Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (Policies) |
12 Months Ended | |
|---|---|---|
Dec. 31, 2015 | ||
| Accounting Policies [Abstract] | ||
| Basis of Presentation and Principles of Consolidation |
Basis of Presentation and Principles of Consolidation The Company’s consolidated financial statements have been prepared in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“GAAP”). The Company’s consolidated financial statements include the accounts of the Company and the accounts of the Company’s subsidiaries: Innmune Limited, Coronado SO, Cyprium Therapeutics, Inc., Escala, JMC, CB Securities Corporation, Avenue, Checkpoint, Mustang and Helocyte. All intercompany balances and transactions have been eliminated. The accompanying consolidated financial statements include the accounts of the Company’s subsidiaries. For consolidated entities where the Company owns less than 100% of the subsidiary, the Company records net income (loss) attributable to non-controlling interests in its consolidated statements of operations equal to the percentage of the economic or ownership interest retained in such entities by the respective non-controlling parties. The Company also consolidates subsidiaries in which it owns less than 50% of the subsidiary but maintains voting control. |
|
| Use of Estimates |
Use of Estimates The Company’s consolidated financial statements include certain amounts that are based on management’s best estimates and judgments. The Company’s significant estimates include, but are not limited to, useful lives assigned to long-lived assets, fair value of stock options and warrants, stock-based compensation, common stock issued to acquire licenses, investments, accrued expenses, provisions for income taxes and contingencies. Due to the uncertainty inherent in such estimates, actual results may differ from these estimates. |
|
| Reclassifications |
Reclassifications The Company reclassified debt issuance costs from other assets to notes payable, long-term on the Consolidated Balance Sheets for all periods presented pursuant to the early adoption of Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) No. 2015-03 Simplifying the Presentation of Debt Issuance Costs. |
|
| Fair Value Measurement |
Fair Value Measurement The Company follows accounting guidance on fair value measurements for financial assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis. Under the accounting guidance, fair value is defined as an exit price, representing the amount that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. As such, fair value is a market-based measurement that should be determined based on assumptions that market participants would use in pricing an asset or a liability. The accounting guidance requires fair value measurements be classified and disclosed in one of the following three categories:
Level 1: Quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities.
Level 2: Observable inputs other than Level 1 prices for similar assets or liabilities that are directly or indirectly observable in the marketplace.
Level 3: Unobservable inputs which are supported by little or no market activity and that are financial instruments whose values are determined using pricing models, discounted cash flow methodologies, or similar techniques, as well as instruments for which the determination of fair value requires significant judgment or estimation.
The fair value hierarchy also requires an entity to maximize the use of observable inputs and minimize the use of unobservable inputs when measuring fair value. Assets and liabilities measured at fair value are classified in their entirety based on the lowest level of input that is significant to the fair value measurement. The Company’s assessment of the significance of a particular input to the fair value measurement in its entirety requires management to make judgments and consider factors specific to the asset or liability. Certain of the Company’s financial instruments are not measured at fair value on a recurring basis, but are recorded at amounts that approximate their fair value due to their liquid or short-term nature, such as accounts payable, accrued expenses and other current liabilities. The carrying value of the amount owed to Ovamed GmbH (“Ovamed”) upon the acquisition of certain manufacturing rights in December 2012 to under the amendment to our sublicense agreement with Ovamed has been recorded at its net present value, which approximates its fair value. The amounts due to Ovamed are included in current liabilities at December 31, 2015 and both current liabilities and long-term liabilities at December 31, 2014 in the Consolidated Balance Sheets (see Note 9). |
|
| Segment Reporting |
Segment Reporting The Company operates in one operating segment and, accordingly, no segment disclosures have been presented herein. All of the Company’s equipment, leasehold improvements and other fixed assets are physically located within the United States, and all agreements with the Company’s vendors are denominated in U.S. dollars. |
|
| Cash and Cash Equivalents |
Cash and Cash Equivalents The Company considers highly liquid investments with a maturity of three months or less when purchased to be cash equivalents. Cash and cash equivalents at December 31, 2015 and at December 31, 2014 consisted of cash, money market funds and certificates of deposit in institutions in the United States. Balances at certain institutions have exceeded Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation insured limits and U.S. government agency securities. |
|
| Marketable Securities |
