with the requirements of HIPAA.

Laws and regulations have also been enacted by the federal government and various states to regulate the sales and marketing practices of medical device and pharmaceutical manufacturers. The laws and regulations generally limit financial interactions between manufacturers and healthcare providers, require pharmaceutical and medical device companies to comply with voluntary compliance standards issued by industry associations and the relevant compliance guidance promulgated by the U.S. federal government and/or require disclosure to the government and/or public of financial interactions (so-called “sunshine laws”). Many of these laws and regulations contain ambiguous requirements or require administrative guidance for implementation. Manufacturers must adopt reasonable interpretations of requirements if there is ambiguity and those interpretations could be challenged. Given the lack of clarity in laws and their implementation, our activities could be subject to the penalty provisions of the pertinent federal and state laws and regulations.

In addition, the practice of medicine, including the practice of radiology and teleradiology, is subject to state licensure laws, regulations and approvals. Physicians located in one state who provide professional medical services to patients located in another state via a telemedicine system must ordinarily hold a valid license to practice medicine in both the state where the physician is located and the state in which the patient is located. We have established a system for ensuring that our affiliated radiologists are appropriately licensed under applicable state law. If we are unable to obtain proper physician licenses or hospital credentials on behalf of our affiliated radiologists, or if our affiliated radiologists lose those licenses or credentials, our business financial condition and results of operations may be negatively impacted.

Generally, corporate practice of medicine laws prohibit anyone but duly licensed physicians from exercising control over the medical judgments or decisions rendered by another physician. Given that general prohibition, some states permit business corporations to hold directly or indirectly customer contracts for the provision of medical services, including radiology and teleradiology, and to own a medical practice that provides such services, provided that only physicians exercise control over the medical judgments or decisions of other physicians. Moreover, the laws of such states may prohibit anyone but a physician who is duly licensed in such state from owning any interest in a medical practice that is incorporated or doing business in such state or the state of incorporation. Failure to comply with these laws could have material and adverse consequences including the judicially sanctioned refusal of third-party payers to pay for services rendered, the absolute right of customers to immediately repudiate the contract for services, malpractice claims or license revocation or suspension proceedings against the provider and possibly the hospital based upon the alleged violation of statute designed to protect the public, as well as civil or criminal penalties. We believe that we are following the corporate practice of medicine laws in each state in which our affiliated radiologists provide medical services. Each of these are duly licensed or qualified as a medical practice in the states where such license or qualification is required. We do not exercise control over the medical judgments or decisions of our affiliated radiologists. While we believe we follow the requirements of the corporate practice of medicine laws in each state where our affiliated radiologists provide services, these laws and their interpretations are continually evolving and may change in the future. Moreover, these laws and their interpretations are generally enforced by state courts and regulatory agencies that have broad discretion in their enforcement. If our arrangements with our affiliated radiologists or our customers are found to violate state laws prohibiting the practice of medicine by general business corporations or fee splitting, our business financial condition and ability to operate in those states could be adversely affected.

Many states have enacted laws prohibiting physicians from splitting fees derived from the practice of medicine with anyone else. We believe that the management administrative technical and other nonmedical services we provide to each of our affiliated radiologists for service fee does not constitute fee splitting. Our belief notwithstanding, these laws and their interpretations also vary from state to state and are also enforced by state courts and regulatory authorities that have broad discretion in their enforcement. If our arrangements with our affiliated radiologists or our customers are found to violate state laws prohibiting the practice of medicine by general business corporations or fee splitting our business financial condition and ability to operate in those states could be adversely affected.

CMS has certain anti-markup rules relating to diagnostic tests paid for by the Medicare program. The anti-markup rules are generally applicable where a physician or other supplier bills for the technical component or professional component of a diagnostic test that was ordered by the physician or other supplier or ordered by a party related to such physician or other supplier through common ownership or control, and the diagnostic test is performed by a physician that does not share a practice with the billing physician or other supplier. If the anti-markup rule applies to a diagnostic test, then the reimbursement provided by Medicare to the billing physician or other supplier for that transaction may be limited. Because our affiliated radiologists do not order diagnostic tests and no party under common control with either us or our affiliated radiologists orders diagnostic tests, we believe that the anti-markup rule does not apply to the professional services our affiliated radiologists perform. However, this rule could be subject to an interpretation that affects the amounts either we or our customers may be reimbursed by Medicare for professional diagnostic interpretations.

