Item 1A. Risk Factors
You should carefully consider the risks and uncertainties described below, as well as the other information in this Annual Report and in our other public filings, including in the section titled “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and in our financial statements and the related notes appearing elsewhere in this Annual Report and in our other public filings, which could materially affect our business, financial condition or future results. The risks described below are not the only risks that we face. The occurrence of any of the following risks, or of additional risks and uncertainties not presently known to us or that we currently believe to be immaterial, could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. We may disclose changes to risk factors or additional risk factors from time to time in our future filings with the SEC.
Business and Industry Risk Factors
We have a history of net losses, and we expect to incur additional losses in the foreseeable future.
We have incurred net losses since inception, and we expect to incur additional losses in the foreseeable future. For the years ended December 31, 2025 and December 31, 2024, we incurred net losses of $25.3 million and $19.9 million, respectively. As of December 31, 2025 we had an accumulated deficit of $155.7 million. Our accumulated deficit reflects significant front-end spending and investment related to both completed and ongoing key operational milestones, including: (i) the initial and continued development of CapsoCam Plus and CapsoCloud, our cloud-based platform; (ii) development of our next pipeline capsule endoscope, CapsoCam Colon; (iii) initial development and ongoing improvements to our AI assisted pathology detection tools and technologies; and (iv) funding of completed and ongoing related clinical and other studies. As we execute on our business strategy to grow our business and revenues (including seeking FDA 510(k) clearance for CapsoCam Colon), we will continue to incur development costs and clinical study expenses and will make additional investments. Additionally, as a public company, we will incur significant legal, accounting and other expenses that we did not incur as a private company. Accordingly, we expect to continue to incur losses for at least the near-term and we may never or, if we do , sustain . Our to and sustain in the future would make it more to finance our business and our strategic objectives, which would have a material effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
Our audited financial statements for the years ended December 31, 2025 and December 31, 2024 include a footnote raising substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a “going concern” and we will likely need to raise additional financing to fund our business and revenue growth plans.
Our 2025 and 2024 audited financial statements include a footnote raising substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern. We have funded our historical net losses and negative cash flows through the issuance of convertible preferred stock and IPO common stock. As of December 31, 2024, we had cash of approximately $9.3 million, including $20.4 million raised in 2023 and $15.0 million raised in 2024 through the issuance of preferred stock to our investors. As of December 31, 2025, we had cash of approximately $10.1 million, including $23.4 million raised through the IPO.
Our ability to continue as a going concern depends on a number of factors including whether we can successfully implement our business and revenue growth plans to generate sufficient cash flow from operating activities, and our ability to raise as needed other equity financing or loan facilities. We closed a private placement on March 16, 2026, and raised $14.0 million from certain accredited investors. We will likely need to undertake additional capital-raising activities before the year-end of 2026 to fund our operations and planned clinical studies as contemplated by our growth strategy, such as the second arm pivotal study for the second generation CapsoCam Colon capsule and the planned study for early pancreatic cancer detection using the CapsoCam UGI system. There is no certainty regarding the occurrence, magnitude, or timing of these capital-raising activities. If we raise additional funds through the sale of equity, convertible debt, or other equity-linked securities, our stockholders’ ownership will be diluted. The inability to secure adequate financing on favorable terms, or at all, could have a material adverse effect on our financial position, results of operations, cash flows, and ability to achieve our intended business objectives. See the risk factor titled “We may require additional capital to support business growth, and this capital might not be available on terms to us, or at all, and may dilute existing stockholders’ ownership of our common stock” below.
Given the substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern, potential investors must exercise caution when evaluating our financial condition, results of operations, and business prospects. Our inability to raise sufficient financing or meet our strategic plans could result in a material adverse effect on our financial position, results of operations, cash flows, and ability to achieve our intended business objectives.
All of our revenues to date have been, and in the near-term will continue to be, generated from CapsoCam Plus related sales for the small bowel; and our ability to grow our small-bowel-related revenue is subject to our ability to successfully and timely execute related elements of our revenue growth strategy.
Near term actions to grow our CapsoCam Plus small-bowel-related revenues include those set forth below. We may be unable to timely and effectively execute these or other activities designed to increase our small-bowel-related revenues.
• Leveraging the patient and provider benefits of CapsoCam Plus capsule endoscopy solution (which includes the associated software products, CapsoCloud and CapsoView) to effectively compete against competitors, such as (i) Medtronic, with its comparatively greater overall brand recognition, financial resources and other competitive advantages; and (ii) the U.S. subsidiary of a non-U.S. (Chinese) competitor who was the first to use AI-driven lesion detection software to support its small bowel capsule endoscopy system.
• Further penetrating the small bowel market in the U.S. and internationally, including by (i) increasing the size and effectiveness of our U.S. and international sales teams; (ii) pursuing the pediatric market (with children comprising a significant portion of the Crohn’s disease patient population) following FDA clearance in December 2024 for this newly indicated patient population; (iii) introducing complementary products such as our (a) capsule delivery device with full commercialization expected in the fourth quarter of 2026 and (b) patency capsule (for verifying a capsule endoscope can pass through the bowel without retention prior to an exam) with tentative FDA 510(k) submission planned by the end of the second quarter of 2026; and (iv) facilitating increased telemedicine adoption following FDA clearance in December 2024 of remote ingestion of our CapsoCam Plus, allowing patients to ingest our capsules in the comfort of their own homes with remote provider supervision.
• Incorporating our AI assisted pathology detection technology into our CapsoCam Plus capsule. We conducted related clinical studies to demonstrate the benefits of our AI technology as incorporated into CapsoCam Plus and submitted the related 510(k) application to the FDA in December 2025. We are targeting the related EU submission in the second quarter of 2026. We anticipate to obtain FDA clearance by the middle of 2026 and EU clearance in the third quarter of 2026 with commercialization planned to begin in US and EU shortly thereafter.
Each of these activities is subject to numerous risks. For example, (i) we may be unable to compete effectively against our competitors; (ii) the introduction of our capsule delivery device and patency capsule may be delayed or these products may not be sufficiently adopted by providers and patients initially or in the longer term; and (iii) we may fail to obtain all required FDA and EU approvals for incorporating our AI assisted pathology detection technology into our CapsoCam Plus solution.
For additional information, see the other risks set forth under this “Risk Factors” section including “We operate in a highly competitive industry, and competitive pressures could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects,” “Our longer term efforts to expand our GI-tract capsule endoscopy solution beyond small bowel and colon pathologies and medical conditions may not succeed,” and “We may face regulatory challenges and delays in obtaining 510(k) clearance for marketing of those CapsoCam capsules incorporating our self-developed AI technology, including our CapsoCam Colon capsule endoscopy solution and CapsoCam Plus capsule endoscopy solution (small bowel).”
CapsoCam Colon is our initial strategic effort to expand revenues for our GI-tract capsule endoscopy solution beyond small-bowel-related sales; we do not currently expect to generate CapsoCam Colon-related revenues until FDA clearance for the second generation of our CapsoCam Colon solution.
Our CapsoCam Colon capsule endoscopy solution (which includes associated software products, CapsoCloud and CapsoView) is our initial strategic effort to grow our revenues beyond small-bowel-related sales. We do not expect to generate CapsoCam Colon related sales in the U.S. or internationally until after (i) obtaining initial FDA 510(k) or EU clearance, as applicable, for our second generation of our CapsoCam Colon capsule for use by the indicated patients (who are a subset of the colorectal cancer screening and surveillance population) and (ii) satisfying the related conditions for obtaining these clearances.
The second generation of our CapsoCam Colon solution incorporates our AI assisted pathology detection technology. The second-generation product will incorporate improvements—such as a new lens and illumination optics with an increased field of view and improved image quality—designed to increase the accuracy (measured in terms of polyp-detection sensitivity and specificity) and benefits of using our CapsoCam Colon solution to visualize the colon and detect and measure polyps. We plan to focus our regulatory efforts on first obtaining U.S. FDA clearance followed by obtaining EU clearance. We plan to use the clinical results of the second arm of our pivotal study to support submission to the FDA of a 510(k) application in the third quarter of 2026. FDA review of our 510(k) submissions may be delayed and we may not receive 510(k) clearances from the FDA on a timely basis or at all. Staff reductions in the FDA office charged with regulating devices may cause delay. Related risks with respect to, among other things, receiving requisite regulatory clearances and the timing thereof and commercializing our CapsoCam Colon capsule endoscopy solution are described further below in these “Risk Factors.”
Broad adoption of our CapsoCam Colon solution (once cleared) and growing related revenues depend on, among other things, expanding beyond CapsoCam Colon’s initial indicated patient population, increasing the accuracy of our initial CapsoCam Colon solution, and achieving and maintaining a satisfactory successful completion rate for capsule endoscopies using our CapsoCam Colon solution; and we may fail to successfully and timely execute related elements of our CapsoCam Colon adoption and revenue growth strategy.
Broader adoption of our CapsoCam Colon capsule endoscopy solution by providers and patients (once cleared) and growing related revenues would involve, among other things:
• increasing the indicated patient population for our CapsoCam Colon solution. The initial indicated patient population is a subset of the colorectal cancer screening and surveillance populations. More specifically, GI patients with (i) major risks for colonoscopy or moderate sedation coupled with evidence of GI bleeding of lower GI origin and (ii) an incomplete colonoscopy with adequate bowel preparation. As part of seeking FDA clearance for the planned second generation of our CapsoCam Colon solution, we plan to seek FDA clearance to remove the GI bleeding requirement. Successful removal of the GI bleeding requirement would significantly increase CapsoCam Colon’s addressable market. There is no assurance that the FDA will permit this request or any future request to expand the indicated patient population for our CapsoCam Colon solution on a timely basis or at all. Any such request would involve significant effort and require, among other things, related regulatory submissions and our conducting non-clinical and clinical studies to generate data and evidence to support the request;
• continued enhancements and improvements to our CapsoCam Colon solution to increase its accuracy (measured in terms of polyp-detection sensitivity and specificity) and benefits of using CapsoCam Colon to visualize the colon and detect and measure polyps. Our success in implementing these enhancements and improvements (including obtaining related FDA 510(k) and EU clearances) is critical to (i) our initial and ongoing commercialization efforts (including efforts to increase provider and patient acceptance of our solution); (ii) our ability to increase CapsoCam Colon’s indicated patient populations; and (iii) consequently, increasing that portion of the colorectal cancer screening, surveillance, and diagnostic patient populations for which our CapsoCam Colon may be used. We may be unable to successfully make continued enhancements and improvements to sufficiently increase the accuracy and benefits of using our CapsoCam Colon system on a timely basis or at all; and
• achieving and maintaining a satisfactory and successful examination completion rate for capsule endoscopy using CapsoCam Colon. A successful completion rate for CapsoCam Colon endoscopies much lower than that for traditional colonoscopies may (i) limit the patient population for whom CapsoCam Colon is deemed appropriate; (ii) limit its acceptance by providers and patients; and (iii) result in an unacceptable number of patients requiring a follow-on colonoscopy or other diagnostic test to confirm that they lack significant colon polyps or do not have cancer. A successful colon capsule endoscopy involves successful imaging of either (i) a patient’s entire colon without detecting significant polyps or (ii) a sufficient portion of the patient’s colon to identify the presence of one or more significant
polyps (i.e., indicating preventative or treatment driven colonoscopy is recommended). Capsule colonoscopy procedures are unsuccessful most often due to inadequate bowel preparation and/or slow capsule transit through the colon. CapsoCam Colon’s successful completion rate (as demonstrated in our pivotal study) is supported by a physical design that encourages timely transit the GI-tract and a battery lifetime that is currently twice the competition’s. However, the bowel preparation, which is similar to that used for colonoscopy, produces a level of cleansing that is patient specific, and capsule endoscopy does not afford an opportunity, as colonoscopy does, for targeted additional cleansing by the physician during the exam. Although we are positioned to benefit from improvements in bowel preparation medications on the market, these developments are outside our business and difficult to predict.
We may be unable to timely and effectively drive broad provider and patient adoption of our CapsoCam Colon solution (once cleared) and grow related revenue. Each of the above activities is subject to numerous risks described above or elsewhere in these “Risk Factors.”
Our longer term efforts to expand our GI-tract capsule endoscopy solutions beyond small bowel and colon pathologies and medical conditions may not succeed.
We believe our CapsoCam Plus (small bowel) and CapsoCam Colon solutions, incorporating our panoramic imaging solution, can be adapted to address new GI medical indications. In connection with our efforts to address pancreatic cancer, we submitted an FDA “Breakthrough Device Designation” for our capsule endoscopy solution on November 6, 2025. A response from FDA in January 2026 determined that the CapsoCam UGI does allow for visualization of the papilla and its abnormalities, for both pre-cancerous and cancerous lesions. Due to the fact that the device does not specifically define diagnostic criteria, the application was not approved. The Company expects to resubmit the Breakthrough Device Designation application following the study, when additional data is available. The breakthrough designation is a part of the on-going project, potentially supplementing the regulatory pathway and approval for early pancreas cancer detection. However, additional research and studies to collect data may delay our anticipated timeline for obtaining the regulatory clearance (including obtaining the Breakthrough Device Designation) and may result in an increase in our research and development expenditures that exceed our current expectations. Starting with a planned study, we will build on established scientific literature and work with opinion leaders (including on Societies in pancreatobiliary field) to define malignancy diagnosis with the device. We expect that the study will start in the second quarter of 2026, and enroll approximately 90 patients using the CapsoCam UGI system to define diagnosis criteria. However, there can be no assurance that our reshaped strategy will be . A Device Designation prioritizes a device in the FDA’s review queue for all future regulatory submissions and accelerates communications (i.e., negotiations and feedback) with the FDA, thereby expediting the marketing application process. However, our proposed capsule endoscopy solution may not meet the eligibility requirements for this designation and, even if a Device Designation is received, it may not receive the FDA authorization required to market the proposed capsule endoscopy solution.
We face significant competition in the capsule endoscopy market for our current and planned medical conditions. Our success in expanding our capsule endoscopy solution is contingent upon our ability to execute on our related strategies, differentiate our technology with initial or improved product accuracy (such as sensitivity and specificity) and features, and secure acceptance in the GI medical community. Any failure in these areas could significantly impede our growth prospects and adversely affect our financial performance. There is no assurance that our efforts will yield successful outcomes in addressing pancreatic cancer, esophageal medical conditions or other targeted medical conditions.
Any failure or defect in our GI-tract capsule endoscopy solution could harm our reputation, expose us to liability, and reduce our sales.
Our GI-tract capsule endoscopy solution comprises our CapsoCam capsules and the associated software (CapsoCloud and CapsoView), including their related components. We may encounter technical, operational, or regulatory challenges or limitations in developing, testing, validating, or implementing improvements to our GI-tract capsule endoscopy solution, which could delay or prevent us from achieving our desired outcomes.
Moreover, related components (including the lens module, image sensor, processor and storage module) and incorporated AI technology may fail or malfunction due to defects, errors, bugs, viruses, cyberattacks, or other causes, which could compromise the quality, accuracy, or reliability of our products and the images and analyses they produce. Any failure or defect in our GI-tract capsule endoscopy solution (including capsule components and the associated software, CapsoCloud and CapsoView) could harm our reputation, expose us to liability, and reduce our sales. Any of these outcomes could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, and results of operations.
We face substantial geopolitical and trade risks (including a possible trade war and imposition of tariffs and supply chain interruptions) and natural disaster risks associated with our business operations in Asia (particularly Taiwan and Japan).
We face substantial geopolitical risks due to our business operations in Asia (particularly Taiwan and Japan). Our major assembly manufacturers are located in Taiwan. Most of our single-source suppliers of critical components of our products are located primarily in Taiwan and Japan. Political events, trade and other international disputes, geopolitical tensions, conflict, terrorism, public health issues, industrial accidents and other business interruptions in these areas can have a material adverse effect on our business operations. Restrictions on international trade, such as tariffs and other controls on imports or exports of goods, technology or data, can materially adversely affect our business and supply chain. Restrictive measures can increase the cost of our products, and can require us to take various actions, including changing suppliers and restructuring our supply chain, business relationships and operations. Changing our business and supply chain in accordance with new or changed restrictions on international trade can be expensive, time-consuming and disruptive to our operations. Such restrictions can be announced with little or no advance notice, which can create uncertainty, and we may not be to effectively mitigate all impacts from such measures. For example, an increase in the recent tensions between mainland China and Taiwan and the possibility of and uncertainty caused by or regular military drills in the Taiwan Strait may result in in the overall trading environment, and in turn result in higher transportation cost and in delivery of our products or its components from our single-source suppliers in Taiwan, affecting our business and financial condition. For additional information, see the risk factor titled “Changes to U.S. tariff measures and other political changes in international trade relations implemented by the U.S. could have a material effect on our business, financial condition, cash flows and results of operations” below.
In addition to political risks, Taiwan and Japan are susceptible to natural disasters, such as earthquakes and typhoons, that could disrupt the normal operations of our business and adversely affect earnings. There can be no assurance that future natural disasters will not occur and result in major damages to our component suppliers and assembly manufacturers (many of whom are single-source and located in Taiwan and Japan), which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
We may face expansion risks when expanding in existing and entering into new foreign markets.
Our growth strategy includes increasing our international revenues and potential entry into new international markets (including through qualified exclusive distributors in targeted regions). In the years ended December 31, 2025 and 2024, international sales accounted for approximately 21% and 23% of our revenue, respectively. Our largest international shipping destinations in 2025 include France, Germany and Colombia. Some of our existing and new international markets may be highly regulated and competitive. However, we may face significant challenges and risks in expanding in existing and entering into new international markets (including risks related to expanding our market share and customer base), such as the following:
The need to grow our sales and marketing team (including potentially through qualified distributors) in these markets.
• The need to comply with complex and evolving regulatory requirements, quality standards, and post-market surveillance obligations, which may entail significant time, cost, and resources, and may subject us to regulatory actions, penalties, or product recalls if we fail to meet them.
• The need to compete with established and emerging players in the capsule endoscopy market, which may have greater financial capabilities, brand recognition, market access, distribution networks, or technological capabilities, and which may offer lower prices, superior features, or better customer service.
• The need to secure adequate reimbursement and coverage policies from public and private payers, which may affect the affordability, accessibility, and adoption of our CapsoCam capsule endoscopy solution, and which may be subject to changes, limitations, or uncertainties due to budget constraints, policy reforms, or competitive pressures.