Marketable Securities Marketable securities are classified as trading and are carried at fair value. There were no marketable securities at December 31, 2015. Marketable securities at December 31, 2014 consist of a U.S. Treasury Bill and a mutual fund which were valued at market prices. |
|
| Property and Equipment |
Property and Equipment Office equipment is recorded at cost and depreciated using the straight-line method over the estimated useful life of each asset. Leasehold improvements are amortized over the shorter of the estimated useful lives or the term of the respective leases. |
|
| Impairment of Long-Lived Assets |
Impairment of Long-Lived Assets The Company reviews long-lived assets, including property and equipment, for impairment whenever events or changes in business circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of the assets may not be fully recoverable. Factors that the Company considers in deciding when to perform an impairment review include significant underperformance of the business in relation to expectations, significant negative industry or economic trends, and significant changes or planned changes in the use of the assets. If an impairment review is performed to evaluate a long-lived asset for recoverability, the Company compares forecasts of undiscounted cash flows expected to result from the use and eventual disposition of the long-lived asset to its carrying value. An impairment loss would be recognized when estimated undiscounted future cash flows expected to result from the use of an asset are less than its carrying amount. The impairment loss would be based on the excess of the carrying value of the impaired asset over its fair value, determined based on discounted cash flows. During the year ended December 31, 2014, in connection to the abandonment of its lease in Woburn, MA, the Company recorded an impairment loss of $0.4 million related to the write-off of its construction in progress long-lived asset (see Note 13). |
|
| Restricted Cash |
Restricted Cash The Company records cash held in trust or pledged to secure certain debt obligations as restricted cash. As of December 31, 2015, the Company has $14.6 million of restricted cash collateralizing a note payable of $14.0 million (see Note 8) and a pledge to secure a letter of credit in connection with a new lease of $0.6 million (see Note 13). |
|
| Investments at Fair Value |
Investments at Fair Value
The Company elects the fair value option for its long-term investments at fair value (see Note 5). The decision to elect the fair value option, which is irrevocable once elected, is determined on an instrument by instrument basis and applied to an entire instrument. The net gains or losses, if any, on an investment for which the fair value option has been elected are recognized as a change in fair value of investments on the Consolidated Statements of Operations.
The Company has various processes and controls in place to ensure that fair value is reasonably estimated. While the Company believes its valuation methods are appropriate and consistent with other market participants, the use of different methodologies or assumptions to determine the fair value of certain financial instruments could result in a different estimate of fair value at the reporting date.
|
|
| Intangible Asset License |
Intangible Asset License The Company records the costs of acquired product distribution license rights as intangible asset licenses in the Consolidated Balance Sheets. Upon commencement of product sales, license rights will be amortized over the expected life of the product into product expense in the Consolidated Statements of Operations. As of December 31, 2015, product sales of the Company’s intangible asset license had not yet commenced (see Note 7). |
|
| Deferred Financing Costs |
Deferred Financing Costs Financing costs incurred in connection with the promissory note for $15.0 million between Israel Discount Bank (“IDB”) and the Company (the “IDB Note”), the Hercules Technology Growth Capital, Inc. note (the “Hercules Note”), and the National Securities Corporation’s NSC Biotech Venture Fund I LLC note (the “NSC Note”) are now recorded as a reduction of principal balance due to ASU No. 15-3 and are being amortized over the appropriate expected life based on the term of the note using the effective interest rate method. As of December 31, 2015 and 2014, the Company recorded deferred financing costs of $0.8 million and $6,000, respectively, in notes payable, long-term on the Consolidated Balance Sheets. The remaining deferred financing cost related to the Hercules Note was expensed in 2014 when the note was paid off (see Note 8). |
|
| Revenue Recognition |
Revenue Recognition Reimbursement Arrangements and Collaborative Arrangements Checkpoint reimbursed by TG Therapeutics, Inc. (“TGTX”), a related party, for its share of the cost of the license and product research and development costs under the collaboration agreement with them. The gross amount of these reimbursed costs are reported as revenue in the Consolidated Statements of Operations, since the Company acts as a principal, bears credit risk and may perform part of the services required in the transactions. Consistent with Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) 605-45, Revenue Recognition Principal Agent Considerations, these reimbursements are treated as revenue by the Company. The actual expenses, if any, creating the reimbursements are reflected as expenses in the consolidated financial statements. The Company recognizes revenue for the performance of services or the