Coverage and Reimbursement

Over the past few years, the growth rate of advanced imaging volumes has slowed in part due to additional patient-related cost-sharing programs and an increasing trend of third-party payors intensifying their utilization management efforts, for example, through benefit managers who require prior authorizations to control the growth rate of imaging services generally. We expect that these trends will continue.

By way of example, in the United States, the Protecting Access to Medicare Act of 2014 required CMS, in conjunction with medical specialty societies, to adopt AUC for certain advanced diagnostic imaging services, including MRI, CT, nuclear medicine (including position emission tomography). Under this provision, payment is to be made to the furnishing professional for an applicable advanced diagnostic imaging service only if the claim indicates that the ordering professional consulted a qualified clinical decision support mechanism, as identified by HHS, as to whether the ordered service adheres to the applicable AUC. Applicable settings include physician offices, hospital outpatient departments, including emergency departments, ambulatory surgical centers and independent diagnostic testing facilities. Advanced imaging services ordered by certain physicians identified as having outlier-ordering partners will be subject to prior authorization for applicable imaging services provided to Medicare beneficiaries. In July 2022, CMS announced that the payment penalty phase for the AUC program would not begin on January 1, 2023 even if the public health emergency for COVID-19 ended in 2022 and that it was unable to forecast when the payment penalty phase would begin. The outlier methodology used by CMS will be subject to future notice and comment rulemaking before the prior authorization component is implemented. We cannot predict the full impact of this project.

Third-party payors may impose limits on coverage or reimbursement for diagnostic imaging services, including denying reimbursement for tests that do not follow recommended diagnostic procedures or can only be billed using an unlisted or miscellaneous code. To the extent our customers will depend on third-party payors, unfavorable coding, coverage and reimbursement policies may constrict the profit margins of our provider customers, which may force us to lower our fees to attract and retain customers. If we are required to request new billing codes that more precisely identify and describe our imaging services, coverage is limited or reimbursement rates are inadequate, a healthcare provider might find it financially unattractive to own our diagnostic imaging systems. It is possible that third-party payor coding, coverage and reimbursement policies will affect the need or prices for our products in the future, which could significantly affect our financial performance and our ability to conduct our business.

In addition, as of December 31, 2022, all of our affiliated radiologists were located within the United States and are eligible to submit to Medicare and state Medicaid programs for reimbursement for services performed. Where our affiliated radiologists provide final reads that are reimbursable under these programs, our business model generally provides that we are still paid service fees by our customers who accept reassignment and bear the risk of loss of reimbursement when collecting from payers. As a result, our service fees do not fluctuate or change based solely on changes in Medicare or Medicaid reimbursement levels. Medicare reimbursement rules generally provide that the proper Medicare carrier to pay physicians’ claims is the Medicare carrier for the region in which the physician or practice providing the service is located rather than the Medicare carrier for the region in which the patient receiving the services is located. Many of our affiliated radiologists are located in a Medicare region that is different from the Medicare region in which the patients and treating hospitals are located. It may be necessary for our customers to enroll with additional Medicare carriers to properly submit claims for reimbursement. CMS has stated that for certain interpretation services provided to certain customers, reimbursement will be based upon the location of the interpreting physician, yet that reimbursement will be made by the Medicare carrier for the region in which the patient and facility are located. Whether this policy will be expanded to other types of interpretation services and facilities is unclear.

Healthcare Reform

In the United States and certain foreign jurisdictions, there have been, and we expect there will continue to be, a number of legislative and regulatory changes to the healthcare system. In March 2010, the ACA was signed into law and substantially changed the way healthcare is financed by both governmental and private insurers in the United States. The ACA contains a number of provisions, including those governing enrollment in federal healthcare programs, reimbursement adjustments and fraud and abuse changes. Additionally, the ACA imposed, among other things, a new federal excise tax on the sale of certain medical devices, which, through a series of legislative amendments, was suspended, effective January 1, 2016, and subsequently repealed altogether on December 20, 2019, provided incentives to programs that increase the federal government’s comparative effectiveness research and implemented payment system reforms including a national pilot program on payment bundling to encourage hospitals, physicians and other providers to improve the coordination, quality and efficiency of certain healthcare services through bundled payment models.