We may fail to successfully execute on our growth strategy, overcome these challenges and risks, or achieve our expected returns on our investments in these foreign markets. In addition, we may encounter unforeseen difficulties or liabilities related to our operations, supply chain, intellectual property, or litigation in these foreign markets. Any of these factors could negatively impact our sales, margins, reputation, or market position in new foreign markets, and as a result, our business, results of operations and financial condition.
The clinical results of our various clinical studies (including those for our CapsoCam Colon capsule) may not be released in any peer-reviewed publications.
On June 10, 2025, we submitted the results of the first arm of our pivotal study for CapsoCam Colon to the FDA as part of an initial 510(k) clearance submission for our “first generation” product. We received responses from the FDA in September 2025. During our meeting with the FDA in December 2025, the FDA raised inquiries on topics including panoramic image processing methodology, and the proposed study design, sample size and primary endpoint for an extended study. Based on our communications with the FDA, we have decided not to further pursue the first generation CapsoCam Colon capsule submission and approval, and to prioritize our resources for the development of our second generation CapsoCam Colon capsule, featuring improved imaging quality and increased field of review with use of AI and better lens.
From time to time, we may publicly disclose interim, top-line or preliminary data from our pivotal studies, which are based on a preliminary analysis of then-available data, and the results and related findings and conclusions are subject to change following a more comprehensive review of the data related to the pivotal study or additional data collected at a later time. We also make assumptions, estimations, calculations, and conclusions as part of our analyses of data, and we may not have received or had the opportunity to fully and carefully evaluate all data. The data from a study may not be released in any peer-reviewed publication, either initially or in the future. As a result, the interim, top-line, or preliminary results that we report may differ from future results of the same trial, or different conclusions or considerations may qualify such results, once additional data have been received and fully evaluated. The FDA may not accept or agree with our assumptions, estimates, calculations, conclusions, or analyses or may interpret or weigh the importance of data differently, which could impact the value of our study (including our CapsoCam Colon pivotal study), or potential for the regulatory approval or for commercialization.
We do not plan to release the clinical results from our various clinical studies (including the second arm of our CapsoCam Colon clinical study and our planned CapsoCam Plus clinical study (AI)) before submitting, as applicable, the related 510(k) clearance submission to the FDA. Typically, the submission of study results for publication in a peer-reviewed journal occurs after its use for an FDA submission. The initial or future absence of peer-reviewed research could hinder the acceptance of our GI-tract capsule endoscopy solution products within the medical community, potentially affecting its credibility and market adoption.
Furthermore, the results of the utilization of our GI-tract capsule endoscopy solution (including CapsoCam Colon) may not be accepted or replicated by the scientific or medical community, or may be challenged or disputed by our competitors or other third parties. Physicians and third-party payors may be skeptical of new technologies and may require substantial evidence of clinical efficacy and cost-effectiveness before adopting new products. If the results of our research and clinical studies and our sales and marketing activities relating to communication of these results do not convince thought-leading gastroenterologists, guidelines organizations, primary care physicians, third-party payors, and patients that our GI-tract capsule endoscopy solution (including CapsoCam Colon) is reliable, effective, and superior to existing screening methods, we may not achieve the necessary
market acceptance. The publication of negative or inconclusive results, or the emergence of new or conflicting data, could undermine the validity or reliability of our study and our GI-tract capsule endoscopy solution, and could reduce the demand for or acceptance of our CapsoCam capsules by physicians, patients, payors, or other stakeholders. Any of these outcomes could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, and results of operations.
We operate in a highly competitive industry, and competitive pressures could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.
We operate in a highly competitive industry, and competitive pressures could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects. The medical device market, particularly in the area of diagnostic imaging and endoscopic procedures, is characterized by rapid technological advancements and the continuous introduction of new products.
The competition that we face for our small bowel CapsoCam Plus is primarily from traditional enteroscopy procedures performed by trained physicians in hospital or clinical settings and other capsule-based imaging solutions manufactured by companies such as Medtronic, IntroMedic, JinShan and Ankon. Those competitors include well-established companies with significant resources and brand recognition such as Medtronic, that are constantly developing and marketing innovative products that may offer superior features or lower costs. With respect to Medtronic, it also enjoys other competitive advantages including (i) a “first mover advantage” as the first manufacturer of a small bowel capsule endoscopy and a colon capsule endoscopy (as described below); (ii) exclusive supply arrangements (sometimes up to three years) with some of the larger GI practices and hospitals (particularly in the Northeast region of the U.S.) which our sales team also targets; and (iii) greater brand recognition and financial resources.
Notably, one competitor, Ankon (through its affiliate AnX Robotics), has already established a market presence with their FDA-cleared AI product for the small bowel in the U.S. and various other markets outside the U.S. This puts us at a market disadvantage until we can launch our own AI product for the small bowel, subject to FDA clearance which is anticipated to occur by the middle of 2026. The delay in our product launch could result in a loss of market share and reduced revenue opportunities, as potential customers may opt for the already available and proven solutions from our competitors. Additionally, the competitive landscape is further impacted by the pricing strategies of Asia-based capsule endoscopy companies, such as Ankon (China), Jinshan (China) and IntroMedic (South Korea), who are offering their products at lower than average prices. This aggressive pricing approach could pressure us to lower our prices to remain competitive, potentially impacting our profit margins.
The competition that we face for CapsoCam Colon is primarily from (i) procedure-based detection technologies such as optical colonoscopy, flexible sigmoidoscopy and CTC (or “virtual” colonoscopy); (ii) stool- based DNA tests such as Cologuard (initial FDA clearance in 2014); and (iii) other capsule-based imaging solutions like PillCam COLON 2 (initial FDA clearance in 2014). Other sources of competition include (a) common CRC screening tests, such as the fecal occult blood test (“FOBT”) and the fecal immunochemical test (“FIT”), and (b) screening technologies including liquid biopsy tests, such as Epi proColon (FDA approval in 2016) and C-Scan (CE Mark obtained in 2019). Those competitors include well-established companies with significant resources and brand recognition such as Medtronic, that are constantly developing and marketing innovative products that may offer superior features or lower costs. For instance, the Medtronic PillCam COLON 2 is the only U.S. FDA approved colon capsule endoscopy and is prominent in the market outside the U.S.
The combination of these factors could significantly affect our ability to attract and retain customers, thereby adversely impacting our overall business performance and future growth prospects.
Cost-containment efforts of our customers and purchasing groups could have a material adverse effect on our sales and results of operations. Consolidation in the healthcare industry or group purchasing organizations could lead to demands for price concessions, which may affect our ability to sell our products at prices necessary to support our current business strategies.
The cost-containment efforts of our customers and integrated group purchasing organizations (“GPOs”) have a material adverse effect on our sales and results of operations. In the United States, many clinics and hospitals, including some of our customers, are members of the GPOs, which are organizations that leverage the collective purchasing power of their members, such as hospitals, clinics, and other healthcare providers, to negotiate favorable pricing and terms for medical products and services. These entities negotiate pricing arrangements with medical device companies and distributors, offering these negotiated prices to affiliated hospitals and other members. GPOs typically award contracts on a category-by-category basis through a competitive bidding process, soliciting bids from multiple providers to drive down pricing or reduce the number of vendors. Due to the highly competitive nature of these contracting processes, we may face challenges in obtaining new or maintaining existing contract positions with major GPOs. The increasing leverage of the GPOs may reduce market prices for our products, thereby impacting our revenue and margins.
While securing a contract with a GPO can facilitate sales to their members and enhance our ability to meet the stringent requirements set by their members, it does not guarantee any level of sales, as purchases are typically made through individual purchase orders. Even as a sole contracted supplier for a certain product category, members of the GPO are generally free to purchase from other suppliers. Consequently, members of the GPOs may opt for alternative products based on price or quality offered by other companies, potentially leading to a decline in our sales volumes and revenue.
The rising healthcare costs over the past decade have led to numerous cost reform initiatives by legislators, regulators, and third-party payors, triggering a consolidation trend in the healthcare industry to aggregate purchasing power. This trend may result in more requests for pricing concessions in the future. We anticipate that market demand, government regulation, third-party coverage and reimbursement policies, and societal pressures will continue to evolve the healthcare industry, leading to further business consolidations and alliances among our customers. These changes may exert additional downward pressure on the prices of our products, affecting our results of operations and our ability to support our current business strategies.
The effectiveness of our CapsoCam capsules heavily relies on patients adhering to our use protocols. Other companies or institutions may develop and market novel or improved methods that may make our technologies less competitive or obsolete.
The effectiveness of our CapsoCam capsule endoscopy relies on patients adhering to proper dietary restriction and bowel cleansing protocols prior to the screening procedure. Inadequate preparation can result in suboptimal imaging, which may lead to missed screenings and diagnoses or the need for repeat procedures or alternative procedure such as colonoscopy. This dependence on patient compliance introduces a variable that is beyond our direct control, potentially impacting the reliability and accuracy of our diagnostic results. If patients do not follow the prescribed fasting and cleansing regimen, the performance of our CapsoCam capsules may be compromised, leading to decreased diagnostic accuracy and patient dissatisfaction.
The use of our CapsoCam capsule also requires manual retrieval of the capsule by the patient, who must send it back to our download center for data collection and analysis. This manual retrieval process, while designed to be as convenient as possible, may not meet the expectations of all patients and could lead to potential errors as patients are required to diligently monitor their bowel movements to ensure the capsule is retrieved, which may be inconvenient and burdensome for them. The capsules are transported by shipping companies. There have been instances where the shipping company has either lost or damaged the capsules, leading to the loss of critical patient data. This compromises the integrity of the patient data and disrupts the entire procedure.
If other companies or institutions develop or market methods that do not require fasting or bowel cleansing or require less stringent preparation, our products may become less attractive to patients. For example, non-invasive stool-based DNA tests generally requires no specific dietary restrictions or bowel preparation and enables patients to collect a stool sample at home using the provided kit and send it to the lab for analysis. Such test may be more attractive to low-risk or average-risk patients who require more convenient options for GI-tract screening. Also, recent advancements in medical research have opened up new possibilities for early detection and screening of colorectal cancer by leveraging key metabolites and early diagnostic biomarkers. Advances in technology or
alternative screening methods that eliminate or reduce the need for fasting or bowel cleansing could provide a more convenient and patient-friendly option, potentially making our CapsoCam capsules less competitive. Should such alternatives gain acceptance in the market, we may experience a decline in demand for our products, which could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, and results of operations. Additionally, our ability to compete effectively may be further challenged if these new methods are protected by patents or other intellectual property rights that we cannot circumvent.
There are risks associated with use of our CapsoCam capsules, including capsule retention, component failures and aspiration.
Our CapsoCam capsule endoscopy is generally a safe procedure providing non-invasive visualization of the entire small bowel and colon (once cleared). However, there are risks associated with this procedure, including capsule retention, component failures and, in rare cases, aspiration.
For 2025, we recorded a provider complaint rate of approximately 2.5% (based on number of capsules sold in 2025). The bulk of recorded complaints related to patient failure to (i) timely retrieve the capsule following completion of the procedure and (ii) enter the correct serial number or use the correct shipping label when returning the capsule for download. Although small, these failures indicate potential issues with the usability or clarity of instructions provided to patients by providers or us and shipment and inventory management issues. These issues, in turn, can significantly impact customer and patient satisfaction and our reputation and potential sales.
Capsule retention by a patient refers to the capsule getting stuck in the GI tract, which can occur due to various reasons such as strictures, tumors, or inflammatory bowel diseases. We believe the industry retention rate may be as high as 2%. Based on (i) incidences reported to us for all CapsoCam capsule patients in the year ended December 31, 2025, and (ii) total CapsoCam capsules sold by us in 2025 and 2024 retention rate was less than 1/10 of 1%. However, we believe our retention rate is understated due to (i) underreporting by providers and patients and, relatedly, (ii) the fact that most retained capsules are eventually excreted without the need for invasive intervention and medication may be used to encourage this process. In some instances, endoscopic retrieval or surgical intervention may be necessary to remove the retained capsule. Aspiration is rare but potentially fatal where the capsule is accidentally inhaled into the respiratory tract instead of being swallowed into the esophagus. As of the date of this Annual Report, there has been one complaint regarding an aspiration incident involving a CapsoCam capsule, where the capsule went into the patient’s lungs and was later endoscopically removed and placed in the patient’s GI track. The capsule was retrieved, data downloaded and read by the customer.
While we strive to ensure the highest safety standards and patient experience for our CapsoCam capsule, we cannot guarantee that it is entirely free of safety issues, component failures or errors. Despite rigorous testing and quality control measures, unforeseen complications may arise during the use of our GI-tract capsule endoscopy solution. These could include, but are not limited to, adverse reactions, product malfunction, or unforeseen interactions with the patient’s medical condition.
We may need additional capital to execute our business plan, and we may be unable to raise additional capital on acceptable terms.
Executing our business plan will require additional capital. We may need to raise funds to support research and development, and expand our sales and marketing efforts. If we are unable to raise additional capital on acceptable terms, we may not be able to implement our business plan effectively, which could adversely affect our growth prospects and financial condition. Furthermore, market conditions and other factors outside our control could make it difficult to raise capital when needed. If we are unable to secure additional financing, we may have to delay, reduce, or eliminate certain aspects of our business plan, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.
Our existing sales and marketing team may face challenges in selling additional products and features added to our GI-tract capsule endoscopy solution.
We may face unique challenges in leveraging our existing sales channels to sell and market product and service additions to our GI-tract capsule endoscopy solution (including CapsoCam Colon once cleared). For example, the primary difference between small-bowel and colon diagnostic visualization lies in their distinct medical purposes, preparation requirements, and market dynamics. A small bowel capsule endoscopy is typically conducted to diagnose conditions such as OGIB, Crohn’s disease, or small bowel tumors and a different cleansing preparation compared to a colon capsule endoscopy which requires more rigorous bowel preparation. Additionally, the market for colorectal cancer screening is highly competitive, with established products such as traditional colonoscopies, other imaging technologies (mainly CT colonography and to a decreasing extent sigmoidoscopy) and stool-based screening products already in widespread use. These and other procedure and market differences and dynamics will require additional sales force training and may necessitate tailored marketing strategies and sales approaches, which could complicate our efforts to utilize our current sales teams for products beyond small bowel.
The success of our business is substantially dependent upon the efforts of our senior management team and certain other key personnel and our ability to retain these individuals and to attract additional key personnel.
Our success depends in large part on our ability to attract and retain managerial and key personnel, including our senior executive officers and various highly skilled employees. If we were to lose any of our senior management team or these key personnel, we may experience difficulties in competing effectively, developing our technologies, and implementing our business strategies. Competition for desirable personnel is intense, and there can be no assurance that we will be able to attract and retain the necessary staff. The failure to maintain management or to attract sales and key personnel as we move towards the commercialization of our CapsoCam capsules could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition, and results of operations.
Macroeconomic conditions could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.
Macroeconomic conditions, such as high inflationary pressure, potential military conflicts, possible trade wars, introduction of or changes in tariffs or trade barriers, changes to monetary policy, high interest rates, volatile currency exchange rates, credit and debt concerns, decreasing consumer confidence and spending, including capital spending, concerns about the stability and liquidity of certain financial institutions, and global recessions can adversely impact demand for our products, which could negatively impact our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects. Recent macroeconomic conditions have been adversely impacted by geopolitical instability and military hostilities in multiple geographies and monetary and financial uncertainties.
The impacts of these macroeconomic conditions, and the actions taken by governments, central banks, companies, and consumers in response, have resulted in, and may continue to result in, higher inflation in the United States and globally, which is likely, in turn, to lead to an increase in costs and may cause changes in fiscal and monetary policy, including additional increases in interest rates. Other adverse impacts of recent macroeconomic conditions have been, and may continue to be, supply chain constraints, logistics challenges, liquidity concerns in the broader financial services industry, and fluctuations in labor availability. In a higher inflationary environment, we may be unable to raise the prices of our products sufficiently to keep up with the rate of inflation.
Adverse developments affecting the financial services industry could adversely affect our current and projected business operations, financial condition and results of operations.
Adverse developments that affect financial institutions, such as events involving liquidity that are rumored or actual, have in the past and may in the future lead to bank failures and market-wide liquidity problems. We are exposed to concentrations of credit risk through our financial instruments, which primarily include demand deposits held at reputable financial institutions and accounts receivable. These financial instruments are subject
to potential credit risk, as we rely on the financial stability and creditworthiness of these institutions and its customers. While we take measures to mitigate these risks, such as conducting thorough credit evaluations and maintaining relationships with well-established financial institutions, there remains an inherent risk of financial loss if these counterparties fail to meet their obligations.
Additionally, our cash deposits may occasionally exceed the limits insured by the U.S. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. This situation can arise during periods of high cash flow or when large payments are received. When cash deposits exceed FDIC insurance limits, we are exposed to the risk of loss in the event of a bank failure. Although we strive to manage this risk by spreading out our cash deposits in accounts with multiple reputable and financially stable banks, the potential for uninsured losses remains a significant risk factor that could adversely impact our financial position and operational stability.
Shutdowns of the U.S. federal government could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.
The U.S. federal government has shut down multiple times in the past, and certain regulatory agencies, including the FDA, the CMS , the U.S. International Trade Commission, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) , the U.S. Department of Defense, and the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, have had to furlough employees and suspend some of their activities. A prolonged shutdown could delay regulatory reviews and approvals, litigation proceedings, or government program implementations and could ultimately disrupt or delay our research and development, manufacturing, commercialization, or intellectual property enforcement activities. Any such delays or disruptions could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.
Risk Related to Regulatory Matters
We may not obtain or may experience delays in obtaining 510(k) clearance for our planned second generation of our CapsoCam Colon solution (with improved optics and other components), which would adversely impact our ability to commercialize this product and generate related revenue.
The 510(k) application process can be lengthy. There is no guarantee that the FDA will grant 510(k) clearance for our planned second generation CapsoCam Colon capsule endoscopy solution, and their timeline for doing so may not align with our planned commercialization schedule. Staff reductions in the FDA office charged with regulating devices may also cause delay. Similar consequences may result in the case of events which affect FDA operations, such as a federal government shutdown.