shipment of products when each of the following four criteria is met: (i) persuasive evidence of an arrangement exists; (ii) products are delivered or as services are rendered; (iii) the sales price is fixed or determinable; and (iv) collectability is reasonably assured. The Company follows ASC 605-25, Revenue Recognition Multiple-Element Arrangements and ASC 808, Collaborative Arrangements, if applicable, to determine the recognition of revenue under its collaborative research, options to enter into collaborative research agreements and development and commercialization agreements. The terms of these agreements generally contain multiple elements, or deliverables, which may include (i) grants of licenses, or options to obtain licenses, to our intellectual property, (ii) research and development services, (iii) drug product manufacturing, and/or (iv) participation on joint research and/or joint development committees. The payments we may receive under these arrangements typically include one or more of the following: non-refundable, up-front license fees; funding of research and/or development efforts; amounts due upon the achievement of specified objectives; and/or royalties on future product sales. ASC 605-25 provides guidance relating to the separability of deliverables included in an arrangement into different units of accounting and the allocation of arrangement consideration to the units of accounting. The evaluation of multiple-element arrangements requires management to make judgments about (i) the identification of deliverables, (ii) whether such deliverables are separable from the other aspects of the contractual relationship, (iii) the estimated selling price of each deliverable, and (iv) the expected period of performance for each deliverable. To determine the units of accounting under a multiple-element arrangement, management evaluates certain separation criteria, including whether the deliverables have stand-alone value, based on the relevant facts and circumstances for each arrangement. Management then estimates the selling price for each unit of accounting and allocates the arrangement consideration to each unit utilizing the relative selling price method. The allocated consideration for each unit of accounting is recognized over the related obligation period in accordance with the applicable revenue recognition criteria. If there are deliverables in an arrangement that are not separable from other aspects of the contractual relationship, they are treated as a combined unit of accounting, with the allocated revenue for the combined unit recognized in a manner consistent with the revenue recognition applicable to the final deliverable in the combined unit. Payments received prior to satisfying the relevant revenue recognition criteria are recorded as deferred revenue in the Consolidated Balance Sheets and recognized as revenue in the Consolidated Statements of Operations when the related revenue recognition criteria are met. See Note 6 for a description of the collaborative arrangements. |
|
| Research and Development |
Research and Development Research and development costs are expensed as incurred. Advance payments for goods and services that will be used in future research and development activities are expensed when the activity has been performed or when the goods have been received rather than when the payment is made. Upfront and milestone payments due to third parties that perform research and development services on the Company’s behalf will be expensed as services are rendered or when the milestone is achieved. Research and development costs primarily consist of personnel related expenses, including salaries, benefits, travel, and other related expenses, stock-based compensation, payments made to third parties for license and milestone costs related to in-licensed products and technology, payments made to third party contract research organizations for preclinical and clinical studies, investigative sites for clinical trials, consultants, the cost of acquiring and manufacturing clinical trial materials, costs associated with regulatory filings, laboratory costs and other supplies. In accordance with ASC 730-10-25-1, Research and Development, costs incurred in obtaining technology licenses are charged to research and development expense if the technology licensed has not reached commercial feasibility and has no alternative future use. Such licenses purchased by the Company require substantial completion of research and development, regulatory and marketing approval efforts in order to reach commercial feasibility and has no alternative future use. Accordingly, the total purchase price for the licenses acquired during the period was reflected as research and development licenses acquired on the Consolidated Statements of Operations for the year ended December 31, 2015. |
|
| Valuation of Warrants Related to NSC Note |
Valuation of Warrants Related to NSC Note In accordance with ASC 815, the Company classified the fair value of the warrants (“Contingently Issuable Warrants”) granted in connection with the NSC Note transferred to Avenue effective February 2015 and transferred to Checkpoint in various tranches from March 19, 2015 to August 31, 2015 as a derivative liability. The Company valued these Contingently Issuable Warrants using option pricing model, and used estimates for an expected dividend yield, a risk-free interest rate, and expected volatility together with management’s estimate of the probability of issuance of the Contingently Issuable Warrants (see Note 5 and Note 8). At each reporting period, as long as the Contingently Issuable Warrants were potentially issuable and there was a potential for an insufficient number of authorized shares available to settle the Contingently Issuable Warrants, these Contingently Issuable Warrants would be revalued and any difference from the previous valuation date would be recognized as a change in fair value of subsidiary’s warrant liabilities in the Consolidated Statements of Operations. |