Since its enactment, there have been judicial and Congressional challenges to certain aspects of the ACA, and we expect there will be additional challenges and amendments to the ACA in the future. By way of example, in 2017, Congress enacted the TCJA, which eliminated the tax-based shared responsibility payment imposed by the ACA on certain individuals who fail to maintain qualifying health coverage for all or part of a year that is commonly referred to as the “individual mandate.” On December 14, 2018, a Texas U.S. District Court Judge (the “Texas District Court Judge”) ruled that the individual mandate is a critical and inseverable feature of the ACA, and therefore, because it was repealed as part of the TCJA, the remaining provisions of the ACA are invalid as well. On June 17, 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court held that state and individual plaintiffs did not have standing to challenge the individual mandate provision of the ACA; in so holding, the Supreme Court did not consider larger constitutional questions about the validity of this provision or the validity of the ACA in its entirety. Another case challenging the ACA’s requirement that private insurers cover certain preventative services is currently pending before the Texas District Court Judge. The Texas District Court Judge struck down this requirement with immediate nationwide effect on March 30, 2023, and the U.S. government has appealed the decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. It is unclear how these decisions and appeals, future decisions, subsequent appeals, and other efforts to repeal and replace the ACA will impact the ACA.

Other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted in the United States since the ACA was enacted, including aggregate reductions of Medicare payments to providers of 2% per fiscal year, which was temporarily suspended from May 1, 2020 through March 31, 2022, followed by a 1% reduction in effect from April 2022 through June 2022 with the full 2% reduction resuming thereafter, and reduced payments to several types of Medicare providers. We believe the overall escalating cost of medical products and services being paid for by the government and private health insurance has led to, and will continue to lead to, increased pressures on the healthcare and medical device industry to reduce the costs of products and services.

Data Privacy and Security

Medical device companies may be subject to U.S. federal and state and foreign health information privacy, security and data breach notification laws, which may govern the collection, use, disclosure and protection of health-related and other personal information. In the United States, HIPAA imposes privacy, security and breach reporting obligations with respect to individually identifiable health information upon “covered entities” (health plans, health care clearinghouses and certain health care providers), and their respective business associates, individuals or entities that create, receive, maintain or transmit protected health information in connection with providing a service for or on behalf of a covered entity. HIPAA and its respective implementing regulations, including the final omnibus rule published on January 25, 2013, impose specified requirements relating to the privacy, security and transmission of individually identifiable health information. HIPAA mandates the reporting of certain breaches of health information to HHS, affected individuals, and if the breach is large enough, the media. Entities that are found to be in violation of HIPAA as the result of a breach of unsecured protected health information (“PHI”), a complaint about privacy practices or an audit by HHS, may be subject to significant civil, criminal and administrative fines and penalties and/or additional reporting and oversight obligations if required to enter into a resolution agreement and corrective action plan with HHS to settle allegations of HIPAA non-compliance. The Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act also increased the civil and criminal penalties that may be imposed against covered entities, business associates and possibly other persons, and gave state attorneys general new authority to file civil actions for damages or injunctions in federal courts to enforce the federal HIPAA laws and seek attorney’s fees and costs associated with pursuing federal civil actions.

Even when HIPAA does not apply, according to the Federal Trade Commission or the FTC, failing to take appropriate steps to keep consumers’ personal information secure constitutes unfair acts or practices in or affecting commerce in violation of Section 5(a) of the Federal Trade Commission Act, 15 U.S.C § 45(a). The FTC expects a company’s data security measures to be reasonable and appropriate in light of the sensitivity and volume of consumer information it holds, the size and complexity of its business, and the cost of available tools to improve security and reduce vulnerabilities. Individually identifiable health information is considered sensitive data that merits stronger safeguards. The FTC’s guidance for appropriately securing consumers’ personal information is similar to what is required by the HIPAA Security Rule.

Another example of recent U.S. data security requirements is FDORA, which, among other provisions, requires developers of certain “cyber devices” to design and implement plans to monitor, identify and address cybersecurity vulnerabilities of those devices and to submit those plans to the FDA as part of every new product application for a cyber device. “Cyber devices” are defined as devices that include software, connect to the internet, and contain any technological features that could be vulnerable to cybersecurity threats. This provision has entered into effect on March 29, 2023, and FDA has indicated that it expects sponsors of cyber devices to begin to comply with these requirements as of October 1, 2023.