Although our CapsoCam Plus solution, which visualizes the small bowel, has been cleared by the FDA, the CapsoCam Colon capsule endoscopy solution will require a distinct, unrelated regulatory submission, as it is subject to different statutory requirements. This is due to its use in the colon (part of the lower GI-tract) and incorporation of new capabilities (including AI assisted pathology detection technology) to facilitate visualization of the colon and to identify and measure polyps, each of which introduces different safety and effectiveness considerations. As a part of the marketing submission review, the FDA may require additional analysis, data, studies, or modifications to our products or labeling, which could increase our costs, delay our launch, or limit our market opportunity. The FDA may also require other conditions on our products to achieve initial clearance, such as additional studies or clinical trials, labeling restrictions, or post-market surveillance commitments, which could increase our regulatory burden and liability. Risks related to the separate FDA clearance of the AI assisted pathology detection technology incorporated in our CapsoCam Colon capsule endoscopy solution and CapsoCam Plus capsule endoscopy solution are discussed in the risk factor titled “We may face regulatory challenges and delays in obtaining 510(k) clearance for marketing of those CapsoCam capsules incorporating our self-developed AI technology, including our CapsoCam Colon capsule endoscopy solution and CapsoCam Plus capsule endoscopy solution (small bowel)” below.
The FDA is required by statute to review 510(k) applications within defined timelines. For most 510(k) submissions, a 90-day maximum review period is mandated. While this requirement provides predictability for the
review process, it also places constraints on available opportunities to address any questions posed by FDA. Factors critical to a timely review and clearance of our 510(k) applications include (i) the quality of our regulatory submission (including both in terms of clarity in presentation and the supportiveness of data) and (ii) the availability of qualified FDA review resources (i.e., individuals possessing relevant technical understanding and requiring a minimal “learning curve”). Although we have (x) engaged with the FDA in early communications (including several pre-submission meetings) regarding our CapsoCam Colon solution and (y) considered FDA feedback during product development, there is no guarantee that the FDA staff members involved in those discussions and/or who are familiar with the CapsoCam technology will be available to participate in the post-submission review of our 510(k) application. The involvement of less experienced FDA staff members may result in a “learning curve” potentially reducing the effective time available to the FDA to critically review our submissions. Likewise, changes in review staff levels or workload—possibly due to changes in FDA funding or operations, including as a result of a government shutdown, or the emergence of competing public health priorities (e.g., addressing a device ) may lead to review and an to complete the FDA review process within the statutorily mandated period, potentially to a longer review process for our applications.
Failure to obtain or delays in obtaining 510(k) clearance for our CapsoCam Colon capsule endoscopy solution could result in additional costs or liabilities and adversely impact our reputation, ability to sell our CapsoCam Plus capsule endoscopy solution, and our ability to compete effectively in this or other markets. Any of these outcomes could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, and results of operations.
Our ability to capture the market opportunity for our GI-tract capsule endoscopy solution depends on several factors, including the following:
• acceptance in the GI medical community;
• the number of patients screened or tested for specific pathology or medical indication and the number of patients who use our CapsoCam capsules for that purpose;
• our ability to introduce enhancements and improvements aimed at increasing the value provided by our GI-tract capsule endoscopy solution;
• our ability to develop and commercialize our CapsoCam capsule endoscopy solution for new indications, patient populations and clinical use cases;
• our ability to successfully complete any required clinical or other studies and obtain and maintain any required regulatory approval or clearances;
• insurer and third-party reimbursement of the costs associated with our GI-tract capsule endoscopy solution (which may be adversely impacted by U.S. governmental budgetary and cost-cutting activity);
• successful management of our global supply chain including our component suppliers and assembly manufacturers for our CapsoCam solution, many of which are located in Asia (particularly Taiwan and Japan) and some of which are currently single-source suppliers;
• successful growth and leveraging of our global sales team (including, where appropriate, distributors) and marketing team to sell and market our GI-tract capsule endoscopy solution; and
• the amount and nature of competition from other GI-tract diagnostic products or procedures.
Our failure to effectively manage our business through the various challenges we face, may result in an inability to execute on our business plan and revenue growth strategies, respond to competitive pressures, take advantage
of market opportunities, satisfy customer requirements, or maintain high-quality products, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.
We may face regulatory challenges and delays in obtaining 510(k) clearance for marketing of those CapsoCam capsules incorporating our self-developed AI technology, including our CapsoCam Colon capsule endoscopy solution and CapsoCam Plus capsule endoscopy solution (small bowel).
On June 10, 2025, we submitted to the FDA the clinical results of the first arm of our CapsoCam Colon pivotal study in a related 510(k) submission and it has been accepted for review. This submission seeks FDA clearance of our initial CapsoCam Colon capsule endoscopy solution which incorporates our self-developed AI technology. Following our decision not to further pursue the first generation CapsoCam Colon capsule submission and approval, and to prioritize its resources for the development of its second generation CapsoCam Colon capsule, the second generation also features improved imaging quality and increased field of review with use of AI and better lens. Our 510(k) submissions and FDA review thereof may be delayed and we may not receive 510(k) clearances from the FDA on a timely basis or at all.
The incorporation of AI technology into our GI-tract capsule endoscopy solution (including the associated software products, CapsoCloud and CapsoView) requires appropriate FDA regulatory authorization, supported by requisite clinical and other studies, prior to its commercialization in the U.S. Under the FDA’s current regulatory framework, our capsule endoscopy solution and the AI technology are assessed separately, with each component falling under a different regulatory classification and subject to distinct regulatory requirements. This bifurcated approach, set by precedent, ensures that each component meets the necessary safety, effectiveness, and performance expectations.
In the case of CapsoCam Colon, as of the date of this Annual Report, the FDA has only authorized one colon capsule imaging system, the Medtronic PillCam COLON 2, introduced in 2014, which does not include any AI-driven analytics; and one AI-driven capsule endoscopy analysis software, the AnX Robotics NaviCam ProScan, introduced in 2023, which exclusively supports AnX Robotics’ small bowel capsule system. These devices respectively serve as predicate devices for our planned second generation CapsoCam Colon 510(k) submission. In particular, to receive FDA clearance for our second generation CapsoCam Colon, the clinical results must demonstrate that:
• CapsoCam Colon, considered without the integration of AI, demonstrates a polyp-detection accuracy that is, at a minimum, comparable to the performance of the predicate device (i.e., Medtronic PillCam COLON 2); and
• our AI technology can (i) reliably and accurately identify and analyze images and video of the colon to detect abnormalities as quantified by diagnostic accuracy measures such as sensitivity and specificity, and, in doing so, (ii) aid qualified physicians in achieving improved diagnostic performance relative to not using AI.
Clearance of the incorporated AI technology is unlikely to occur if the CapsoCam Colon solution, absent AI, fails to meet the applicable regulatory requirements. In connection with FDA clearance of our planned second generation of CapsoCam Colon, which will incorporate various hardware and image processing improvements, we will need to demonstrate that the incorporated AI technology is not compromised by these modifications.
The FDA may not agree that our AI technology meets these evidentiary requirements, or it may require us to submit additional data or information over the course of regulatory review to support the safety and effectiveness of CapsoCam Colon (including the incorporated AI technology). Also, the FDA may determine that CapsoCam Colon (including the incorporated AI technology) is not eligible for the 510(k) pathway and that we must utilize a different, more rigorous and costly regulatory pathway, such as a PMA or a De Novo request, which could significantly delay our ability to market CapsoCam Colon (including the incorporated AI technology), increase our development costs and reduce our competitive advantage. The FDA recognizes that there are challenges within the current regulatory framework for medical devices incorporating artificial intelligence and is actively pursuing
regulatory reforms to better foster innovation while maintaining patient safety. We proactively monitor new FDA policies and programs and will update our regulatory strategy to reduce regulatory uncertainty and burden where applicable.
In seeking 510(k) clearance for our AI technology as incorporated into CapsoCam Plus we are (i) utilizing the NaviCam ProScan as the predicate device (confirmed with the FDA) and (ii) currently conducting a retrospective clinical study of the CapsoCam Plus solution with the AI technology incorporated to analyze in vivo videos from completed, real-world clinical cases, to assess the performance of the AI technology for small bowel. Similar to the first arm of our CapsoCam Colon pivotal study, the study seeks to demonstrate that the AI technology can (i) reliably and accurately identify and analyze images and video of the small bowel to detect abnormalities as quantified by diagnostic accuracy measures such as sensitivity and specificity, and, in doing so, (ii) aid qualified physicians in achieving improved diagnostic performance relative to not using AI.
These regulatory considerations may apply to updates or improvements to previously cleared AI technology, such as major changes in algorithm design, significant changes in clinical performance, or the addition of new functions (e.g., detection of new types of abnormalities). In these scenarios, we will be expected to demonstrate the safety and performance of the updated technology through the appropriate studies and pursue regulatory clearance through additional FDA filings prior to commercial distribution. Also, changes to the device hardware or imaging processing methods contained in CapsoCam capsules incorporating our AI technology may affect the performance of the incorporated AI technology, even if the related algorithm is not directly changed. As a result, we may be required to demonstrate that performance of the incorporated AI technology is not degraded by those critical capsule component changes and obtain regulatory clearance prior to distribution.
If Medicare and other third-party payors, including managed care organizations, do not approve reimbursement for our products at adequate reimbursement rates, we may be unable to successfully commercialize our products which would likely have a material adverse effect on our business.
Our ability to increase sales of our products depends, in significant part, on the availability of adequate coverage and reimbursement from third-party payers, including governmental payers, managed care organizations, and private health insurers. If Medicare and other third-party payors do not approve reimbursement for our CapsoCam capsules at adequate reimbursement rates, we may be unable to successfully commercialize our products which would have a material adverse effect on our business.
In particular, we believe that obtaining a positive national coverage decision and favorable reimbursement rate from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (“CMS”) for our CapsoCam capsules will be a necessary element in achieving material commercial success. These third-party payors are increasingly attempting to contain healthcare costs by limiting both coverage and the level of reimbursement for new healthcare products approved for marketing by the FDA. As a result, there is significant uncertainty surrounding whether the use of capsules will be eligible for coverage by third-party payors or, if eligible for coverage, what the reimbursement rates will be for those products.
CMS currently reimburses properly submitted reimbursement claims for most capsule endoscopies utilizing our small bowel CapsoCam Plus capsule. For CapsoCam Colon, we expect to qualify for CMS reimbursement for our initial indicated patient population. CMS currently provides reimbursement for capsule endoscopy procedures for patients with major risks for colonoscopy or moderate sedation with evidence of GI bleeding of lower GI origin and patients who have had an incomplete colonoscopy with adequate preparation. As a part of our 510(k) FDA application for our second generation CapsoCam Colon capsule and to increase the population of indicated patients, we intend to seek FDA clearance of expanded indications that remove the requirement for evidence of GI bleeding of lower GI origin for patients with major risks for colonoscopy or moderate sedation. Successfully growing our CapsoCam Colon revenues will depend on our success in timely securing CMS reimbursement for this and any newly indicated patient population.
Reimbursement of capsule endoscopy by a third-party payor may depend on a number of factors, including a payor’s determination that products using our technologies are: effective for detecting or diagnosing
gastrointestinal disorders; not experimental or investigational; approved by the major guidelines organizations; reliable, safe and minimally invasive; medically necessary; appropriate for the specific patient; and cost-effective.
If we are unable to obtain positive policy decisions from third-party payors, including Medicare and managed care organizations, approving reimbursement for our CapsoCam capsules, including our CapsoCam Colon, at adequate levels, the commercial success of these products would be compromised and our revenues would be significantly limited. Moreover, coverage policies and reimbursement rates are subject to change and we cannot guarantee that even if we initially achieve adequate coverage and reimbursement rates that they will be applicable to our products in the future. Any failure to obtain or maintain favorable reimbursement could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.
If we or our distributors fail to comply with regulatory requirements, we may be subject to stringent penalties and our business may be materially adversely affected.
The marketing and sale of our CapsoCam capsules are subject to various state, federal, and foreign regulations. Compliance with these regulatory requirements is essential to avoid significant penalties and ensure the continued commercialization of our products. However, the regulatory landscape is complex and constantly evolving, making it challenging to stay compliant. Any failure by us or our distributors to adhere to applicable regulations could result in substantial fines, sanctions, or other enforcement actions and damage to our reputation.
Healthcare policy changes and increased scrutiny of marketing practices in the medical device industry add another layer of risk. New regulations or changes to existing laws could impose additional burdens on our business, affecting our ability to operate effectively. Ensuring ongoing compliance with regulatory requirements is critical to maintaining our market position and avoiding adverse impacts on our business.
Healthcare policy and funding/budgetary changes could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.
In recent years, the healthcare industry in the United States has experienced significant legislative and regulatory changes aimed at reducing costs, increasing access to health insurance, and improving the overall efficiency of healthcare delivery. The Affordable Care Act (the “ACA”) has been a cornerstone of these efforts, expanding health insurance coverage through public program expansion and private sector reforms. Additionally, the American Rescue Plan Act and the Inflation Reduction Act have introduced enhanced subsidies to make health insurance more affordable. More recently, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (the “OBBBA”) was signed into law, which included significant reforms to Medicaid, including an estimated $1 trillion in reduced federal Medicaid spending from 2025 through 2034, the imposition of work requirements for certain adult enrollees, more frequent eligibility redeterminations and increased cost-sharing for beneficiaries. However, these changes bring uncertainty regarding the number of individuals who will obtain public or private health insurance and the scope of such coverage. This uncertainty can impact our business by potentially reducing the number of insured individuals or altering the scope of insurance coverage, which may affect our revenue streams and financial stability.
The ACA has been subject to continuous legislative, regulatory, and judicial challenges, creating an unpredictable environment for healthcare providers. Changes in the interpretation or implementation of the ACA could eliminate or modify provisions that are beneficial to our business while maintaining or introducing provisions that reduce our reimbursement rates or otherwise negatively impact our operations. For instance, if certain beneficial provisions are repealed or altered, we may face increased financial pressure due to reduced reimbursement rates or additional regulatory compliance costs. This uncertainty makes it challenging to plan for the future and could lead to financial instability if adverse changes are implemented.
Moreover, other health reform initiatives at both federal and state levels add another layer of complexity. These initiatives could result in funding and coverage reductions or decreased enrollment in Medicaid, further impacting our revenue. Additionally, recent reforms focused on price transparency and out-of-network charges, such as the No Surprises Act, may limit our ability to set and negotiate prices, affecting our relationships with insurers and
patients. Further, the Trump administration has enacted several executive actions and the U.S. Congress is considering budget cuts that would adversely impact the U.S. federal government’s budget and potential changes in budgetary priorities and spending levels (including those related to Medicare and Medicaid). Such pressures and uncertainty could (i) result in a reduction in the market opportunity and demand for our current or future pipeline products and (ii) adversely affect staffing levels and the funding for the FDA and as a result, prevent or delay marketing approval of our current or future pipeline products, restrict or regulate post-approval activities and affect our ability to profitably sell any product for which we obtain marketing approval, each of which may negatively impact our business. These factors collectively create a challenging environment that could adversely affect our financial condition, results of operations, and cash flows.
Changes to U.S. tariff measures and other potential changes in international trade relations implemented by the U.S. could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, cash flows and results of operations.
Our supply chain is heavily reliant on products and components manufactured and assembled in various Asian countries (particularly Taiwan and Japan). These import operations are subject to tariff and other international trade regulations. When imported into the U.S., such products and components are subject to applicable rates of duty. The U.S. government has recently made statements and taken certain actions that have created significant uncertainty about the future relationship between the U.S. and various other countries, including Taiwan and Japan, with respect to trade policies, treaties, government regulations and tariffs, including implementing tariffs on certain countries and implementing and subsequently pausing such implementation of tariffs on certain other countries. As a result of these statements and actions, we are exposed to the risk of product supply disruption and increased costs and expenses. There continues to exist significant uncertainty about the future relationship between the U.S. and other countries with respect to such trade policies, treaties and tariffs. We cannot predict with certainty the future trade policy of the U.S. or other countries. We experienced an increase of customs and tariffs expenses as a result of the imposition of tariffs and keep evaluating measures that we might implement to address or mitigate the impact on our business. We cannot predict the likelihood, nature or extent of the potential impact or our ability to avoid the related adverse effects. Relevant factors include whether such tariffs are ultimately implemented, the timing and duration of implementation and the amount, scope and nature of such tariffs and potential exclusions from the application of those tariffs. These tariffs and other government policies on international trade (such as export controls) may increase the cost of manufacturing our commercialized products or developing our pipeline products, affect the demand for our products (if and once approved), or restrict our access to raw materials and components used in the manufacture of our current products and the development of our future products, each of which could impact our financial condition and results of operations. Further, such developments, or the perception that any such developments could occur, may have a material effect on global economic conditions and the of global financial markets, and may have and could continue to significantly reduce global trade and, in particular, trade between the impacted nations and the U.S. Any of these factors could economic activity and impact the price and demand for our products, increase our costs, and affect our customers and suppliers and have a material effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
Changes in tax laws or tax rulings could adversely affect our effective tax rates, results of operations and financial condition.
The tax regimes we are subject to or operate under are unsettled and may be subject to significant change. This challenge will continue to increase as we expand our operations globally. Changes in tax laws, issuance of new tax rulings or changes in interpretations of existing laws could cause us to be subject to additional income-based taxes and non-income-based taxes, including payroll, sales, use, value-added, digital, net worth, property and goods and services taxes, which in turn could adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition. In particular, the U.S. government may enact significant changes to the taxation of business entities including, among others, an increase in the corporate income tax rate, the imposition of minimum taxes or surtaxes on certain types of income, significant changes to the taxation of income derived from international operations, and it may enact further limitations on the deductibility of business interest. For example, on August 16, 2022, the Inflation Reduction Act (the “IRA”) was signed into law in the U.S. Among other changes, the IRA, along with
subsequent regulations, imposes a minimum tax on certain corporations with book income of at least $1 billion, subject to certain adjustments, and a 1% excise tax on certain stock buybacks and similar corporate actions. Furthermore, on July 4, 2025, the OBBB Act was enacted, introducing amendments to U.S. tax laws with various effective dates from 2025 to 2027, including changes to the treatment of research and development expenses under Section 174 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, modifications to the global intangible low-taxed income regime, new minimum or book-based taxes, and limitations on interest deductibility.