|
| Contingencies |
Contingencies The Company records accruals for contingencies and legal proceedings expected to be incurred in connection with a loss contingency when it is probable that a liability has been incurred and the amount can be reasonably estimated. If a loss contingency is not probable but is reasonably possible, or is probable but cannot be estimated, the nature of the contingent liability, together with an estimate of the range of possible loss if determinable and material, would be disclosed. |
|
| Stock-Based Compensation |
Stock-Based Compensation The Company expenses stock-based compensation to employees over the requisite service period based on the estimated grant-date fair value of the awards and forfeiture rates. For stock-based compensation awards to non-employees, the Company remeasures the fair value of the non-employee awards at each reporting period prior to vesting and finally at the vesting date of the award. Changes in the estimated fair value of these non-employee awards are recognized as compensation expense in the period of change. The Company estimates the fair value of stock options grants using the Black-Scholes option pricing model and the assumptions used in calculating the fair value of stock-based awards represent management’s best estimates and involve inherent uncertainties and the application of management’s judgment. |
|
| Income Taxes |
Income Taxes The Company records income taxes using the asset and liability method. Deferred income tax assets and liabilities are recognized for the future tax effects attributable to temporary differences between the financial statement carrying amounts of existing assets and liabilities and their respective income tax bases, and operating loss and tax credit carryforwards. The Company establishes a valuation allowance if it is more likely than not that the deferred tax assets will not be recovered based on an evaluation of objective verifiable evidence. For tax positions that are more likely than not of being sustained upon audit, the Company recognizes the largest amount of the benefit that is greater than 50% likely of being realized. For tax positions that are not more likely than not of being sustained upon audit, the Company does not recognize any portion of the benefit. |
|
| Non-Controlling Interests |
Non-Controlling Interests Non-controlling interests in consolidated entities represent the component of equity in consolidated entities held by third parties. Any change in ownership of a subsidiary while the controlling financial interest is retained is accounted for as an equity transaction between the controlling and non-controlling interests (see Note 10). |
|
| Comprehensive Loss |
Comprehensive Loss The Company’s comprehensive loss is equal to its net loss for all periods presented. |
|
| Recently Issued Accounting Standards |
Adoption of Recent Accounting Pronouncements In April 2015, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) No. 2015-03, Simplifying the Presentation of Debt Issuance Costs, which requires debt issuance costs to be presented in the balance sheet as a direct deduction from the carrying value of the associated debt liability, consistent with the presentation of a debt discount. ASU No. 2015-03 is effective for the interim and annual periods ending after December 15, 2015, with early adoption permitted. As of June 30, 2015, the Company adopted ASU No. 2015-03 and such adoption resulted in debt issuance costs for all periods presented to be reclassified to notes payable, long-term, net. In August 2015, the FASB issued ASU No. 2015-15, Interest - Imputation of Interest: Presentation and Subsequent Measurement of Debt Issuance Costs Associated with Line-of-Credit Arrangements, which clarifies the treatment of debt issuance costs from line-of-credit arrangements after the adoption of ASU No. 2015-03, Interest - Imputation of Interest: Simplifying the Presentation of Debt Issuance Costs. In particular, ASU No. 2015-15 clarifies that the SEC staff would not object to an entity deferring and presenting debt issuance costs related to a line-of-credit arrangement as an asset and subsequently amortizing the deferred debt issuance costs ratably over the term of such arrangement, regardless of whether there are any outstanding borrowings on the line-of-credit arrangement. The Company adopted ASU No. 2015-15 during the second quarter of 2015, and its adoption did not have a material impact on its financial statements. In November 2015, the FASB issued ASU No. 2015-17, Balance Sheet Classification of Deferred Taxes, which requires that deferred tax liabilities and assets be classified as noncurrent in a classified statement of financial position to simplify the presentation of deferred income taxes. The standard is effective prospectively for fiscal years, and interim periods within those fiscal years, beginning after December 15, 2017, with early adoption permitted. As of December 31, 2015, we elected to early adopt the pronouncement on a prospective basis. Adoption of this amendment did not have an effect on the Company's financial position or results of operations, and prior periods were not