In addition, certain state and non-U.S. laws, such as the GDPR, govern the privacy and security of health information in certain circumstances, some of which are more stringent or broader in scope than HIPAA and many of which differ from each other in significant ways and may not have the same effect, thus complicating compliance efforts. Further, “business associates,” defined as independent contractors or agents of covered entities that create, receive, maintain or transmit protected health information in connection with providing a service for or on behalf of a covered entity, are also subject to certain HIPAA privacy and security standards. Failure to comply with these laws, where applicable, can result in the imposition of significant civil and/or criminal penalties and private litigation. For example, California enacted the CCPA, which went into effect January 1, 2020. The CCPA, among other things, creates new data privacy obligations for covered companies and provides new privacy rights to California residents, including the right to opt out of certain disclosures of their information. The CCPA also creates a private right of action with statutory damages for certain data breaches, thereby potentially increasing risks associated with a data breach. Further, the CPRA imposes additional data protection obligations on businesses and service providers, including additional consumer rights processes, limitations on data uses, new audit requirements for higher risk data, and opt outs for certain uses of sensitive data. It also created a new California data protection agency authorized to issue substantive regulations and could result in increased privacy and information security enforcement. The majority of the provisions went into effect on January 1, 2023, and additional compliance investment and potential business process changes may be required. In Europe, the GDPR introduced strict requirements for processing the personal data of individuals within the EEA and the UK as applicable. Companies that must comply with the GDPR face increased compliance obligations and risk, including more robust regulatory enforcement of data protection requirements and potential fines for noncompliance as set out above. The State of Israel has also implemented data protection laws and regulations, including the Israeli Protection of Privacy Law of 1981.

While it is generally the laws of the jurisdiction in which our business is located apply, there is a risk that data protection regulators of other countries may seek jurisdiction over our remotely activities in locations in which we process data of our customers, but do not have an operating entity. Where the local data protection and privacy laws of a jurisdiction apply, we may be required to register our operations in that jurisdiction or make changes to our business so that personal data is only collected and processed in accordance with applicable local law. In addition, because our services are accessible worldwide, certain foreign jurisdictions may claim that we are required to comply with their privacy and data protection laws, including in jurisdictions where we have no local entity, employees or infrastructure. In such cases, we may require additional legal review and resources to ensure compliance with any applicable privacy or data protection laws and regulations. In addition, in many jurisdictions there may in the future be new legislation that may affect our business and require additional legal review. Additionally, if third parties we work with violate applicable laws, regulations, or contractual obligations, such violations may put our users’ data at risk, could result in governmental investigations or enforcement actions, fines, litigation, claims, or public statements against us by consumer advocacy groups or others and could result in significant liability, cause our users to lose trust in us, and otherwise materially and adversely affect our reputation and business. Further, public scrutiny of, or complaints about, technology companies or their data handling or data protection practices, even if unrelated to our business, industry, or operations, may lead to increased scrutiny of technology companies, including us, and may cause government agencies to enact additional regulatory requirements, or to modify their enforcement or investigation activities, which may increase our costs and risks.

Foreign Regulation

As we plan to market and deploy our Nanox System broadly across the globe, we will be subject to regulations applicable to medical and radiation-emitting devices in the jurisdictions in which we operate, which regulations vary among countries. While some countries’ regulations may not impose barriers to marketing and selling our products or only require certain notification, others may require that we obtain the clearance, registration or approval of a specified regulatory body. Process for obtaining such clearance, registration or approvals may involve additional testing and time. Furthermore, complying with foreign regulatory requirements can be expensive and time-consuming, and we will need to seek for regulatory clearances or approvals in each country in which we plan to market our products.

In addition, depending on the country, if we modify our products, we may need to apply for additional regulatory clearances or approvals before we are permitted to sell the modified product. Also, for maintaining our authorizations in a particular country, we will need to continue meeting quality and safety standards required in such country.

Finally, while regulatory clearance or approval by the FDA does not ensure registration, clearance or approval by regulatory authorities in other countries, registration or regulatory clearance or approval in one country, or denial thereof, may have effects on the regulatory process in others.

Legal Proceedings

From time to time, we may become involved in various lawsuits and legal proceedings which arise in the ordinary course of business. However, litigation is subject to inherent uncertainties, and an adverse result in these or other matters may arise from time to time that may harm our business.