In addition, many countries in the European Union, as well as a number of other countries and organizations, have recently proposed or recommended changes to existing tax laws or have enacted new laws that could impact our tax obligations in the future. We are unable to predict what changes to the tax laws of the U.S. and other jurisdictions may be proposed or enacted in the future or what effect such changes would have on our business. Any of these or similar developments or changes to tax laws or rulings (which changes may have retroactive application) could adversely affect our effective tax rate and our results of operations and financial condition.
Our relationships with board-certified physicians are subject to various state laws and there is no assurance that our current practices will remain compliant.
We provide remote capsule endoscopy reading services through board-certified physicians to our customers with $295 and $232 thousand in revenue for the years ended December 31, 2025 and 2024, respectively. Our relationships with board-certified physicians are subject to various state laws including those with respect to physician licensing requirements. The interpretation and enforcement of these laws vary significantly across states, and there is no assurance that our current practices will remain compliant. If regulatory authorities determine that our arrangements with physicians violate these laws, we may be forced to restructure or terminate these relationships, leading to potential disciplinary actions, penalties, and a loss of revenue.
Our products must be manufactured in accordance with applicable laws and regulations, and we could be forced to recall our products or terminate production if we fail to comply with these regulations.
Our CapsoCam capsules are regulated as medical devices in the United States and must be manufactured in compliance with the FDA’s current good manufacturing practices (cGMPs) for medical devices, known as the QMSR. The FDA enforces the QMSR through periodic announced or unannounced inspections of medical device manufacturing facilities, which may include the facilities of subcontractors. Failure to comply with applicable FDA requirements or later discovery of previously unknown problems with our products or manufacturing processes could result in, among other things, warning letters, fines, injunctions, civil penalties, suspension or withdrawal of marketing authorizations, product recalls, and total or partial suspension of production or distribution.
In addition, our products are subject to similar state regulations 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 medical devices. If we or our third-party manufacturers fail to comply with applicable laws and regulations, we could be forced to recall our products or terminate production, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.
Some of our activities may subject us to risks under federal and state laws prohibiting “kickbacks” and false or fraudulent claims.
Our business practices and relationships with healthcare providers are subject to scrutiny under various federal and state laws designed to prevent fraud and abuse, including the federal Physician Payments Sunshine Act, Anti-Kickback Statute and the False Claims Act. The Physician Payments Sunshine Act increases the transparency of financial relationships between medical device manufacturers and healthcare providers in order to uncover potential conflicts of interest that could compromise treatment decisions and medical research, or that could increase the cost of healthcare services billed to federal health programs. The Anti-Kickback Statute prohibits the exchange of remuneration to induce or reward the referral of business reimbursable under federal healthcare programs. The False Claims Act imposes liability on individuals and companies who submit under
federal health care programs. Violations of these laws can result in severe penalties, including criminal and civil fines, exclusion from participation in federal healthcare programs, and significant reputational harm.
Additionally, state laws often mirror or expand upon federal prohibitions, applying to all payers, not just federal programs. Compliance with these laws requires substantial resources and ongoing monitoring of our business practices. Any failure to comply with these laws, whether intentional or inadvertent, could lead to investigations, legal actions, and significant financial penalties, which could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.
Our independent sales representatives earn commissions for capsule sales in their territories, with potential additional commissions for reorders from new accounts and quarterly bonuses. Despite our efforts to provide compliance training and integrate some of them into our direct sales team to improve regulatory oversight, there remains a risk that they might inadvertently breach laws or ethical guidelines in their pursuit of higher earnings, which is not entirely within our control. Independent sales representatives, motivated by commissions and bonuses, might engage in practices that could be construed as kickbacks. If our independent sales representatives engage in unethical or illegal practices to boost sales, it could lead to the submission of false or fraudulent claims for payment submitted to the government. Their malfeasance may expose us to legal and financial liabilities under the federal and state laws.
Failure to comply with the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (the “FCPA”), economic and trade sanctions regulations, and similar laws could subject us to penalties and other adverse consequences.
We are subject to the FCPA and other laws that prohibit improper payments or offers of payments to foreign governments and their officials for the purpose of obtaining or retaining business. Our operations in countries with a high risk of corruption expose us to the risk that our employees, contractors, or agents may engage in activities that violate the FCPA or similar laws, despite our policies and procedures designed to prevent such conduct. Violations of these laws can result in severe penalties, including substantial fines, criminal sanctions, and reputational damage.
Additionally, we are subject to economic and trade sanctions regulations administered by the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC), which restrict our ability to engage in transactions with certain countries, entities, and individuals. Non-compliance with these regulations can lead to significant financial penalties, restrictions on our business operations, and adverse effects on our reputation. Ensuring compliance with these complex and evolving regulations requires significant resources and ongoing vigilance.
We sell our GI-tract capsule endoscopy products in the international market through a combination of our direct sales team and third-party distributors. Additionally, the bulk of our component suppliers and assembly manufacturers are currently located outside the U.S., and we anticipate increasing our international activities in the future. Despite our implementation of policies, internal controls, and other measures designed to ensure compliance with applicable anti-corruption and anti-bribery laws and regulations, as well as U.S. trade sanctions laws, there remains a risk that our employees or agents may engage in improper conduct for which we could be held accountable. Any violations, or even allegations of violations, of these laws can result in investigations and enforcement actions that may disrupt our operations, divert significant management attention, and incur substantial costs and expenses, including legal fees. If we, our sales representatives or distributors are found to have these laws, we could face , including , profit , , securities , on government business transactions, from securities exchanges, and other consequences that could materially and affect our business, financial condition, and results of operations. Furthermore, our reputation, net sales, or stock price could if we become the subject of publicity related to actual or potential of anti-, anti-, or trade sanctions laws and regulations.
Risks Related to Our Reliance on Third Parties
We rely on various suppliers to assist us in the assembly and manufacture of our GI-tract capsule endoscopy solution and sourcing of critical and other components and many of these suppliers are single source suppliers located in Asia (particularly Taiwan and Japan); any disruption in our supply chain could adversely affect our ability to meet the demand for our products and fulfil our orders.
To assist us in manufacturing our GI-tract capsule endoscopy products we rely on component suppliers and assembly manufacturers based in Asia (particularly Taiwan and Japan). Critical components found in our CapsoCam capsules include lens modules from Largan, complementary metal oxide semiconductor (“CMOS”) image sensors from Toshiba Corporation (“Toshiba”), and application-specific integrated circuits (“ASICs”) from Moai Electronics Corporation (“Moai”) / Speedbridge Technology Co. (“Speedbridge”). Many of our suppliers/manufacturers are single source and located in Asia. For example, the single source suppliers of our lens modules and ASICs are located in Taiwan and the single source supplier of our CMOS image sensors is located in Japan. Currently, assembled CapsoCam capsules are shipped by Largan from Taiwan to our U.S. facility where we complete the manufacturing process before distributing the capsules to our distribution network. Any disruption to our supply chain could significantly harm our ability to effectively manufacture and deliver our CapsoCam capsules and, in turn materially harm, our financial results.
The numerous supply chain related risks we face that could adversely impact our ability to manufacture and sell our CapsoCam capsules include:
• our supplier may be unable to meet our demand requirements, including demands for desired improvements or upgrades, or may prioritize the orders of its other customers;
• our supplier may be unable to meet our quality standards, specifications, or requirements for critical components, or may experience defects, errors, or failures in these components, which could compromise the quality, performance, or safety of our CapsoCam capsules and the images and analyses they produce;
• our supplier may increase or seek to increase prices, or impose unfavorable purchase terms or conditions, which could increase our costs and reduce our margins;
• our supplier may discontinue the production of critical components, or cease to do business with us, for any reason;
• it may be difficult for us to find an alternative or second supply source, which may not be available, affordable, or compatible with our CapsoCam capsules and, for commercial reasons, we may prefer or be required to work on an exclusive basis with our supplier; and
• supplier concentration in Asia (particularly Taiwan and Japan) subjects us to heightened risks related to geopolitical tensions (particularly between China and Taiwan), potential trade disputes, the imposition of new or increased tariffs or threats of tariffs, transportation interruptions, natural disasters, and manufacturing constraints, any of which can affect the manufacture and delivery of our CapsoCam capsules and lead to delays, increased costs, and potential shortages of our CapsoCam capsules and critical components. For additional information, see the risk factor titled “We face substantial geopolitical and trade risks (including a possible trade war and imposition of tariffs and supply chain interruptions) and natural disaster risks associated with our business operations in Asia (particularly Taiwan and Japan)” and “Changes to U.S. tariff measures and other political changes in international trade relations implemented by the U.S. could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, cash flows and results of operations” below.
Although we are in the process of planning or implementing various mitigation measures to address supply chain risks (including qualifying a backup supplier for certain critical components and looking to build reserve supplies of
capsules and critical components to address unanticipated delays), these efforts may not be successful. For example, implementation of mitigation measures to address the supply chain disruption of CMOS image sensors would be complicated, and resolving an industry-wide issue relating to CMOS image sensors would require a significant amount of time and coordinated efforts across multiple industry participants.
In addition, our operations depend heavily on expedited and reliable shipping services to ensure the secure and timely delivery of our products to customers. Any delivery performance issues, such as loss, damage, or destruction of our CapsoCam capsules or the components thereof, would incur substantial costs for timely replacement and could tarnish our reputation, leading to decreased demand for our products and increased operational expenses. Additionally, significant increases in shipping rates could negatively affect our operating margins and overall financial performance. Service interruptions caused by strikes, severe weather, natural disasters, or other disruptions could further impede our ability to process orders promptly. These factors collectively pose a risk to our business, financial condition, and operational results, and can potentially damage our reputation.
We depend on our authorized agent and importer for a significant portion of our revenue.
We depend on Aureliance, our authorized agent and importer in the EU and EEA for a significant portion of our revenue. It has historically contributed a significant percentage of our revenue generated from EU countries, such that if it were to materially reduce or terminate its business with us, our revenue generated from such countries would suffer. For the years ended and as of December 31, 2025 and December 31, 2024, Aureliance represented approximately 9% and 10% of our revenue, respectively, and 22% and 21% of our accounts receivable balance, respectively. The loss of it or a significant reduction in its business with us could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.
We rely on third parties to conduct and support our clinical trials. These third parties may not properly and successfully carry out their contractual duties or meet expected deadlines, which could harm our ability to obtain marketing authorization of or commercialize future products we develop.
We utilize and depend upon independent investigators and collaborators, such as third-party clinical institutions and hospitals to conduct and support portions of our clinical trials under agreements with us, and may in the future rely on CROs.
We have relied on these third parties for our clinical trials and expect to continue to do so, and we control only certain aspects of their activities. As a result, we have less direct control over the conduct, timing, and completion of these clinical trials and the management of data developed through clinical trials than would be the case if we were relying entirely upon our own staff. Nevertheless, we are responsible for ensuring that each of our studies is conducted in accordance with applicable protocol, legal and regulatory requirements, and scientific standards and our reliance on third parties does not relieve us of our regulatory responsibilities. We and these third parties are required to comply with GCP requirements, which are regulations and guidelines enforced by the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities for medical devices in clinical development. Regulatory authorities enforce these GCP requirements through periodic inspections of trial sponsors, principal investigators and trial sites.
If we or any of these third parties fail to comply with applicable GCP regulations, the clinical data generated in our clinical trials may be deemed unreliable, and the FDA or other bodies may require us to perform additional clinical trials. We cannot assure you that, upon inspection, such regulatory authorities will determine that any of our clinical trials comply with the GCP regulations. In addition, our investigational devices must be produced in accordance with cGMP requirements known as the QMSR. Our failure or any failure by these third parties to comply with these regulations or to recruit a sufficient number of patients may require us to repeat clinical trials, which would delay the marketing authorization process. Moreover, our business may be implicated if any of these third parties violates federal, state or foreign fraud and abuse or false claims laws and regulations or healthcare privacy and security laws.
Third parties conducting or supporting portions of our clinical trials are not our employees and, except for remedies available to us under our agreements with such third parties, we cannot control whether or not they devote sufficient time and resources to our investigational products. These third parties may also have relationships with other commercial entities, including our competitors, for whom they may also be conducting clinical trials, or other product development activities, which could affect their performance on our behalf. These third parties may not successfully carry out their contractual duties or obligations or meet expected deadlines. They may need to be replaced or the quality or accuracy of the clinical data they obtain may be compromised due to the failure to adhere to our clinical protocols or regulatory requirements or for other reasons. Accordingly, our clinical trials may be extended, delayed or terminated and we may not be able to complete development of, obtain marketing authorizations for or successfully commercialize our future devices.
Switching or adding third parties to conduct or support portions of our clinical trials involves substantial cost and requires extensive management time and focus. In addition, there is a natural transition period when a new third party commences work. As a result, delays may occur, which could have an adverse impact on our product development, results of operations, and prospects.
We rely on relationships with contracted physicians to provide reading services to certain customers.
We contract directly or indirectly with physicians to provide remote reading services to certain customers. If these physicians terminate their contracts, we or our partners may not be able to contract with alternative physicians to provide such services in a timely manner, or at all, which would impact our ability to provide services to certain customers and could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.
Data Privacy Risk Factors
We may face risks associated with our use and development of artificial intelligence, including our AI technology.
Clinicians are subject to fatigue and distraction and have varying degrees of expertise in identifying GI-tract abnormalities. Our AI assisted pathology detection tool is designed to (i) reduce viewing times for clinicians by highlighting the areas of interest (via a bonding box placed around suspected abnormalities) and (ii) improve diagnostic yield and provide more consistent accuracy by providing suggestions or recommendations. However, risks related to the use of our AI technology include:
• our AI assisted pathology detection technology may fail to accurately identify all or a sufficient portion of the patient’s GI-tract abnormalities (measured in terms of sensitivity and specificity);
• a clinician may (i) place undue reliance on our AI assisted pathology detection technology to identify GI-tract abnormalities (e.g., polyps in colon) or (ii) fail to fully utilize product features designed to supplement a clinician’s review (such as the ability to review frames adjacent to an AI bonded frame identifying a suspected GI-tract abnormality or view the video in non-AI mode);
• our AI technology may not prevent or reduce the occurrence or impact of clinician alertness fatigue; and
• product enhancements and improvements (including improvements to our AI algorithms) may fail to deliver improved viewing, accuracy improvements (including as measured in terms of sensitivity and specificity) and other expected benefits.
We plan to further invest in AI to improve our products. However, we may not achieve the expected benefits from our AI investments, or we may face technical, regulatory, ethical or legal challenges that could limit or delay the development, deployment or adoption of our AI technology. Additionally, we may encounter difficulties in integrating our AI technology with our existing or future products, software or platforms, or in ensuring the compatibility, interoperability or reliability of our AI technology.
Our AI technology may introduce errors or biases that could compromise the quality or validity of the clinician’s viewing. In particular, for data collected by CapsoCloud to serve as the clinically derived reference standard (“ground truth”) for enhancing AI capabilities, it is imperative that the collected data be meticulously labeled. This labeling process is resource-intensive and necessitates the involvement of qualified gastroenterologists who meticulously review and annotate the images. The accuracy of these labels is crucial, as it directly impacts the AI’s ability to make precise and reliable predictions based on the data. If the models underlying our AI technologies are incorrectly designed or implemented; trained or reliant on incomplete, inadequate, inaccurate, biased, or otherwise poor quality data (including as a result of the labeling process described above), or on data to which we do not have sufficient rights or in relation to which we and/or the providers of such data have not implemented sufficient legal compliance measures; used without sufficient oversight and governance to ensure their responsible use; or used outside of scope of applicable regulatory authorizations; and/or impacted by , technical , cybersecurity , or material performance issues, the performance of our products, as well as our reputation, could or we could incur liability resulting from the of laws or contracts to which we are a party, regulatory enforcement actions, or civil .
The performance of any algorithm incorporated in our AI technology will generally be assessed by comparing the output of the algorithm against a ground truth for a specified dataset. This applies to internal evaluation of an algorithm’s performance, supporting external presentations and publications, and testing to support regulatory submissions. Our algorithm output will not always agree with the opinion of a qualified gastroenterologist, and in some cases multiple qualified gastroenterologists may not agree with each other. While we constantly work to improve our GI-tract capsule endoscopy solution, our AI technology is novel and complex, and our AI technology may not perform as intended under all circumstances.
CapsoCloud is designed to automatically accumulate patient data critical to develop and train AI-based GI-tract abnormality detection and classification capabilities. If we are unable to obtain sufficient rights to use such data under applicable regulatory frameworks or our patients were to withdraw or withhold their consent, our ability to continue to develop new or improved CapsoCam capsule endoscopy products, and our revenue prospects, could be materially adversely impacted.
The regulatory landscape for AI technologies is rapidly changing as various federal, state, and international government bodies introduce or consider new laws and regulations. The FDA has issued guidance on incorporating AI into medical devices, and existing laws may be interpreted in ways that impact AI operations or could be rescinded or amended as new administrations take differing approaches to evolving AI technologies. This creates uncertainty around implementation standards and enforcement practices, making it difficult to predict the future impact on businesses. In the U.S., the Trump administration rescinded an executive order relating to AI technologies that was previously implemented by the Biden administration. The Trump administration may continue to rescind other existing federal orders and/or administrative policies relating to AI technologies, or may implement new executive orders and/or other rule-making relating to AI technologies in the future. Any such changes at the federal level could require us to expend significant resources to modify our products, services, or operations to ensure compliance or remain competitive. U.S. legislation related to AI technologies has also been introduced at the federal level and is advancing at the state level. Such additional regulations may impact our ability to develop, use, and commercialize AI technologies in the future.
It is possible that further new laws and regulations will be adopted in the U.S. and other jurisdictions, potentially limiting the use of AI technologies or requiring changes that could negatively affect business performance. Compliance with these laws may necessitate significant resource expenditure, especially if regulations vary across jurisdictions. The cost of compliance could increase operating expenses due to additional reporting obligations. Any failure, actual or perceived, to comply with these laws and regulations could materially and adversely impact our business operations, financial condition, and future prospects.
Actual or perceived failures to comply with applicable data privacy and security laws, regulations, standards and other requirements could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.
We collect, store, process and analyze large amounts of data for GI tract from our products, customers, patients, hospitals and other sources, to support our AI technology. With CapsoCloud, we have access to a rich and growing source of clinical data from patients, which enables us to develop ever-improving automated detection and classification of GI-tract abnormalities. However, the collection and use of such data involves significant risks and challenges, such as data breaches, cyberattacks, unauthorized access, theft, loss, corruption, misuse, manipulation, infringement, disclosure or destruction. Any of these events could compromise the security, privacy, integrity, availability or accuracy of our data, and expose us to legal, regulatory, reputational or financial liabilities, as well as potential , , , sanctions, or .