retrospectively adjusted. Recent Accounting Pronouncements In May 2014, the FASB issued ASU No. 2014-09, Revenue from Contracts with Customers, an updated standard on revenue recognition. ASU No. 2014-09 provides enhancements to the quality and consistency of how revenue is reported by companies while also improving comparability in the financial statements of companies reporting using International Financial Reporting Standards or U.S. GAAP. The main purpose of the new standard is for companies to recognize revenue to depict the transfer of goods or services to customers in amounts that reflect the consideration to which a company expects to be entitled in exchange for those goods or services. The new standard also will result in enhanced disclosures about revenue, provide guidance for transactions that were not previously addressed comprehensively and improve guidance for multiple-element arrangements. In July 2015, the FASB voted to approve a one-year deferral of the effective date of ASU No. 2014-09 and may be applied on a full retrospective or modified retrospective approach. The Company is evaluating the impact of implementation and transition approach of this standard on its financial statements. When adopted, the Company does not expect this guidance to have a material impact on its financial statements. In August 2014, the FASB issued ASU No. 2014-15, Disclosure of Uncertainties about an Entity’s Ability to Continue as a Going Concern. This ASU explicitly requires management to assess an entity’s ability to continue as a going concern, and to provide related footnote disclosures in certain circumstances. In connection with each annual and interim period, management will assess if there is substantial doubt about an entity’s ability to continue as a going concern within one year after the issuance date. Management will consider relevant conditions that are known, and reasonably knowable, at the issuance date. Substantial doubt exists if it is probable that the entity will be unable to meet its obligations within one year after the issuance date. Disclosures will be required if conditions give rise to substantial doubt. The new standard will be effective for all entities in the first annual period ending after December 15, 2016. Early adoption is permitted. The Company is currently evaluating the impact of this guidance on its consolidated financial statements. When adopted, the Company does not expect this guidance to have a material impact on its financial statements. In January 2016, FASB issued ASU No. 2016-01, Recognition and Measurement of Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities. ASU No. 2016-01 requires equity investments to be measured at fair value with changes in fair value recognized in net income; simplifies the impairment assessment of equity investments without readily determinable fair values by requiring a qualitative assessment to identify impairment; eliminates the requirement for public business entities to disclose the method(s) and significant assumptions used to estimate the fair value that is required to be disclosed for financial instruments measured at amortized cost on the balance sheet; requires public business entities to use the exit price notion when measuring the fair value of financial instruments for disclosure purposes; requires an entity to present separately in other comprehensive income the portion of the total change in the fair value of a liability resulting from a change in the instrument-specific credit risk when the entity has elected to measure the liability at fair value in accordance with the fair value option for financial instruments; requires separate presentation of financial assets and financial liabilities by measurement category and form of financial assets on the balance sheet or the accompanying notes to the financial statements and clarifies that an entity should evaluate the need for a valuation allowance on a deferred tax asset related to available-for-sale securities in combination with the entity’s other deferred tax assets. ASU No. 2016-01 is effective for financial statements issued for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017, and interim periods within those fiscal years. The Company is currently evaluating the impact ASU No. 2016-01 will have on its consolidated financial statements. In February 2016, FASB issued ASU No. 2016-02, Leases (Topic 842) which supersedes FASB ASC Topic 840, Leases (Topic 840) and provides principles for the recognition, measurement, presentation and disclosure of leases for both lessees and lessors. The new standard requires lessees to apply a dual approach, classifying leases as either finance or operating leases based on the principle of whether or not the lease is effectively a financed purchase by the lessee. This classification will determine whether lease expense is recognized based on an effective interest method or on a straight-line basis over the term of the lease, respectively. A lessee is also required to record a right-of-use asset and a lease liability for all leases with a term of greater than twelve months regardless of classification. Leases with a term of twelve months or less will be accounted for similar to existing guidance for operating leases. The standard is effective for annual and interim periods beginning after December 15, 2018, with early adoption permitted upon issuance. |
|
| Subsequent Events |
Subsequent Events
The Company evaluates events that have occurred after the balance sheet date through the date, which these financial statements were available to be issued.
|