In September 2020, two securities class action complaints were filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York against the Company and certain then-current officers and a director, which were subsequently consolidated and captioned as White v. Nano-X Imaging Ltd. et al., Case No. 1:20-cv-04355 (the “White Action”), alleging violations of securities laws on behalf of all persons and entities that purchased or otherwise acquired the Company’s publicly traded securities between August 21, 2020 and September 15, 2020, and seeking unspecified damages. In addition, on October 5, 2021, a class action complaint was filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York against the Company and certain of its officers, captioned McLaughlin v. Nano-X Imaging Ltd. et al., Case No. 1:21-cv-05517 (the “McLaughlin Action”). The amended complaint in that action, filed on April 12, 2022, alleges that defendants violated the federal securities laws in connection with certain disclosures concerning the cost of the Nanox.ARC system as well as the comparison of the Nanox.ARC to CT scanners, among other allegations. The Lead Plaintiff in the McLaughlin Action seeks to represent a class of investors who purchased the Company’s publicly-traded securities between August 21, 2020 and November 17, 2021. The Company entered into a term sheet on April 28, 2023, to settle all shareholder class action litigation related to the McLaughlin Action and the consolidated White Action. On June 2, 2023, the Company entered into a formal settlement agreement to settle the McLaughlin Action and the consolidated White Action for $8 million. On October 31, 2023, Magistrate Judge Kuo preliminarily approved the settlement and on February 15, 2024, held a final approval hearing, during which Judge Kuo requested that the parties submit updated settlement claims information by letter on or before February 29, 2024 for incorporation into a final report and recommendation. The settlement claims information letter was submitted on February 29, 2024, and on April 17, 2024, Magistrate Judge Kuo issued a report and recommendation recommending that Judge Kovner grant the motion for final approval of the settlement. Due to the settlement agreement, during December, 2023 the Company deposited $5 million and the D&O insurance carrier deposited $3 million in a trust account in connection with the settlement agreement. The settlement remains subject to court approval among other conditions.

The Division of Enforcement of the U.S. Securities & Exchange Commission (the “SEC” or the “Commission”) conducted an investigation to determine whether there had been any violations of the federal securities laws, relating to the development cost of the Company’s Nanox.ARC prototypes, as well as the Company’s estimate for the cost of assembling the final Nanox.ARC product at scale, among other things. The Company and Ran Poliakine, former Chairman of the Board of Directors of the Company, have reached final agreements with the SEC staff to settle this matter, which agreements were approved by the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York in October 2023. The Company paid a civil penalty in the amount of $650,000 and was permanently enjoined from violating Section 17(a)(2) of the Securities Act of 1933 (the “Securities Act”) and Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”) and Rules 12b-20 and 13a-1 thereunder. Mr. Poliakine paid disgorgement of $240,000, together with prejudgment interest of $26,836.39, paid a civil penalty of $150,000, and was permanently enjoined from violating Section 17(a)(2) of the Securities Act and aiding and abetting any violation of Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act and Rules 12b-20 and 13a-1 thereunder.

On October 28, 2021, a complaint was filed in the United States District Court for the Central District of California against the Company, the Company’s recently-formed Delaware subsidiary and Nanox Gibraltar PLC (“Gibraltar Entity”) from which the Company received certain assets, as well as Mr. Ran Poliakine and certain other unidentified parties, alleging several causes of action including breach of a consulting agreement between the plaintiff and Gibraltar Entity that was entered into in 2015. The plaintiff demanded payment of unpaid consulting fees from Gibraltar Entity in the amount of approximately $1 million and approximately $29.5 million from the Company relating to his claimed entitlement to warrants in Gibraltar Entity. On February 15, 2022, the Company moved to dismiss the complaint on the grounds, among others, that it was not a party to the agreement with the plaintiff, and it is not Gibraltar Entity’s legal successor for any liabilities that Gibraltar Entity may owe to the plaintiff. On June 4, 2022, the Court granted the motion to dismiss with leave to amend. The plaintiff did not amend the complaint, and on July 20, 2022, the Court entered judgment in the Company’s favor (the “First Gibraltar Judgment”).

On May 1, 2023, the Company received a notice alleging several causes of action, including breach of a consulting agreement between the plaintiff and Gibraltar Entity that was entered into in 2015. The plaintiff’s demand from the Company is for the payment of approximately $1.26 million for unpaid consulting fees from the Gibraltar Entity and approximately $25 million connection with his claimed entitlement to securities in the Gibraltar Entity.