We must comply with various U.S. laws and regulations that protect personal information, especially health-related information, such as the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA), which imposes privacy, security, and breach notification obligations and penalties on entities that handle such information. Some states, such as California, have also enacted their own privacy and security laws, which may differ from or conflict with federal laws and require additional disclosures, responses, and contracts. These laws and regulations are subject to interpretation and change, and may increase our compliance costs and risks.
We may also face data protection laws and regulations in foreign jurisdictions, such as the General Data Protection Regulation, which applies to personal data of individuals in the European Economic Area and imposes stringent requirements and fines on data processors and controllers, including for transfers of such data to third countries like the U.S. These laws and regulations may affect how we conduct business, transfer data, and provide services, and may expose us to additional costs, complaints, investigations, or fines. The Federal Trade Commission may also take action against us for misleading, deceptive, or unfair practices related to privacy and data security.
Although we work to comply with applicable laws, regulations and standards, our contractual obligations, research protocols, and other obligations, any actual or perceived failure by us or our employees, representatives, contractors, consultants, or other third parties to comply with such requirements or adequately address data privacy and security concerns, even if unfounded, could result in, among other adverse impacts, damage to our reputation, loss of customer confidence in our security measures, withdrawal or withholding of customer consent for using patient data, government investigations, and enforcement actions and litigation and claims by third parties, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.
We leverage cloud-based CapsoCloud for easy access to patients’ in vivo videos, however use of CapsoCloud faces complicated compliance requirements.
Utilizing our cloud-based platform, CapsoCloud, physicians can remotely access and analyze their patients’ in vivo videos and other exam data. However, the regulatory environment for cloud-based platforms is complex and varies across different jurisdictions, and as described below, some states or countries may impose restrictions or prohibitions on the use of cloud-based platforms or the transmission of patient data across borders. Initially, following the commercial launch of our CapsoCam Colon solution, providers will utilize CapsoCloud to download in vivo videos for remote review. Within one year of commercial launch, we plan to introduce user-friendly streaming functions to facilitate via CapsoCloud remote in vivo video review, procedure report generation and image annotation.
Outside the U.S., CapsoCloud also faces significant operational and compliance issues due to stringent data privacy and security regulations in various countries. This necessitates the development of country-specific cloud infrastructures for CapsoCloud, which can lead to increased costs, complexity, and potential delays in service delivery. Additionally, for certain U.S. government-related customers, such as the U.S. Department of Defense and Veterans Administration associated hospitals, CapsoCloud must implement additional layers of IT security to meet their stringent security requirements before these customers can utilize CapsoCloud. This could further complicate our cloud infrastructure, increase the risk of security breaches if not properly managed, and require substantial investment in specialized security measures and compliance protocols.
If we are unable to comply with these regulations or obtain the necessary approvals or licenses, we may face legal actions, fines, penalties, or loss of business, which could adversely affect our reputation, operations, and financial results. Additionally, we may incur significant costs and resources to adapt CapsoCloud to meet the changing regulatory requirements or customer preferences in different markets and countries.
Our business and operations may suffer in the event of information technology system failures, cyberattacks, or deficiencies in our cybersecurity.
We rely heavily on information technology systems and infrastructure to operate our business, including the collection, storage, and transmission of sensitive patient exam data. Our systems, including CapsoCloud, and those of our third-party service providers, are vulnerable to cyberattacks, data breaches, and other security incidents that could compromise the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of our data. Such incidents could result in significant disruptions to our operations, financial losses, and damage to our reputation.
We seek to protect against cybersecurity threats. Among other measures, our CapsoCloud systems are HIPAA-compliant and operate in an ISO 27001 certified cloud-computing environment, we have adopted various cybersecurity controls and procedures and we conduct cybersecurity related trainings. However, there is no guarantee that our systems will be immune to cyber threats. For example, in October 2019, we observed and investigated a cyberattack that breached our Amazon Web Services (AWS) account hosting the CapsoCloud service. In connection with this investigation, we determined no data was compromised during this incident and, in addition to related employee trainings, we adopted additional procedures and controls designed to protect against these types of incidents. Any failure to adequately protect our IT systems and sensitive patient exam data collected, stored and transmitted on or through our systems could lead to regulatory , legal actions, and substantial costs associated with remediation and notification efforts, which could materially and affect our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.
Risks Relating to Our Intellectual Property
Our success will depend on our ability to obtain, maintain, enforce, and protect our intellectual property rights.
Our success and ability to compete depends in part on our ability to obtain, maintain, enforce, and protect issued patents, trademarks, trade secret, and other intellectual property rights and proprietary technology in the U.S. and elsewhere. If we cannot adequately obtain, maintain, and enforce our intellectual property rights and proprietary technology, competitors may be able to use our technologies or the goodwill we have acquired in the marketplace and erode or negate any competitive advantage we may have and our ability to compete, which could harm our business and ability to achieve profitability and/or cause us to incur significant expenses. We generally seek to protect our proprietary position by filing patent applications that are important to our business. We also seek to protect our proprietary position by acquiring or in-licensing relevant issued patents or pending patent applications or other intellectual property or proprietary rights from third parties. If we are unable to obtain or maintain patent protection with respect to any proprietary technology, our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects could be materially .
We rely on a combination of contractual provisions, confidentiality procedures, and patent, trademark, copyright, trade secret and other intellectual property laws to protect the proprietary aspects of our brands, technologies, trade secrets, know-how, and data. These legal measures afford only limited protection, and competitors or others may gain access to or use our intellectual property rights and proprietary information. In addition, patents have a limited lifespan. In the U.S., for example, the natural expiration of a utility patent is generally 20 years from the earliest effective non-provisional filing date. Our success will depend, in part, on preserving our trade secrets, maintaining the security of our data and know-how, and obtaining, maintaining, and enforcing other intellectual property rights. We may not be able to obtain, maintain, and/or enforce our intellectual property or other proprietary rights necessary to our business or in a form that provides us with a competitive advantage.
The patent prosecution process and enforcement of any resulting patents are expensive, time-consuming, and complex, and we may not be able to file, prosecute, maintain, enforce, defend, or license all necessary or desirable patents or patent applications at a reasonable cost or in a timely manner, or in all jurisdictions. Moreover, pending patent applications cannot be enforced against third parties practicing the technology claimed in such applications unless, and until, patents issue from such applications, and then only to the extent the issued claims cover relevant product, service, or the technology. There can be no assurance that our current or future patent applications will result in patents being issued or that our issued patents will afford sufficient protection against competitors or other third parties with similar products, services or technologies competitive with ours, nor can there be any assurance that the patents issued will not be infringed, designed around, or invalidated by third parties.
Even our issued patents may later be found invalid or may be modified or revoked in proceedings instituted by third parties before various patent offices or in courts. In addition, our issued patents may later be found to be unenforceable for a number of possible reasons, such as for a failure to properly identify material prior art or other references to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (the “USPTO”). The degree of future protection for our intellectual property or other proprietary rights is uncertain. Only limited protection may be available and may not adequately protect our rights or permit us to gain or keep any competitive advantage. These uncertainties and/or limitations in our ability to properly protect or be able to enforce the intellectual property or other proprietary rights relating to our products, services and technologies could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.
We cannot be certain that the claims in our U.S. pending patent applications, corresponding international patent applications and patent applications in certain foreign territories will be considered patentable by the USPTO, courts in the U.S., or by the patent offices and courts in foreign countries, nor can we be certain that the claims in our future issued patents will not be found invalid or unenforceable if challenged. Our ability to obtain and maintain valid and enforceable patents depends in part on whether the differences between our inventions and the prior art allow our inventions to be patentable over the prior art. Additionally, regardless of when filed, we may fail to identify relevant third-party patents or patent applications, or we may incorrectly conclude that a third-party patent is invalid or not infringed by our products, services, technologies, or activities. Therefore, we cannot be certain that we were the first to make the claimed in any of our patents or pending patent applications, or that we were the first to file for patent protection of such .
Failure to obtain, maintain, and/or enforce intellectual property rights necessary to our business and failure to protect, monitor and control the use of our intellectual property rights could negatively impact our ability to compete and cause us to incur significant expenses. The intellectual property laws and other statutory and contractual arrangements in the U.S. and other jurisdictions we depend upon may not provide sufficient protection in the future to prevent the infringement, use, violation or misappropriation of our patents, trademarks, data, technology, and other intellectual property rights by others, and may not provide an adequate remedy if our intellectual property rights are infringed, misappropriated, or otherwise violated by others.
The degree of future protection for our intellectual property rights is uncertain. Therefore, we cannot ensure that others will not develop, manufacture and/or commercialize similar or alternative products, services, or technologies that do not infringe, misappropriate, or violate any patents or other intellectual property rights that we own or have rights to. We cannot ensure that any patents issued to us will provide a basis for an exclusive market for our products, services, or technologies, will provide us with any competitive advantages or will not be challenged, invalidated, modified, revoked, or circumvented by third parties. We cannot ensure that any of our challenged patents will be found to ultimately be valid and enforceable. We cannot ensure that any of our patents, or any of our pending patent applications, if issued, will include claims having a scope sufficient to protect our products, services, or technologies. We cannot ensure that any of our pending patent applications will issue as patents, or even if issued, will include with a scope sufficient to protect our products, services, or technologies. We cannot ensure that we will be to develop, manufacture, and commercialize our products, services, or technologies on a substantial scale before relevant patents we may have expire. We cannot ensure that we were the first to make the covered by each of our patents and pending patent applications or we were the first to file patent applications for such . We cannot ensure that we will
develop additional proprietary inventions, products, services, or technologies that are separately patentable. In addition, we cannot ensure that our commercial activities, products, services, or technologies will not infringe upon the patents of others. Defending against any such infringement claims is also expensive, time-consuming, complex, and can distract us from pursuing commercial activities.
If we fail to identify our patentable inventions or adequately protect our patent rights, the commercial value of our products, services or technologies may be adversely affected and our competitive position may be harmed.
We rely in part on our portfolio of issued patents and pending patent applications in the U.S. and other countries to protect our intellectual property and competitive position. However, it is also possible that we may fail to identify patentable aspects of inventions made in the course of the development, manufacture, and commercial activities conducted by or on behalf of us before it is too late to obtain patent protection on such inventions. If we fail to timely file for patent protection in any jurisdiction, we may be precluded from doing so at a later date. Although we enter into non-disclosure and confidentiality agreements with parties who have access to patentable aspects of our research and development output, such as our employees, outside scientific collaborators, suppliers, consultants, advisors, and other third parties, any of these parties may breach the agreements and disclose such output before a patent application is filed, thereby jeopardizing our ability to seek patent protection, and any of these parties may decide to independently file for intellectual property without naming us as owners, , or co-owners for the intellectual property. Furthermore, publications of discoveries in the scientific literature often behind the actual discoveries, and patent applications in the U.S. and other jurisdictions are typically not published until 18 months after filing, or in some cases not at all. Therefore, we cannot be certain that we were the first to make the claimed in any of our patents or pending patent applications, or that we were the first to file for patent protection of such . Moreover, should we become a licensee or co-owner of a third party’s patents or patent applications, depending on the terms of any future in-licenses or co-ownership agreement to which we may become a party, we may not have the right to control the preparation, filing, and of patent applications, or to maintain or enforce the patents, covering technology in-licensed from third parties. Therefore, these patents and patent applications may not be , maintained, and/or enforced in a manner consistent with the interests of our business. While we may apply for patents in some countries outside of the U.S., we may not accurately predict all of the countries where patent protection will ultimately be . Furthermore, the issuance of a patent does not give us the right to practice the patented . Third parties may have blocking patents that could prevent us from importing, using, manufacturing, and/or commercializing our own products or services, or otherwise practicing our own technology. Any of these outcomes could our ability to prevent competition from third parties, which may have an impact on our business.
The patent positions of companies, including our patent position, may involve complex legal and factual questions that have been the subject of much litigation in recent years, and, therefore, the scope of any patent claims that we have or may obtain cannot be predicted with certainty. Accordingly, we cannot provide any assurances about which of our patent applications will issue, the breadth of any resulting patent, whether any of the issued patents will be found to be infringed, invalid, or unenforceable or will be threatened or challenged by third parties, that any of our issued patents have, or that any of our currently pending or future patent applications that mature into issued patents will include claims with a scope sufficient to protect our products, services, or technology. Our pending and future patent applications may not result in the issuance of patents or, if issued, may not issue in a form that will be advantageous to us.
The coverage claimed in a patent application can be significantly reduced before the patent is issued, and its scope can be reinterpreted after issuance. We cannot offer any assurances that the breadth of our issued patents will be sufficient to stop a competitor from developing, manufacturing, and commercializing one or more products, services, or technologies in a non-infringing manner that would be competitive with one or more of our products, services, or technologies, or otherwise provide us with any competitive advantage. Furthermore, any successful challenge to these patents or any other patents owned by us after patent issuance could deprive us of rights necessary for our commercial success. Further, there can be no assurance that we will have adequate resources to enforce our patents.
Though an issued patent is presumed valid and enforceable, its issuance is not conclusive as to its validity or its enforceability and it may not provide us with adequate proprietary protection or competitive advantages against competitors with similar products or services. Patents, if issued, may be challenged, deemed unenforceable, invalidated, narrowed, or circumvented. Proceedings challenging our patents or patent applications could result in either loss of the patent, or denial of the patent application or loss or reduction in the scope of one or more of the claims of the patent or patent application. Any successful challenge to our patents and patent applications could deprive us of exclusive rights necessary for our commercial . In addition, such in such proceedings may be . Thus, any patents that we own may not provide the anticipated level of, or any, protection competitors. Furthermore, an decision may result in a third party receiving a patent right sought by us, which in turn could affect our ability to develop, manufacture, commercialize, import, or otherwise use our products, services, or technologies.
Some of our patents and patent applications are or may in the future be co-owned with third parties. If we are unable to obtain an exclusive license to any such third- party co-owners’ interest in such patents or patent applications, such co-owners may be able to license their rights to other third parties, including our competitors, and our competitors could market competing products, services, or technologies. In addition, we may need the cooperation of any such co-owners of our patents to enforce such patents against third parties, and such cooperation may not be provided to us.
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 for non-compliance with these requirements.
The USPTO, 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 addition, periodic maintenance fees, renewal fees, annuity fees, and various other government fees on issued patents often must be paid to the USPTO and foreign patent agencies over the lifetime of the patent and/or applications and any patent rights we may obtain in the future. While an unintentional lapse of a patent or patent application 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 non-compliance 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. Non-compliance events that could result in abandonment or lapse of a patent or patent application include, but are not limited to, failure to respond to official actions within prescribed time limits, non-payment of fees, and to properly legalize and submit formal documents. If we to maintain our patents and patent applications, we may not be to stop a competitor from marketing products, services, or technologies that are the same as or similar to our products, services, or technologies, which would have a material effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.
Our patents will eventually expire, and our patent protection will be reduced or eliminated by expiration of patents in our patent portfolio.
We have prosecuted and obtained a variety of patents to protect the intellectual property rights to our products and services. These patents protect our inventions relating to camera, image sensor, display and imaging system, capsule detection, power source control, and other key and ancillary components of our products. We rely on these patents to prevent others from using, developing, manufacturing and selling competing products or solutions or infringing on our proprietary rights.
However, patents have a limited lifespan, with the term of individual patents depends upon the date of filing of the patent application, the date of patent issuance and the legal term of patents in jurisdictions in which they are obtained. In most countries, including the U.S., issued patents are granted a term of 20 years from the earliest effective non-provisional filing date. We have patents that are anticipated to expire. After patents in our portfolio begin to expire, we cannot guarantee that our remaining patents will be sufficient to maintain our competitive advantage or prevent competitors from developing similar or superior products. Once our patents expire, we may lose the exclusive right to prevent others from using, developing, manufacturing or selling products that
incorporate our patented technology that are claimed in the expired patents. If third parties use our technology within the scope of such expired patents, we may not be able to sue them for infringement or recover any damages. This could result in increased competition, reduced market share, lower revenues and margins, and harm to our reputation and brand.
In certain instances, a patent term of a U.S. patent may be adjusted to recapture a portion of delay by the USPTO in examining the patent application or extended to account for term effectively lost as a result of the FDA regulatory review period, or both. While the adjustment of the patent term based upon delay by the USPTO is automatically calculated by the USPTO, it is possible that this patent term adjustment is improperly calculated by the USPTO and thus does not accurately reflect the true amount of adjustment that is entitled to a patent holder. Indeed, the USPTO has publicly acknowledged in 2024 that numerous errors have possibly occurred for patent term adjustments that have been calculated by the USPTO for previously issued patents. Moreover, it is possible that actions we have taken to prosecute a patent application will be considered applicant delay and will reduce the amount of patent term adjustment that is granted to a patent. For a patent term extension based upon the FDA regulatory review period, the period of extension may be up to five years, but cannot extend the remaining term of a patent beyond a total of 14 years from the date of approval. Only one patent among those eligible for an extension may be extended. However, there is no guarantee that the applicable authorities, including the FDA, will agree with our assessment of whether such extensions should be granted, and even if granted, the length of such extensions may be less than the maximum extension available. In addition, this type of patent term extension will only be granted if requested within a designated timeframe after FDA approval. If the applicable authorities do not approve the extension or if we do not make a timely application for extension, then it is possible that a term extension will not be granted for a given patent in our patent portfolio, thereby reducing the amount of enforceable term for the patent.
Changes in U.S. or foreign patent laws or their interpretations could diminish the value of our patents in general, thereby impairing our ability to protect our current and future products, services, or technologies, and could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of our patent applications and the enforcement or defense of our current or future patents.
Our ability to obtain patents and the breadth of any patents obtained is uncertain in part because, to date, some legal principles remain unresolved, and there has not been a consistent policy regarding the breadth or interpretation of claims allowed in patents in the U.S. and other countries. Changes in either patent laws or in interpretations of patent laws in the U.S. and other countries may diminish the value of our intellectual property rights or narrow the scope of our patent protection, which in turn could diminish the commercial value of our products, services, and technologies.