On or about December 21, 2023, a claim was filed in Israel against the Company, the Gibraltar Entity, and the late Mr. Ran Poliakine, based on allegations previously dismissed in the First Gibraltar Judgment. The Company reiterates its strong denial of the plaintiff’s baseless claims and emphasizes that the Company was never a party to the consulting agreement with the plaintiff. In addition, the Company is not responsible for any potential liabilities of Gibraltar Entity, which is a separate legal entity. The Company is currently reviewing and analyzing the claim filed in Israel and will take all necessary steps to vigorously defend itself against these unfounded allegations. The Company remains confident in its legal position and is committed to protecting its shareholders and stakeholders. On April 5, 2024, the Gibraltar Entity filed an amended claim and a request for an anti-suit injunction (“ASI”) in Gibraltar against the plaintiff. A hearing for the ASI request has been scheduled for September 25, 2024. On April 17, 2024, the Company filed a request with the Israeli court to postpone the deadline for submitting its response to the claim until the Gibraltar court issues its decision on the ASI request. The court ordered the plaintiff to respond to the request by May 12, 2024.

On October 5, 2022, a complaint was filed in the Court of Common Pleas of Washington County, Pennsylvania against several defendants, including Dr. Michael Yuz and USARAD, alleging medical negligence due to the failure to properly diagnose metastatic breast cancer. Dr Yuz’s only involvement in the case was on July 18, 2017, prior to our acquisition of USARAD, when he reviewed and interpreted an imaging study, identified a lesion and referred for an additional imaging. The only claim against USARAD is for vicarious liability based on Dr. Yuz’s involvement, as an employee of USARAD. We intend to vigorously defend this matter.

NANO-X IMAGING LTD, an Israeli Company (“Nanox IL”), was incorporated on December 20, 2018 and commenced its operations on September 3, 2019.

On September 19, 2019, Nanox IL established Nanox Imaging Inc. (“Nanox Japan”), a wholly owned subsidiary in Japan.

On September 25, 2020, Nanox IL established Nano-X Korea Inc. (“Nanox Korea”), a wholly owned subsidiary in Korea.

On September 13, 2021, Nanox IL established Nano-X Imaging Inc (“Nanox Inc.”), a wholly owned Delaware subsidiary. On November 2, 2021, Nanox Inc. completed the acquisition of 100% of the shares of USARAD Holdings, Inc. (“USARAD”), a Delaware corporation.

On September 30, 2021, Nanox Inc. established a new wholly-owned Delaware subsidiary, Nano-X MDW Inc, which owns the platform and other assets purchased by us from MDWEB, LLC on November 3, 2021.

On November 4, 2021, Nanox IL purchased all the shares of Nano-X AI Ltd. (“Nanox AI”), an Israeli company formerly named Zebra Medical Vision Ltd. Nanox AI has a wholly owned Delaware subsidiary named Nanox-X AI Inc.

On January 3, 2024, Nanox IL established Nanox Impact Inc (“Nanox Impact”), a wholly owned Delaware subsidiary.

Our principal executive offices are located in a leased facility in Petach Tikva, Israel.

In July 19, 2023, we signed a new agreement to lease 3,080 square meters of office space in Petach Tikva, Israel, for a term of 60 months with an option for extension of additional 60 months.

In December 2023, we signed an amendment to previous lease agreement to extend the lease by 165 square meters of office space in Neve Ilan, Israel, until December 2024.

Nanox Inc. leases office space of approximately 2,300 square feet in Fort Lee, New Jersey. The monthly rent payment for this agreement is approximately $6,000.

In December 2020, we purchased approximately 11,889 square meters of land in Yongin, Geonggi province, Korea, on which we built our fabrication facility for approximately $6.2 million, which is operational.

Nanox AI leases approximately 841 square meters of office space under an operating lease agreement that expires on November 30, 2024. The monthly rent payment for this agreement is approximately $19,000.

USARAD leases approximately 6,000 square feet in Oakland Park, Broward County, Florida, under a lease agreement that expires on December 31, 2027. The monthly rent payment for this agreement is approximately $12,000.

Item 4A. Unresolved Staff Comments

Not applicable.

Item 5. Operating and Financial Review and Prospects

The following discussion and analysis of our financial condition and results of operations should be read in conjunction with our audited consolidated financial statements and the related notes included elsewhere in this annual report on Form 20-F. This discussion contains forward-looking statements based upon current expectations that involve risks and uncertainties. Our actual results may differ materially from those anticipated in these forward-looking statements as a result of various factors, including those discussed in the section titled “Item 3. Key Information—D. Risk Factors” and in other parts of this annual report on Form 20-F. Our consolidated financial statements have been prepared in accordance with U.S. GAAP. The functional currency of NANO-X IMAGING LTD is the U.S. dollar.

A. Operating Results

Overview

Nanox is focused on applying its proprietary medical imaging technology and solutions to make diagnostic medicine more accessible and affordable across the globe. Nanox’s vision is to increase access, reduce costs and enhance the efficiency of routine medical imaging technology and processes, in order to improve early detection and treatment, which Nanox believes is key to helping people achieve better health outcomes, and, ultimately, to save lives. The Nanox ecosystem includes Nanox.ARC— a multi-source Digital Tomosynthesis system that is cost-effective and user-friendly; an AI-based suite of algorithms that augment the readings of routine CT imaging to highlight early signs often related to chronic disease (Nanox AI); a cloud-based infrastructure (Nanox.CLOUD); and a proprietary decentralized marketplace, through Nanox’s subsidiary, USARAD Holdings Inc., that provides remote access to radiology and cardiology experts; and a comprehensive teleradiology services platform (Nanox.MARKETPLACE). Together, Nanox’s products and services create a worldwide, innovative and comprehensive solution that connects medical imaging solutions, from scan to diagnosis.

Following receipt of clearance from the FDA, and if cleared by the requisite regulatory authorities in other jurisdictions, we plan to market and deploy the Nanox System broadly across the globe at a substantially lower cost compared to currently available medical imaging systems, such as CT. We believe that, if cleared by the requisite regulatory authorities, as the Nanox.ARC (including the Nanox.CLOUD) was cleared for marketing by the FDA, our technology’s relatively low cost will enable us to increase accessibility and affordability of early-detection medical imaging systems globally, substantially reduce wait-times for imaging results and increase early detection rates compared to currently employed imaging process protocol.

On April 28, 2023, the Company received clearance from the FDA to market the Nanox.ARC (including the Nanox.CLOUD) as a stationary X-ray system intended to produce tomographic images of the human musculoskeletal system adjunctive to conventional radiography, on adult patients. This device is intended to be used in professional healthcare facilities or radiological environments, such as hospitals, clinics, imaging centers and other medical practices by trained radiographers, radiologists and physicians. The current FDA-cleared version of the Nanox.ARC is not intended for mammographic, angiographic, cardiac, pulmonary, intra-abdominal, intra-cranial, interventional, or fluoroscopic applications, or for imaging pediatric or neonatal patients.

We have devoted substantially all of our financial resources to acquiring the base technology for our X-ray source and related know-how, our AI solutions and our teleradiology services, conducting research and development activities, organizing and staffing our company, developing our business plan, securing related intellectual property rights and raising capital. Historically, we have funded our operations primarily with proceeds from the sale of our ordinary shares and warrants (after September 3, 2019) and those of our predecessor company (prior to September 3, 2019). During the years ended December 31, 2023, 2022 and 2021, we received net cash proceeds of $28.0 million, $0.9 million and $3.6 million, respectively, from the sales of our ordinary shares, warrants and options. In the year ended December 31, 2021, we began to generate revenues through the sale of teleradiology services and the sale of AI solutions, following the completion of the merger with Zebra, renamed Nanox AI Ltd., and the acquisitions of USARAD and the assets of MDWEB in November 2021 and in the year ended December 31, 2021, we began to generate revenues through the sale of and deployment of our imaging systems which stems from the sale and deployment of Nanox.CONNECT systems in Africa.

We have incurred significant operating losses since our inception. Our ability to achieve profitability depends on the successful development and commercialization of our technology and our products. We incurred net losses of $60.8 million, $113.2 million, and $61.8 million for the years ended December 31, 2023, 2022 and 2021, respectively. As of December 31, 2023 and 2022, we had an accumulated deficit of $320.2 million and $259.5 million, respectively. We expect to continue to incur significant expenses for at least the next several years as we advance the Nanox System through further development, regulatory approval and commercial deployment. We expect to incur significant capital expenditures and commercialization expenses related to product manufacturing, marketing, sales, regulation, distribution and support. In addition, we continue to incur additional costs associated with operating as a public company, including significant legal, accounting, investor relations and other expenses.