Patent reform legislation may pass in the future that could lead to additional uncertainties and increased costs surrounding the prosecution, enforcement, and defense of our patents and applications. Furthermore, the U.S. Supreme Court and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit have made, and will likely continue to make, changes in how the patent laws of the U.S. are interpreted. The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled on several patent cases in recent years, either narrowing the scope of patent protection available in certain circumstances or weakening the rights of patent owners in certain situations.
In addition to increasing uncertainty with regard to our ability to obtain patents in the future, this combination of events has created uncertainty with respect to the value of patents, once obtained. Depending on actions by the U.S. Congress, the federal courts and the USPTO, the laws and regulations governing patents could change in unpredictable ways that would weaken our ability to obtain new patents or to enforce patents that we own or that we might obtain or license in the future. An inability to obtain, enforce, and defend patents covering our proprietary technologies would materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.
Similarly, foreign courts have made, and will likely continue to make, changes in how the patent laws in their respective jurisdictions are interpreted. Changes in patent laws and regulations in other countries or jurisdictions, changes in the governmental bodies that enforce them, or changes in how the relevant governmental authority
enforces patent laws or regulations may weaken our ability to obtain new patents or to enforce patents that we own or may obtain in the future. Further, the laws of some foreign countries do not protect proprietary rights to the same extent or in the same manner as the laws of the U.S. In addition, any protection afforded by foreign patents may be more limited than that provided under U.S. patent and intellectual property laws. We may encounter significant problems in enforcing and defending our intellectual property both in the U.S. and abroad. For example, if the issuance in a given country of a patent covering an invention is not followed by the issuance in other countries of patents covering the same invention, or if any judicial interpretation of the validity, enforceability or scope of the claims or the written description or enablement in a patent issued in one country is not similar to the interpretation given to the corresponding patent issued in other countries, our ability to protect our intellectual property rights in those countries may be limited. We cannot predict future changes in the interpretation of patent laws in the U.S. and other countries or changes to patent laws that might be enacted into law by U.S. and foreign legislative bodies. Those changes may materially affect our patents or patent applications and our ability to obtain additional patent protection in the future. Any of the foregoing could have a material effect on our competitive position, business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.
In June 2023, the European Unitary Patent system and the European Unified Patent Court (“UPC”) were launched. European patent applications now have the option, upon grant of a patent, of becoming a Unitary Patent which is subject to the jurisdiction of the UPC. In addition, conventional European patents, both already granted at the time the new system began and granted thereafter, are subject to the jurisdiction of the UPC, unless actively opted out. This was a significant change in European patent practice, and deciding whether to opt-in or opt-out of Unitary Patent practice entail strategic and cost considerations. The UPC provides third parties with a new forum to centrally revoke our European patents and makes it possible for a third party to obtain pan-European injunctions against us. It will be several years before we will understand the scope of patent rights that will be recognized and the strength of patent remedies that will be provided by the UPC. While we have the right to opt our patents out of the UPC over the first seven years of the court’s existence, doing so may preclude us from realizing the benefits of the UPC. Moreover, the decision whether to opt-in or opt-out of Unitary Patent status will require coordinating with co-applicants, if any, adding complexity to any such decision.
The legal systems in certain countries may also favor state-sponsored or companies headquartered in particular jurisdictions over our first-in-time patents and other intellectual property protection. We are aware of incidents where such entities have stolen the intellectual property of other companies in order to create competing products. For example, through its “Annual Special 301 Report on Intellectual Property,” the Office of the United States Trade Representative has been reporting on the adequacy and effectiveness of intellectual property protection in a number of foreign countries that are U.S. trading partners and their protection and enforcement of intellectual property rights. Placement of a country on the Priority Watch List indicates that particular problems exist in that country with respect to intellectual property protection, enforcement, or market access for persons relying on intellectual property rights. Countries placed on the Priority Watch List are the focus of increased bilateral attention concerning the specific problem areas. It is possible that we will not be able to enforce our intellectual property rights against third parties that misappropriate our proprietary technology in those countries.
We may not be able to protect our intellectual property rights throughout the world.
Filing, prosecuting, and defending patents on our products, services, and technologies in all countries throughout the world would be prohibitively expensive, and the laws of foreign countries may not protect our rights to the same extent as the laws of the U.S. The requirements for patentability may differ in certain countries, particularly in developing countries. In addition, the laws of some foreign countries do not protect intellectual property rights to the same extent as federal and state laws in the U.S. Consequently, we may not be able to prevent third-parties from practicing our inventions in all countries outside the U.S. or from selling or importing products made using our inventions in and into the U.S. or other jurisdictions. Competitors may use our technologies in jurisdictions where we have not obtained patent protection to develop their own products, services, or technologies and, further, may export otherwise infringing products, services, or technologies to territories where we have patent protection, but enforcement is not as strong as that in the U.S. These products, services, or technologies may compete with our products, services, or technologies, and our patents or other intellectual property rights may not be or sufficient to prevent such competition.
Various companies have encountered significant problems in protecting and defending intellectual property rights in certain foreign jurisdictions. The legal systems of certain countries may not favor the enforcement of patents and other intellectual property protection, particularly those relating to medical devices and related services and technologies, which could make it difficult for us to stop the infringement of our patents or marketing of competing products, services, and technologies in violation of our intellectual property and proprietary rights. In addition, some jurisdictions, such as Europe, Japan, and China, may have a higher standard for patentability than in the U.S., including, for example, imposing a high standard for making claim amendments and for the submission of supplemental experimental data during patent examination. Under those heightened patentability requirements, we may not be able to obtain sufficient patent protection in certain jurisdictions even though the same or similar patent protection can be secured in the U.S. and other jurisdictions.
Proceedings to enforce our intellectual property and proprietary rights in foreign jurisdictions could result in substantial costs and divert our efforts and attention from other aspects of our business, could put our patent rights at risk of being invalidated or interpreted narrowly, could put our owned patent applications at risk of not issuing and could provoke third parties to assert claims against us. We may not prevail in any lawsuits that we initiate, and the damages or other remedies awarded, if any, may not be commercially meaningful. Accordingly, our efforts to enforce our intellectual property and proprietary rights around the world may be inadequate to obtain a significant commercial advantage from the intellectual property that we develop, own or license. Various countries outside the U.S., including certain countries in Europe, India, and China, have compulsory licensing laws under which a patent owner may be compelled to grant licenses to third parties. If we are forced to grant a license to third parties with respect to any patents relevant to our business, our competitive position may be , and our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects may be affected. In addition, many countries limit the enforceability of patents government agencies or government contractors. As a result, a patent owner in such countries may have limited remedies in certain circumstances, which could materially the value of such patent. Accordingly, our efforts to enforce our intellectual property rights around the world may be to obtain a significant commercial from our intellectual property.
Further, the standards applied by the USPTO and foreign patent offices in granting patents are not always applied predictably. As such, we do not know the degree of world-wide uniform protection that we will have on our technologies and products in the future.
If we cannot successfully enforce our intellectual property rights, the commercial value of our products, services, or technologies may be adversely affected and our competitive position may be harmed.
Third parties, including our competitors, may currently, or in the future, infringe, misappropriate, or otherwise violate our issued patents or other intellectual property rights, and we may file lawsuits or initiate other proceedings to protect or enforce our patents or other intellectual property rights, which could be expensive, time-consuming, and unsuccessful. We regularly monitor for unauthorized use of our intellectual property rights and, from time to time, analyze whether to seek to enforce our rights against potential infringement, misappropriation, or violation of our intellectual property rights. However, the steps we have taken, and are taking, to protect our proprietary rights may not be adequate to enforce our rights as against such infringement, misappropriation, or violation of our intellectual property rights. In certain circumstances it may not be practicable or cost- for us to enforce our intellectual property rights fully, particularly in certain developing countries or where the initiation of a claim might our business relationships. We may also be or prevented from enforcing our rights with respect to a government entity or instrumentality because of the doctrine of sovereign immunity. Our ability to enforce our patent or other intellectual property rights depends on our ability to detect . It may be to detect infringers who do not advertise the components or methods that are used in connection with their products, services, or technologies. Moreover, it may be or to obtain evidence of in a competitor’s or potential competitor’s product, services, or technologies. Thus, we may not be to detect use of, or take appropriate steps to enforce, our intellectual property rights. Any to meaningfully enforce our intellectual property rights could our ability to compete and reduce demand for our products, services, and technologies. We may in the future become involved in lawsuits to protect or enforce our intellectual property rights. An result in any proceeding could our business. In any lawsuit
we bring to enforce our intellectual property rights, a court may refuse to stop the other party from manufacturing, commercializing, using or importing the product, service, offering or technology at issue on grounds that our intellectual property rights do not cover, and the other party is not infringing, violating or otherwise misappropriating our intellectual property, through the manufacture, commercialization, use or importation of the product, service, offering or technology in question. Any claims we assert against perceived infringers could also provoke these parties to assert counterclaims against us alleging that we infringe, misappropriate, or otherwise violate their intellectual property rights. If we initiate legal proceedings a third party to enforce a patent covering a product, service, offering or technology, the could that such patent is or unenforceable. In patent in the U.S., or unenforceability are common, and there are numerous grounds upon which a third party can assert or unenforceability of a patent. Grounds for a validity could be an to meet any of several statutory requirements, including of patentable subject matter, novelty, obviousness, or non-enablement. Grounds for an unenforceability assertion could be an that someone connected with of the patent withheld relevant information from USPTO, or made a statement, during . Mechanisms for such include re-examination, post-grant review, inter partes review, proceedings, derivation proceedings, and equivalent proceedings in foreign jurisdictions (e.g., proceedings). In a patent or other intellectual property proceeding, a court may decide that a patent or other intellectual property right of ours is or unenforceable, in whole or in part, construe the patent’s or other intellectual property narrowly or to stop the other party from manufacturing, commercializing, using or importing the product, service, offering, or technology at issue on the grounds that our patents or other intellectual property do not cover the manufacture, commercialization, use, or importation of the product, service, offering, or technology in . Furthermore, even if our patents or other intellectual property rights are found to be valid and , a court may to grant injunctive relief the infringer and instead grant us monetary and/or ongoing royalties. Such monetary compensation may be to offset the to our business caused by the infringer’s competition in the market. An result in any or administrative proceeding could put one or more of our patents or other intellectual property rights at risk of being or interpreted narrowly, which could affect our competitive business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. Moreover, even if we are in any , we may incur significant expense in connection with such proceedings, and the amount of any monetary may be to compensate us for as a result of the and the proceedings.
We may become a party to intellectual property litigation or administrative proceedings that could be expensive, time-consuming, and unsuccessful, and could interfere with our ability to develop, manufacture, commercialize, import, or otherwise use our products, services, or technologies.
Our commercial success depends, in part, on our ability to develop, manufacture, commercialize, import, or use our products, services, and technologies without infringing, misappropriating, or otherwise violating the intellectual property rights of third parties. Our industry has been characterized by extensive litigation regarding patents, trademarks, trade secrets, and other intellectual property rights, and companies in the industry have used intellectual property litigation to gain a competitive advantage. While we do not intend to infringe upon, misappropriate, or otherwise violate the intellectual property rights of others, there may be pertinent rights of which we are presently unaware.
Third parties may initiate legal proceedings alleging that we are infringing, misappropriating, or otherwise violating their intellectual property rights. The outcomes of such proceedings are uncertain and could have a negative impact on the success of our business. It is possible that U.S. and foreign patents and pending patent applications controlled by third parties may be alleged to cover our products, services, and technologies, or that we may be accused of misappropriating third parties’ trade secrets or infringing third parties’ trademarks. We may in the future become party to, or be threatened with, adversarial proceedings or litigation regarding intellectual property rights with respect to our products, services, or technologies, including interference proceedings, post grant review, and inter partes review before the USPTO or equivalent foreign regulatory authority. Furthermore, we may also become involved in other proceedings, such as reexamination, derivation, or proceedings before the USPTO or other jurisdictional body relating to our intellectual property rights or the intellectual property rights of others. Third parties may assert us based on existing patents or patents that may
be granted in the future, regardless of their merit. 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, which our current or future products, services, or technologies 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. There is a risk that third parties may choose to engage in litigation with us to enforce or to otherwise assert their patent rights against us. Even if we believe such claims are without merit, a court of competent jurisdiction could hold that these third-party patents are valid and enforceable, and infringed by the use of our products, services, or technologies, which could have a negative impact on the commercial of our current and any future products, services, or technologies. If we were to the validity of any such third-party U.S. patent in federal court, we would need to a presumption of validity. As this is a high one requiring us to present clear and convincing evidence as to the of any such U.S. patent claim, there is no assurance that a court of competent jurisdiction would the of any such U.S. patent. We will have similar to in foreign courts in order to a third-party claim of patent .
Our defense of any litigation or interference proceedings may fail and, even if successful, defending such claims brought against us would cause us to incur substantial expenses and distract our management and other employees. If such claims are successfully asserted against us, we could be forced to pay substantial damages. Further, if a patent infringement or other intellectual property rights-related lawsuit were brought against us, we could be forced, including by court order, to cease developing, manufacturing, commercializing, importing, or using the product, service, or technology. In addition, we could be found liable for monetary , including treble and attorneys’ fees, if we are found to have a patent or other intellectual property right. Although patent, trademark, trade secret, and other intellectual property have often been settled through licensing or similar arrangements, costs associated with such arrangements may be substantial and could include ongoing royalties. We may not be to obtain licenses on commercially reasonable terms or at all, in which event our business would be materially and affected. Even if we were to obtain a license, the rights may be non-, which could result in our competitors and other third parties access to the same intellectual property. Ultimately, if we are to obtain such licenses or make any necessary changes to our products, services, or technologies, we could be to some aspect of our business operations, which could our business significantly.
A finding of infringement or an unfavorable interference or derivation proceedings outcome could prevent us from developing, manufacturing, commercializing, importing, or using our products, services, or technologies, or force us to cease some or all of our business operations, which could materially harm our business. Claims that we have misappropriated the confidential information or trade secrets of third parties could have a similar negative impact on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects. We may not have sufficient financial or other resources to conduct such litigation or proceedings adequately. Some of our competitors may be able to sustain the costs of litigation or administrative proceedings more effectively than we can because of greater financial resources and more mature and developed intellectual property portfolios. We could encounter in product introductions while we attempt to develop alternative products or technologies.
If third parties assert infringement, misappropriation, or other claims against our customers, these claims may require us to initiate or defend protracted and costly litigation on behalf of our customers, regardless of the merits of these claims. If any of these claims succeed or settle, we may be forced to pay damages or settlement payments on behalf of our customers or may be required to obtain licenses for the products, services, or technologies they use. If we cannot obtain all necessary licenses on commercially reasonable terms, our customers may be forced to stop using our products, services, or technologies.
Our competitors may have substantially greater resources and have made substantial investments in patent portfolios, trade secrets, trademarks, and competing technologies, and may have applied for or obtained, or may in the future apply for or obtain, patents or trademarks that will prevent, limit, or otherwise interfere with our ability to make, use, sell, import, and/or export our products, services, or technologies. As the number of competitors in our market grows and the number of patents issued in this area increases, the possibility of patent infringement
claims against us may increase. Moreover, individuals and groups that are non-practicing entities, commonly referred to as “patent trolls,” purchase patents, and other intellectual property assets for the purpose of making claims of infringement in order to extract settlements. From time to time, we may receive threatening letters, notices or “invitations to license,” or may be the subject of claims that our products, services, or technologies and business operations infringe, misappropriate, or otherwise violate the intellectual property rights of others. These matters can be time-consuming, costly to defend in litigation, divert management’s attention and resources, damage our reputation and brand, and cause us to incur significant expenses or make substantial payments. In addition, we purchase product components, including hardware and software, from suppliers, and the design of these components may be outside of our direct control. These suppliers may not indemnify us in the event that a third party the use of such components its intellectual property rights.
Any lawsuits relating to intellectual property rights could subject us to significant liability for damages and invalidate our intellectual property. Any potential intellectual property litigation also could force us to do one or more of the following: (a) stop developing, making, selling, importing, or using products, services, or technologies that allegedly infringe, misappropriate, or otherwise violate the asserted intellectual property right; (b) pay substantial damages or royalties to the party whose intellectual property rights we may be found to be infringing, misappropriating, or otherwise violating; (c) redesign those products, services, or technologies that contain the allegedly infringing intellectual property, which could be , , and infeasible; and attempt to obtain a license to the relevant intellectual property rights from third parties, which may not be available on commercially reasonable terms or at all, or from third parties who may attempt to license rights that they do not have; (d) the to license our intellectual property rights to others or to collect royalty payments based upon protection and assertion of our intellectual property rights others; (e) incur significant legal expenses; or (f) pay the attorney’s fees and costs of to the party whose intellectual property rights we may be found to be , , or otherwise .
Third parties may also raise similar claims before administrative bodies in the U.S. or abroad, even outside the context of litigation. Such mechanisms include re-examination, post grant review, inter partes review, and equivalent proceedings in foreign jurisdictions (for example, opposition proceedings). Such proceedings could result in revocation of or amendment to our patents in such a way that they no longer cover our products, services, or technologies. With respect to the validity question, for example, we cannot be certain that there is no invalidating prior art, of which we, our patent counsel, and the patent examiner were unaware during prosecution. If a third party were to prevail on a legal assertion of invalidity and/or unenforceability, we may lose at least part, and perhaps all, of the patent protection on our products, services, or technologies. Such a loss of patent protection would have a material impact on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.
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 litigation. There could also be public announcements of the results of hearing, motions, or other interim developments. If securities analysts or investors perceive these results to be negative, it could have a material adverse effect on the price of shares of our common stock. Even if we ultimately prevail, a court may decide not to grant an injunction against further infringing activity and instead award only monetary damages, which may not be an adequate remedy. Furthermore, even if resolved in our favor, the monetary cost of such litigation and the diversion of the attention of our management could outweigh any benefit we receive as a result of the proceedings. Uncertainties resulting from the initiation and continuation of patent or other proceedings could have a material effect on our business. Any of the foregoing may cause us to incur substantial costs and could place a significant on our financial resources, the attention of management from our core business, and our reputation.
We may be subject to claims challenging the inventorship or ownership of our patents and other intellectual property rights.
We may also be subject to claims that our current or former employees, contractors, partners, vendors or other third parties have an ownership interest in our current or future patents, patent applications, or other intellectual property rights, including as an inventor, co-inventor, or co-owner. We may be subject to ownership or
inventorship disputes in the future arising, for example, from conflicting obligations of employees, consultants, partners, vendors, or others who were or are involved in developing our products, services, or technologies. Although it is our policy to require those who may be involved in the conception or development of inventions to execute agreements assigning such inventions and intellectual property rights therein to us, we may be unsuccessful in executing such an agreement with each party who, in fact, conceives or develops inventions that we regard as our own, and we cannot be certain that our agreements with such parties will be upheld in the face of a potential challenge, or that they will not be breached, for which we may not have an adequate remedy. The assignment of inventions may not be self-executing, or the assignment agreements may be breached, and litigation may be necessary to these and other inventorship or ownership of inventorship. If we in any such , in addition to paying monetary , we may intellectual property rights, such as ownership of, or the right to use, intellectual property rights, and other owners may be to license their interest in such intellectual property rights to other third parties, including our competitors. Such an outcome could have a material effect on our business. Even if we are in such , could result in substantial costs and be a to management and other employees.
In addition, we may be subject to claims from third parties challenging inventorship or ownership of intellectual property rights we regard as our own, based on claims that our agreements with employees, consultants, partners, vendors, or others who were or are involved in developing our products, services, or technologies obligating them to assign their inventions and intellectual property rights therein to us are ineffective or in conflict with prior or competing contractual obligations to assign inventions and intellectual property rights therein to another employer, to a former employer, or to another person or entity. Many of our current and former employees and consultants were previously employed at or engaged by other medical device companies, including our competitors or potential competitors. Some of these employees and consultants have executed with such previous employment or engagements confidential information non-disclosure and non-use agreements and inventions assignment agreements, which may have included non-competition provisions. Although we try to ensure that such employees and consultants do not use or otherwise disclose confidential information or intellectual property rights of others in their work for us without such other person’s consent, we may be subject to that we or our current or former employees or consultants have, or otherwise, , , or otherwise the confidential information or the intellectual property rights of these former employers, clients, or other third parties. To the extent that our current or former employees or consultants or use confidential information or intellectual property rights owned by others in their work for us, may arise as to the rights in any related or resulting and may be necessary to these . It may also be necessary or we may desire to obtain a license to such third party’s intellectual property rights to settle any such claim; however, there can be no assurance that we would be to obtain such license on commercially reasonable terms, if at all. If our defense to those , in addition to paying monetary or a settlement payment, a court could prohibit us from manufacturing, commercializing, using or importing the product, service, or technology features or practicing other intellectual property rights that are essential to our business, which could have a material effect on our competitive position as well as our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects. In addition, we may intellectual property rights or personnel. Even if we are in these , could result in substantial costs and could be a to management and our employees. Any or the thereof may affect our ability to hire employees or contract with , partners, services provides, or contractors. A of key personnel or their work product could or prevent our ability to develop, manufacture, commercialize, import, or use our products, services, or technologies, which could materially and affect our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.
If we are unable to protect the disclosure and use of our confidential information and trade secrets, the value of our products, services, and technologies and our business and competitive position could be harmed.
In addition to patent protection, we also rely on other intellectual property rights, including trade secrets, know-how, and/or other proprietary information that is not patentable or that we elect not to patent. However, trade secrets can be difficult to protect, and some courts are less willing or unwilling to protect trade secrets. To protect
and maintain the confidentiality of our trade secrets and other proprietary information, we rely heavily on confidentiality provisions that we have in contracts with our employees, consultants, collaborators, and other third parties. We generally enter into confidentiality and inventions assignment agreements with our employees, consultants, and applicable third parties upon their commencement of a relationship with us. However, we cannot guarantee that we have entered into such agreements with each party that may have or have had access to our trade secrets or proprietary technology and processes, and we may not enter into such agreements with all employees, consultants, and third parties who have been involved in the development of our inventions. Although we generally require all of our employees, consultants, advisors, and any third parties who have access to our proprietary know-how, information, or technology to enter into confidentiality agreements, we cannot provide any assurances that all such agreements have been duly executed, and any of these parties may breach the agreements and disclose our proprietary information, including our trade secrets.
In addition, despite the protections we place on our intellectual property and our other proprietary rights, monitoring unauthorized use and disclosure by employees, consultants, and other third parties who have access to such intellectual property or other proprietary rights is difficult, and we do not know whether the steps we have taken to protect our intellectual property or other proprietary rights will be adequate. Therefore, we may not be able to prevent the unauthorized disclosure or use of our technical knowledge or other trade secrets by such employees, consultants, advisors, or third parties, despite the existence of our protections, including non-disclosure and use restrictions. These agreements may not provide meaningful protection against the unauthorized disclosure or use or of our trade secrets, know-how, or other proprietary information in the event the unwanted use is outside the scope of the provisions of the contracts or in the event of any unauthorized use, , or disclosure of such trade secrets, know-how or other proprietary information that we to detect. There can be no assurances that such employees, consultants, advisors, or third parties will not intentionally or their agreements with us, that we will have adequate remedies for any , or that our trade secrets will not otherwise become known or independently developed by third parties, including our competitors. If any of our trade secrets were to be lawfully obtained or independently developed by a competitor, we would have no right to prevent them, or those to whom they communicate it, from using that information to compete with us. In addition to contractual measures, we try to protect the confidential nature of our proprietary information by maintaining physical security of our premises and electronic security of our information technology systems. Such security measures may not, for example, in the case of of a trade secret by an employee, consultant or other third party with authorized access, provide adequate protection for our proprietary information. Our security measures may not prevent an employee, consultant, or other third party from our trade secrets and providing them to a competitor, and recourse we take such may not provide an adequate remedy to protect our interests fully.
If any of our trade secrets were to be disclosed to or independently developed by a competitor, our competitive position would be harmed. The exposure of our trade secrets and other proprietary information would impair our competitive advantages and could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects. In particular, a failure to protect our proprietary rights may allow competitors to copy our products, services, or technologies, which could adversely affect our pricing and market share. Unauthorized parties may also attempt to copy or reverse engineer certain aspects of our products, services, or technologies that we consider proprietary. Costly and time-consuming litigation could be necessary to enforce and determine the scope of our trade secret rights and related confidentiality, non-disclosure, and non-use provisions, and outcomes of such litigation are . Enforcing a claim that a party , used or a trade secret can be , expensive, and time-consuming, and the outcome is . While we use commonly accepted security measures, trade secret are often a combination of federal and state law in the U.S., and the criteria for protection of trade secrets can vary among different jurisdictions. If the steps we have taken to maintain our trade secrets are deemed , we may have recourse third parties for the trade secret. In addition, some courts are less willing or to protect trade secrets and agreement terms that address non-competition are to enforce in many jurisdictions and might not be enforceable in certain cases. Finally, even if we were to be on the enforcement of our , we may not be to obtain adequate remedies.
It is also possible that others may independently develop information or technologies that are the same as or similar to our trade secrets or other proprietary technologies and develop products, services, or technologies without obtaining access to our trade secrets or other proprietary information in which case we could not assert any intellectual property rights, including trade secret rights, against such parties in a manner that could prevent legal recourse by us. If we fail to obtain or maintain trade secret protection, or if any of our confidential or proprietary information, such as our trade secrets, were to be disclosed or used by others without our consent or otherwise misappropriated, or if any such information was independently developed by a competitor, or if our competitors obtain our trade secrets or independently develop products, services, or technologies that are the same as or similar to ours, our competitive market position could be materially and adversely harmed.
If our trademarks and trade names are not adequately protected, we may not be able to build brand name recognition in our markets of interest and our competitive position may be harmed.
Our trademarks could be challenged, opposed, invalidated, infringed, and circumvented by third parties, and our trademarks could also be diluted, declared generic or descriptive, or found to be infringing on other marks. If any of the foregoing occurs, we could be forced to re-brand our Company, products, services, or technologies, resulting in loss of brand recognition and requiring us to devote resources to advertising and marketing new brands, and suffer other competitive harm. Third parties may also adopt trademarks similar to ours, which could harm our brand identity and lead to market confusion. Further, there can be no assurance that competitors will not infringe our trademarks or that we will have adequate resources to enforce our trademarks. At times, competitors may adopt trade names or trademarks similar to ours, thereby our ability to build brand identity and possibly to market . Certain of our current or future trademarks may become so well known by the public that their use becomes generic and they trademark protection. Over the long term, if we are to establish name recognition based on our trademarks and trade names, then we may not be to compete effectively. Any of the foregoing could have a material effect on our competitive position, business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.
We rely on our trademarks, trade names, and brand names to distinguish our products, services, and technologies from the products, services, and technologies of our competitors, and have registered or applied to register many of these trademarks in the U.S. and certain countries outside the U.S.; however, we have not yet registered all of our trademarks in all of our current and potential markets. There can be no assurance that all of our trademark applications will be approved for registration. During trademark registration proceedings, we may receive rejections. Although we are given an opportunity to respond to those rejections, we may be unable to overcome such rejections. In addition, in proceedings before the USPTO and comparable agencies in many foreign jurisdictions, third parties have opposed and may oppose in the future further our trademark applications and may seek to cancel trademark registrations or otherwise challenge our use of the trademarks. Opposition or proceedings may be filed our trademark filings in these agencies, and such filings may not survive such proceedings. While we may be to continue the use of our trademarks in the event registration is not available, particularly in the U.S., where trademark rights are acquired based on use and not registration, third parties may be to the continued use of our trademarks if such parties are to claim in court. In addition, or proceedings may be filed our trademark applications and registrations and our trademarks may not survive such proceedings. If we do not secure registrations for our trademarks, we may encounter more in enforcing them third parties than we otherwise would. Our trademarks or trade names may be , , declared generic, or determined to be or on other marks.
Our products contain third-party open source software components and failure to comply with the terms of the underlying open source software licenses could restrict our ability to sell our products, affect our ability to protect our proprietary information, and subject us to possible litigation.
Our products contain software tools licensed by third parties under open source software licenses. Use and distribution of open source software may entail greater risks than use of third-party commercial software, as open source software licensors generally do not provide warranties or other contractual protections regarding infringement claims or the quality of the code. Some open source software licenses contain requirements that the
licensee make its source code publicly available if the licensee creates modifications or derivative works using such open source software, depending on the type of open source software the licensee uses and how the licensee uses it. If we combine our proprietary software with open source software in a certain manner, we could, under certain open source software licenses, be required to make available the source code of certain of our proprietary software to the public for free. This could allow our competitors to create similar products with less development effort and time and ultimately could result in a loss of product sales and revenue. In addition, some companies that use third-party open source software have faced claims challenging their use of such open source software and their compliance with the terms of the applicable open source license. We may be subject to suits by third parties claiming ownership of what we believe to be open source software or claiming non-compliance with the applicable open source licensing terms. Use of open source software may also present additional security risks because the public availability of such software may make it easier for hackers and other third parties to compromise or attempt to compromise our technology platform and systems.
Although we typically review our use of open source software to avoid subjecting our products, services or technology to conditions we do not intend, the terms of many open source software licenses have not been interpreted by U.S. courts, and there is a risk that these licenses could be construed in a way that could impose unanticipated conditions or restrictions on our ability to commercialize our products, services or technology. Moreover, our processes for monitoring and controlling our use of open source software in our products, services or technology may not be effective. If we are held to have breached the terms of an open source software license, we could be required to seek licenses from third parties to continue offering our solutions on terms that are not economically feasible, to re-engineer our products, services, or technology, to discontinue the sale of our products, services, or technology if re-engineering could not be accomplished on a timely basis, to pay statutory or other damages to the license holder, or to make generally available, in source code form, our proprietary code, any of which could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.
Risks Relating to Financial and Accounting Matters
Our ability to utilize our net operating loss carryforwards and research and development tax credits may be limited.
We have experienced net operating losses (“NOLs”) for tax purposes since our inception. As of December 31, 2025, we have total available gross (pre-tax) Federal and U.S. state NOL carryforwards of $126 million and $93 million, respectively. Under the Federal Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017, NOLs incurred in tax years beginning on or after January 1, 2018, are carried forward indefinitely and are subject to a usage limitation of 80% of taxable income. NOLs incurred in tax years prior to January 1, 2018, are subject to a twenty-year carryforward period before expiring but are not subject to a usage limitation based on taxable income.
Utilization of NOL carryforwards and research and development tax credit carryforwards may be subject to substantial annual limitations under Section 382 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (“Section 382”), or, for states, under state laws, due to ownership changes that have occurred previously or that could occur in the future. These ownership changes may limit the amount of carryforwards that can be utilized annually to offset future taxable income. In general, an ownership change, as defined by Section 382, results from transactions increasing the ownership of certain stockholders or public groups in the stock of a corporation by more than 50% over a three-year period. We have not conducted a study to assess whether an ownership change has occurred or whether there have been multiple ownership changes since inception. If we have experienced an ownership change, as defined by Section 382, at any time since inception, utilization of the NOL carryforwards or research and development tax credit carryforwards would be subject to an annual limitation under Section 382. Any limitation may result in the expiration of a portion of the NOL carryforwards or research and development tax credit carryforwards before utilization.
The inability to fully utilize the NOL carryforwards and research and development tax credits could adversely affect our financial position and results of operations. If we are unable to generate sufficient taxable income in future periods to utilize the NOL carryforwards and research and development tax credit carryforwards before they
expire, we may incur higher tax liabilities, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, and results of operations.
We have identified two material weaknesses in our internal control over financial reporting. These material weaknesses could adversely affect our ability to report our results of operations and financial condition accurately and in a timely manner.
Our management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with U.S. GAAP. Our management is likewise required, on a quarterly basis, to evaluate the effectiveness of our internal controls and to disclose any changes and material weaknesses identified through such evaluation in those internal controls. A material weakness is a deficiency, or a combination of deficiencies, in internal control over financial reporting, such that there is a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement of our annual or interim financial statements will not be prevented or detected on a timely basis.
We identified two material weaknesses in our internal control over financial reporting.
The first material weakness relates to our failure to design or maintain sufficient controls over implementation of information technology general controls or complementary user entity controls for applications (such as our enterprise resource planning (“ERP”), payroll and stock option management IT systems) used in the preparation of our financial statements. More specifically, we did not design or maintain sufficient controls related to user access provisioning and monitoring, change management, program development and data management.
The second material weakness relates to a lack of segregation of duties in the financial reporting function due to a limited number of staff performing the financial reporting function. More specifically, there is a limited level of multiple reviews among those tasked with preparing our financial records and with respect to our existing ERP system proper segregation of duties was not enforced (i.e., for journal entries we did not always different individuals responsible for the entry process and another approving the journal entry).
Any failure to remediate these material weaknesses could adversely impact our ability to report our financial position and results from operations on a timely and accurate basis. If our financial statements are not accurate, investors may not have a complete understanding of our operations. Likewise, if our financial statements are not filed on a timely basis, we could be subject to sanctions or investigations by the stock exchange on which our common stock is listed, the SEC or other regulatory authorities. Either of the foregoing could have a material adverse effect on our business. Ineffective 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 securities.
We can give no assurance that the measures we have taken and plan to take in the future will remediate the material weaknesses identified or that any additional material weaknesses or restatements of financial results will not arise in the future due to a failure to implement and maintain adequate internal control over financial reporting or circumvention of these controls. In addition, even if we are successful in strengthening our controls and procedures, in the future those controls and procedures may not be adequate to prevent or identify irregularities or errors or to facilitate the fair presentation of our financial statements.
We may face litigation and other risks as a result of the material weaknesses in our internal control over financial reporting.
As a result of such material weaknesses and other matters raised or that may in the future be raised by the SEC, we face potential for litigation or other disputes which may include, among others, claims invoking the federal and state securities laws, contractual claims or other claims arising from the restatement and material weaknesses in our internal control over financial reporting and the preparation of our financial statements. Any such litigation or dispute, whether successful or not, could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.
Risks Relating to Our Common Stock
We are an emerging growth company and a smaller reporting company, and we cannot be certain if the reduced reporting requirements applicable to emerging growth companies and smaller reporting companies will make our common stock less attractive to investors.
We are an “emerging growth company,” as defined in the JOBS Act. We will remain an “emerging growth company” until the earliest to occur of:
• the last day of the fiscal year during which our total annual revenue equals or exceeds $1.235 billion (subject to adjustment for inflation);
• the last day of the fiscal year following the fifth anniversary of our IPO;
• the date on which we have, during the previous three-year period, issued more than $1 billion in non-convertible debt; or
• the date on which we are deemed to be a “large accelerated filer” under the Exchange Act.
As a result of our “emerging growth company” status, we may take advantage of exemptions from various reporting requirements that would otherwise be applicable to public companies including, but not limited to, reduced disclosure obligations regarding executive compensation in our periodic reports and proxy statements and exemptions from the requirements of holding a nonbinding advisory vote on executive compensation and stockholder approval of any golden parachute payments not previously approved.
We are also a “smaller reporting company,” meaning that the market value of our stock held by non-affiliates plus the aggregate amount of gross proceeds to us as a result our IPO is less than $700.0 million and our annual revenue is less than $100.0 million during the most recently completed fiscal year. We may continue to be a smaller reporting company if either (i) the market value of our stock held by non-affiliates is less than $250.0 million or (ii) our annual revenue is less than $100.0 million during the most recently completed fiscal year and the market value of our stock held by non-affiliates is less than $700.0 million.
If we are a smaller reporting company at the time we cease to be an emerging growth company, we may continue to rely on exemptions from certain disclosure requirements that are available to smaller reporting companies. Specifically, as a smaller reporting company we may choose to present only the two most recent fiscal years of audited financial statements in our annual report on Form 10-K and, similar to emerging growth companies, smaller reporting companies have reduced disclosure obligations regarding executive compensation. Investors may find our common stock less attractive because we may rely on these exemptions. If some investors find our common stock less attractive as a result, there may be a less active trading market for our common stock and the market price of our common stock may be adversely affected and more volatile.
We will incur increased costs and are subject to additional regulations and requirements as a result of operating as a public company, which could lower our profits or make it more difficult to run our business.