Our goal is to jumpstart the MSaaS-based medical imaging market by producing and deploying an initial wave of Nanox System units. We expect to incur significant expenses for the manufacturing, installation, deployment, repairs, and maintenance of the Nanox System. As a result, we may need substantial funding to support our continuing operations and pursue our business strategy before we can generate significant revenues. Until such time as we can generate significant revenue from sales of services, we expect to finance our operations through the sale of equity, debt financings or other capital sources, including collaborations, strategic partnerships or marketing, distribution or licensing arrangements with third parties. We may be unable to raise additional funds or enter into such other agreements or arrangements when needed on favorable terms, or at all. If we fail to raise capital or enter into such agreements as and when needed, we may have to significantly delay, scale back or discontinue the development and commercialization of one or more of our systems and products or delay our pursuit of potential in-licenses or acquisitions.

As of December 31, 2023, we had marketable securities, restricted deposits, cash and cash equivalents of $82.8 million. We believe that our cash on hand, cash equivalents and marketable securities will enable us to fund our operating expenses and capital expenditure requirements for at least the next twelve months from the date of issuance of the financial statements. We have based this estimate on assumptions that may prove to be wrong, and we could exhaust our capital resources sooner than we expect. See “Item 5. Operating and Financial Review and Prospects—B. Liquidity and Capital Resources.”

Recent Developments

During 2023, we issued (i) 286,141 ordinary shares upon the exercise of options and RSUs and (ii) an additional 255,392 ordinary shares to the former stockholders of USARAD, in consideration for the achievement of certain milestones in connection with the first earn out period, as defined in the USARAD Stock Purchase Agreement and a global settlement of both parties’ performance obligations under the USARAD Stock Purchase Agreement; and (iii) an additional 2,142,858 of the Company’s ordinary shares, together with warrants to purchase up to 2,142,858 ordinary shares at a combined purchase price of $14.00 per share. The net proceeds of the offering were approximately $27.1 million, excluding any proceeds that may be received upon the exercise of the warrants, after deducting placement agent fees and other offering expenses payable by the Company. The warrants have an exercise price of $19.00 per share, are exercisable immediately upon issuance and will expire five years from issuance. The Company accounted for the issued warrants as an equity in accordance with ASC 480-10, Accounting for Certain Financial Instruments with Characteristics of both Liabilities and Equity.

Components of Our Results of Operations

Revenue

We began to generate revenues in year ended December 31, 2021, through the sale of teleradiology services and the sale of AI solutions, following the completion of the merger with Nanox AI, and the acquisitions of USARAD and the assets of MDWEB in November 2021. The majority of our revenues are derived from our teleradiology services, which consist primarily of fees received from various payors based on established billing rates, and also of fees from hospitals and healthcare providers. We recognize revenue in the period in which performance obligations are satisfied by providing services to our customers, and record the amount of revenue that reflects the consideration that we expect to receive in exchange for those services. During 2023, we began to generate revenue from sales of the Nanox.CONNECT systems.

Cost of Revenue

Cost of the sale of teleradiology services mainly consists of the cost of radiologists and the cost of picture archiving and communication software (a medical imaging technology used to securely store and digitally transmit electronic images and clinical reports). In 2023, the cost of radiologists and the cost of picture archiving and communication software was $8.0 million. In 2022, the cost of radiologists and the cost of picture archiving and communication software was $6.9 million. The cost of the sale of AI solutions mainly consists of the cost of labor and amortization of intangible assets. In 2023, the cost of revenue through the sale of AI solutions consisted mainly of salaries and wages expense in the amount of $0.3 million, and amortization of intangible assets of $8.0 million. In 2022, the cost of revenue through the sale of AI solutions consisted mainly of salaries and wages expense in the amount of $0.5 million, and amortization of intangible assets of $8.0 million. In 2021, the cost of revenue through the sale of AI solutions consisted mainly of salaries and wages expense in the amount of $0.4 million and amortization of intangible assets of $1.3 million. The amortization of intangible assets is the periodic amortization expense with regards to the acquisition of the shares of Nanox AI since the date of acquisition through the year end.

Operating Expenses

Research and Development Expenses

Research and development expenses consist primarily of costs incurred in connection with the research and development of our products. These expenses include:

We recognize external development costs based on an evaluation of the progress to completion of specific tasks using information provided to us by our suppliers and service providers. Upfront payments, milestone payments (other than those deemed contingent consideration in a business combination) and annual maintenance fees under license agreements are expensed in the period in which they are incurred.