As a public company, we will incur significant legal, accounting, and other expenses that we have not incurred as a private company, including costs associated with public company reporting requirements. We will also incur costs associated with the Sarbanes-Oxley Act and related rules implemented by the SEC and The Nasdaq Stock Market, LLC. The expenses generally incurred by public companies for reporting and corporate governance purposes have been increasing. We expect these rules and regulations to increase our legal and financial compliance costs and to make some activities more time-consuming and costly, although we are currently unable to estimate these costs with any degree of certainty. These laws and regulations also could make it more difficult or costly for us to obtain certain types of insurance, including director and officer liability insurance, and we may
be forced to accept reduced policy limits and coverage or incur substantially higher costs to obtain the same or similar coverage.
These laws and regulations could also make it more difficult for us to attract and retain qualified persons to serve on our board of directors, on our board committees or as our executive officers. Furthermore, if we are unable to satisfy our obligations as a public company, we could be subject to delisting of our common stock, fines, sanctions, other regulatory action, and potentially civil litigation.
If we are unable to design, implement, and maintain effective internal control over financial reporting in the future, investors may lose confidence in the accuracy and completeness of our financial reports and the market price of our common stock may decline.
As a public company, we are required to maintain internal control over financial reporting and to report any material weaknesses in such internal controls. In addition, beginning with our second annual report on Form 10-K, we will be required to furnish a report by management on the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting, pursuant to the rules and regulations of the SEC regarding compliance with Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. The process of designing, implementing and testing the internal control over financial reporting required to comply with this obligation is time consuming, costly and complicated. See the risk factor titled “We have identified two material weaknesses in our internal control over financial reporting. These material weaknesses could adversely affect our ability to report our results of operations and financial condition accurately and in a timely manner.” Any failure to maintain internal control over financial reporting could severely inhibit our ability to accurately report our financial condition, results of operations, or cash flows.
Further, if we are unable to comply with the requirements of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act in a timely manner, or if we or, if required, our auditors, are unable to assert that our internal control over financial reporting is effective, investors may lose confidence in the accuracy and completeness of our financial reports and the market price of our common stock could decline, and we could also become subject to investigations by the stock exchange on which our common stock is listed, the SEC or other regulatory authorities, which could require additional financial and management resources. Failure to remedy any material weakness in our internal control over financial reporting, or to implement or maintain other effective control systems required of public companies, could also restrict our future access to the capital markets.
In addition, as we continue to scale and improve our operations, including our internal systems and processes, we are currently evaluating the implementation of a variety of critical systems, such as supply chain management, customer relationship management, billing, human resource information systems and accounting systems. We cannot assure you that new systems, including any increases in scale or related improvements, will be successfully implemented or that appropriate personnel will be available to facilitate and manage these processes. Failure to implement necessary systems and procedures, transition to new systems and processes or hire the necessary personnel could result in higher costs, compromised internal reporting and processes and system errors or failures. For example, we are evaluating an upgrade to or replacement of our existing ERP system that facilitates orderly maintenance of books and records and the preparation of financial statements. ERP system implementations are complex projects that require significant investment of capital and human resources, the reengineering of many business processes and the attention of many employees who would otherwise be focused on other aspects of our business. The implementation and transition to any new system, including a new ERP system, may be to our business if they do not work as planned or if we experience issues related to such implementation or transition, which could have a material effect on our operations.
We do not intend to pay dividends in the foreseeable future. As a result, your ability to achieve a return on your investment will depend on appreciation in the market price of our common stock.
We have never declared or paid cash dividends on our capital stock, and we do not currently intend to pay any cash dividends on our capital stock in the foreseeable future. We currently intend to retain all available funds and any future earnings to fund the development and expansion of our business. Any future determination related to dividend policy will be made at the discretion of our board of directors, subject to applicable laws, and will depend
upon, among other factors, our results of operations, prospects, financial condition, contractual restrictions and capital requirements. In addition, our ability to pay cash dividends on our capital stock may be limited by the terms of any future debt or preferred securities we issue or any future credit facilities we enter into.
Accordingly, investors must for the foreseeable future rely on sales of their common stock after price appreciation, which may never occur, as the only way to realize any future gains on their investments.
We may require additional capital to support business growth, and this capital might not be available on terms favorable to us, or at all, and may dilute existing stockholders’ ownership of our common stock.
We intend to continue to make investments to support our business growth and may require additional funds to respond to business challenges and opportunities, including the need to advance clinical studies and pursue regulatory clearances for new or next-generation product pipeline. The scope, cost, timeline of these clinical development efforts are inherently uncertain, there can be no assurance that such efforts will yield successful outcomes or that the capital resources required to fund them will not exceed our current expectations. Accordingly, we may need to engage in equity or debt financings to secure additional funds. If we raise additional funds through further issuances of equity or convertible debt securities, our existing stockholders could suffer significant dilution, and any new equity securities we issue could have rights, preferences, and privileges superior to those of holders of our common stock. In addition, the incurrence of indebtedness would increase our fixed obligations and include covenants or other restrictions that would impede our ability to manage our operations. Further, if additional financing is needed, we may not be able to obtain additional financing on terms to us or at all. Our to obtain adequate financing or financing on terms to us, when we require it, could significantly limit our ability to continue supporting our business growth and our new or next-generation product pipeline.
Sales of a substantial number of shares of our common stock in the public market could cause our stock price to fall.
Sales of a substantial number of shares of our common stock in the public market could occur at any time. Lock-up agreements covering approximately 41.1 million pre-IPO shares of our outstanding common stock entered into in connection with our initial public offering expired in early January 2026 and these shares may now be sold, subject to any applicable volume limitations under federal securities laws, at any time. If our stockholders sell, or the market perceives that our stockholders intend to sell, substantial amounts of our common stock in the public market, the market price of our common stock could decline significantly and impair our ability to raise adequate capital through the sale of additional equity or equity-linked securities at a time and price that we deem appropriate. If our existing stockholders sell, or indicate an intention to sell, substantial amounts of our common stock in the public market , the trading price of our common stock could decline.
Provisions in our charter documents and under Delaware law could discourage a takeover that stockholders may consider favorable and may lead to entrenchment of management.
Our amended and restated certificate of incorporation and amended and restated bylaws contain provisions that could delay or prevent changes in control or changes in our management without the consent of our board of directors. These provisions include the following:
• A classified board of directors with three-year staggered terms, which may delay the ability of stockholders to change the membership of a majority of our board of directors;
• No cumulative voting in the election of directors, which limits the ability of minority stockholders to elect director candidates;
• The exclusive right of our board of directors to elect a director to fill a vacancy created by the expansion of the board of directors or the resignation, death, or removal of a director, which prevents stockholders from being able to fill vacancies on our board of directors;
• The ability of our board of directors to authorize the issuance of shares of preferred stock and to determine the price and other terms of those shares, including preferences and voting rights, without stockholder approval, which could be used to significantly dilute the ownership of a hostile acquiror;
• The ability of our board of directors to alter our amended and restated bylaws without obtaining stockholder approval;
• The required approval of at least 66 2 ⁄ 3 % of the shares entitled to vote at an election of directors to adopt, amend or repeal our amended and restated bylaws or to repeal certain provisions of our amended and restated certificate of incorporation;
• A prohibition on stockholder action by written consent, which forces stockholder action to be taken at an annual or special meeting of our stockholders;
• The requirement that a special meeting of stockholders may be called only by our board of directors, which may delay the ability of our stockholders to force consideration of a proposal or to take action, including the removal of directors; and
• Advance notice procedures that stockholders must comply with in order to nominate candidates to our board of directors or to propose matters to be acted upon at a stockholders’ meeting, which may discourage or deter a potential acquiror from conducting a solicitation of proxies to elect the acquiror’s own slate of directors or otherwise attempting to obtain control of us.
We are also subject to the anti-takeover provisions contained in Section 203 of the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware (the “Delaware General Corporation Law”). Under Section 203, a corporation may not, in general, engage in a business combination with any holder of 15% or more of its capital stock unless the holder has held the stock for three years or, among other exceptions, the board of directors has approved the transaction.
Claims for indemnification by our directors, officers, and other employees or agents may reduce our available funds to satisfy successful third-party claims against us and may reduce the amount of money available to us.
Our amended and restated certificate of incorporation and amended and restated bylaws will provide that we will indemnify our directors and officers, in each case to the fullest extent permitted by Delaware law. In addition, as permitted by Section 145 of the Delaware General Corporation Law, our amended and restated bylaws and our indemnification agreements that we have entered into with our directors, officers and certain other employees provide that:
• We will indemnify our directors and officers for serving us in those capacities or for serving other business enterprises at our request, to the fullest extent permitted by Delaware law. Delaware law provides that a corporation may indemnify such person if such person acted in good faith and in a manner such person reasonably believed to be in or not opposed to the best interests of the registrant and, with respect to any criminal proceeding, had no reasonable cause to believe such person’s conduct was unlawful.
• We may, in our discretion, indemnify employees and agents in those circumstances where indemnification is permitted by applicable law.
• We are required to advance expenses, as incurred, to our directors and officers in connection with defending a proceeding, except that such directors or officers shall undertake to repay such advances if it is ultimately determined that such person is not entitled to indemnification.
• We will not be obligated pursuant to our amended and restated bylaws to indemnify a person with respect to proceedings initiated by that person against us or our other indemnitees, except with respect to proceedings authorized by our board of directors or brought to enforce a right to indemnification.
The rights conferred in our amended and restated bylaws are not exclusive, and we are authorized to enter into indemnification agreements with our directors, officers, employees, and agents and to obtain insurance to indemnify such persons.
• We may not retroactively amend our amended and restated bylaws provisions to reduce our indemnification obligations to directors, officers, employees, and agents.
Our amended and restated certificate of incorporation provides that the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware will be the exclusive forum for certain disputes between us and our stockholders, which could limit our stockholders’ ability to obtain a favorable judicial forum for disputes with us or our directors, officers, or employees.
Our amended and restated certificate of incorporation provides that, unless we consent in writing to the selection of an alternative forum, the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware (or, in the event that the Court of Chancery does not have jurisdiction, the federal district court for the District of Delaware or other state courts of the State of Delaware) is the exclusive forum for any derivative action or proceeding brought on our behalf, any action asserting a claim of breach of fiduciary duty owed by any of our directors, officers, or stockholders to us or to our stockholders, any action asserting a claim against us arising pursuant to the Delaware General Corporation Law, our amended and restated certificate of incorporation, or our amended and restated bylaws (as either may be amended from time to time), or any action asserting a claim against us that is governed by the internal affairs doctrine; provided that, the exclusive forum provision will not apply to suits brought to enforce any liability or duty created by the Exchange Act or any other claim for which the federal courts have jurisdiction; and provided further that, if and only if the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware any such action for of subject matter jurisdiction, such action may be brought in another state or federal court sitting in the State of Delaware. Our amended and certificate of incorporation also provides that the federal district courts of the United States of America will be the forum for the resolution of any asserting a cause of action us or any of our directors, officers, employees, or agents and arising under the Securities Act. Nothing in our amended and certificate of incorporation or amended and bylaws stockholders that assert under the Exchange Act from bringing such in state or federal court, subject to applicable law.
If any action the subject matter of which is within the scope described above is filed in a court other than a court located within the State of Delaware (a “Foreign Action”), in the name of any stockholder, such stockholder shall be deemed to have consented to the personal jurisdiction of the state and federal courts located within the State of Delaware in connection with any action brought in any such court to enforce the applicable provisions of our amended and restated certificate of incorporation and having service of process made upon such stockholder in any such action by service upon such stockholder’s counsel in the Foreign Action as agent for such stockholder. Although our amended and restated certificate of incorporation contains the choice of forum provision described above, it is possible that a court could find that such a provision is inapplicable for a particular claim or action or that such provision is unenforceable.
We believe these provisions may benefit us by providing increased consistency in the application of Delaware law and federal securities laws by chancellors and judges, as applicable, particularly experienced in resolving corporate disputes, efficient administration of cases on a more expedited schedule relative to other forums, and protection against the burdens of multi-forum litigation. However, this choice of forum provision may limit a stockholder’s ability to bring a claim in a judicial forum that it finds favorable for disputes with us or any of our directors, officers, other employees, or stockholders, which may discourage lawsuits with respect to such claims, although our stockholders will not be deemed to have waived our compliance with federal securities laws and the rules and regulations thereunder. In addition, this choice of forum provision may result in increased costs for stockholders to bring a claim. Furthermore, the enforceability of similar choice of forum provisions in other
companies’ certificates of incorporation has been challenged in legal proceedings, and it is possible that a court could find these types of provisions to be inapplicable or unenforceable.
The market price of our common stock may be volatile, which could cause the value of your investment to decline.
The market price of our common stock may be highly volatile and could be subject to wide fluctuations. Securities markets worldwide experience significant price and volume fluctuations. This market volatility, as well as general economic, market, or political conditions, could reduce the market price of our common stock regardless of our operating performance. In addition, our results of operations could be below the expectations of public market analysts and investors due to a number of potential factors, including variations in our quarterly results of operations, additions or departures of key management personnel, failure to meet analysts’ earnings estimates, publication of research reports about our industry, litigation and government investigations, data privacy and security-related events, changes or proposed changes in laws or regulations or differing interpretations or enforcement thereof affecting our business, adverse market reaction to any indebtedness we may incur or securities we may issue in the future, changes in market valuations of similar companies or speculation in the press or investment community, announcements by our competitors, adverse publicity about the medical device industry, or individual , and, in response, the market price of our common stock could decrease significantly.
Stock markets experience extreme price and volume fluctuations. In the past, following periods of volatility in the overall market and the market price of a company’s securities, securities class action litigation has often been instituted against these companies. Such litigation, if instituted against us, could result in substantial costs and a diversion of our management’s attention and resources.
If securities or industry analysts do not publish research or reports about our business, or if they issue an adverse or misleading opinion regarding our stock, our stock price and trading volume could decline.
The trading market for our common stock will be influenced by the research and reports that industry or securities analysts publish about us or our business. We do not currently have and may never obtain research coverage by securities and industry analysts. If no or few securities or industry analysts commence coverage of us, the market price for our stock would be negatively impacted. In the event we obtain securities or industry analyst coverage, if any of the analysts who cover us issue an adverse or misleading opinion regarding us, our business model, our intellectual property or our stock performance, or if our results of operations fail to meet the expectations of analysts, our stock price would likely decline. If one or more of these analysts cease coverage of us or fail to publish reports on us regularly, we could lose visibility in the financial markets, which in turn could cause our stock price or trading volume to decline.
General Risk Factors
Product and professional liability suits against us could result in expensive and time-consuming litigation, payment of substantial damages and increases in our insurance rates.
Our CapsoCam capsules are cleared or authorized by the FDA for specific intended uses. However, if physicians elect to use our products in manners outside of these intended uses, such use may result in adverse outcomes and may pose significant risks, especially for individuals with known or suspected gastrointestinal obstructions, strictures, or fistulas, as the capsule may become lodged, potentially leading to an obstruction that requires urgent medical or surgical intervention. We cannot prevent physicians from using our products off-label or from using non-our products in conjunction with our products. The risk of injury to patients may increase if physicians attempt off-label use. Additionally, we cannot guarantee that physicians are adequately trained by us or their peers before using our products. Complications from off-label use or use by untrained physicians may not effectively treat conditions and may expose us to product liability claims or , our reputation.
The sale and use of our CapsoCam capsules could lead to product or professional liability claims based on allegations that one of our CapsoCam capsules contained a design or manufacturing defect, which resulted in the failure to detect the disease for which it was designed. A product or professional liability claim could result in substantial damages and be costly and time-consuming to defend, either of which could materially harm our business or financial condition. We cannot assure you that our liability insurance would protect our assets from the financial impact of defending a liability claim.
Any claim brought against us, with or without merit, could increase our liability insurance rates or prevent us from securing insurance coverage in the future. Furthermore, product liability claims could result in negative publicity, injury to our reputation, and loss of revenue. Even successful defense would require significant financial and management resources, which could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.
We may engage in acquisitions that could disrupt our business, cause dilution to our stockholders and reduce our financial resources.
In the future, we may enter into transactions to acquire other businesses, products, or technologies. Because we have not made any acquisitions to date, our ability to do so successfully is unproven. If we do identify suitable candidates, we may not be able to make such acquisitions on favorable terms or at all. Any acquisitions we make may not strengthen our competitive position, and these transactions may be viewed negatively by customers or investors.
We may decide to incur debt in connection with an acquisition or issue our common stock or other securities to the stockholders of the acquired company, which would reduce the percentage ownership of our existing stockholders. We could incur losses resulting from undiscovered liabilities of the acquired business that are not covered by the indemnification we may obtain from the seller. In addition, we may not be able to successfully integrate the acquired personnel, technologies, and operations into our existing business in an effective, timely, and non-disruptive manner.
We or the third parties we depend on may be adversely affected by natural disasters and other catastrophic events, and our business continuity and disaster recovery plans may not adequately protect us from a serious natural disaster or other catastrophic event. Any interruption in our operations or the operations of third parties who supply components or other materials for our products may have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.
Severe weather, natural disasters and other catastrophic events, including pandemics or other public health crises (such as the COVID-19 pandemic), earthquakes, tsunamis, hurricanes, floods, fires, explosions, accidents, power outages, cyber attacks, telecommunications failures, mechanical failures, unscheduled downtimes, civil unrest, strikes, transportation interruptions, unpermitted discharges or releases of toxic or hazardous substances, other environmental risks, wars or other conflicts (including wars in Ukraine and the Middle East), sabotage, terrorist attacks, or other intentional acts of vandalism or could our operations, or the operations of third parties who manufacture or supply components or other materials for our products, and have a material effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.
If a natural disaster or other catastrophic event occurs that prevents us or third-party suppliers or manufacturers from using all or a significant portion of our or their headquarters or other facilities, that damages critical infrastructure or that otherwise disrupts operations, it may be difficult or, in certain cases, impossible, for us to continue our business for a substantial period of time. The disaster recovery and business continuity plans we have in place currently are limited and are unlikely to prove adequate in the event of a serious disaster or similar catastrophic event. The potential impact of any disruption would depend on the nature and extent of the damage caused by a . We may incur substantial expenses as a result of the limited nature of our recovery and business continuity plans, which, particularly when taken together with our of earthquake insurance, could have a material effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.
In addition, our corporate headquarters and manufacturing facilities are located in Saratoga, California, near major earthquake faults and fire zones. We do not carry earthquake insurance. Furthermore, integral parties in our supply chain are similarly vulnerable to natural disasters or other sudden, unforeseen, and severe adverse events. If such an event were to affect our supply chain, it could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.
