UNITED STATES
Securities and Exchange Commission
Washington, D.C.  20549
 
FORM 10-K
 
[X]ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
 
For the fiscal year ended December 31, 20082009
 
 or
 
[  ]TRANSITION REPORT UNDER SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
 
For the transition period from  to               .
 
Commission File No. 0-30379
CHEMBIO DIAGNOSTICS, INC.
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
 
Nevada
 
88-0425691
(State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization) (I.R.S. Employer Identification No.)
   
  3661 Horseblock Road, Medford, NY
 
11763
(Address of principal executive offices) (Zip Code)

Registrant’s telephone number, including area code (631) 924-1135
 
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:
 
Title of each class Name of each exchange on which registered
None
 
None

Securities registered pursuant to section 12(g) of the Act:
Common Stock, $0.01 par value
(Title of Class)

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

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act. Yes __ No X

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.  Yes X   No__

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Website, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule-405 of Regulation S-T (§ 232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files).  Yes __ No __

Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K (§ 229.405 of this chapter) is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K. [   ]

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company.  See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.
                                                        Large accelerated filer [ ]                                        Accelerated filer [ ]         
                                         Non-accelerated filer [ ]                                          Smaller reporting company [X] 
                                        (Do not check if a smaller reporting company)


Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act).   Yes __ No _X__X_

As of the last business day of the Company’s most recently completed second fiscal quarter, the aggregate market value of voting and non-voting common equity held by non-affiliates* was $5,970,000.$3,550,000.

As of March 17, 2009,3, 2010, the registrant had 61,944,90161,989,901 common shares outstanding.

* Without asserting that any of the issuer’s directors or executive officers, or the entities that own 38,252,448more than five percent of the outstanding shares of the Registrant’s common stock, are affiliates, the shares of which they are beneficial owners have not been deemed to be ownedincluded in shares held by affiliatesnon-affiliates solely for this calculation.




TABLE OF CONTENTS
  Page
PART I  
ITEM 1.BUSINESS3
ITEM 1A.RISK FACTORS1412
ITEM 2.PROPERTIES1917
ITEM 3.LEGAL PROCEEDINGS1917
PART II  
ITEM 5.MARKET FOR REGISTRANT'S COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES2018
ITEM 6.SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA2119
ITEM 7.MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS2320
ITEM 8.FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA3233
ITEM 9.CHANGES IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE.3233
ITEM 9A.CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES3234
ITEM 9B.OTHER INFORMATION3334
PART III  
ITEM 10.DIRECTORS, EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE3435
ITEM 11.EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION3637
ITEM 12.SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT AND RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS4041
ITEM 13.CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS, AND DIRECTOR INDEPENDENCE4243
ITEM 14.PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTANT FEES AND SERVICES44
PART IV  
ITEM 15.EXHIBITS, FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULES45
SIGNATURES 4746









 
PART I                                                                      
 
ITEM 1.BUSINESS
 
FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

This report contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933. Any statements contained in this report that are not statements of historical fact may be forward-looking statements. When we use the words intends,“intends,” “estimates,” “predicts,” “potential,” “continues,” anticipates,“anticipates,” “plans,” “expects,” “believes,” “should,” “could,” “may,” “will” or the negative of these terms or other comparable terminology,, we are identifying forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements involve risks and uncertainties, which may cause our actual results, performance or achievements to be materially different from those expressed or implied by forward-looking statements.  These factors include our research and development activities, distributor channels, compliance with regulatory impositions; and our capital needs. Although we believe that the expectations reflected in the forward-looking statements are reasonable, we cannot guarantee future results, levels of activity, performance or achievements. 
 
Except as may be required by applicable law, we do not undertake or intend to update or revise our forward-looking statements, and we assume no obligation to update any forward-looking statements contained in this report as a result of new information or future events or developments. Thus, you should not assume that our silence over time means that actual events are bearing out as expressed or implied in such forward-looking statements. You should carefully review and consider the various disclosures we make in this report and our other reports filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission that attempt to advise interested parties of the risks, uncertainties and other factors that may affect our business.  
 
For further information about these and other risks, uncertainties and factors, please review the disclosure included in this report under “Part I, Item 1A, Risk Factors.”
 
General
 
Chembio Diagnostics, Inc. (referred to collectively with its subsidiariessubsidiary as the “Company”) and its subsidiariessubsidiary develop, manufacture and market rapid point-of-care diagnostic tests (POCTs) that detect infectious diseases. The Company’s main products presently commercially available are threefour rapid tests for the detection of HIV antibodies in whole blood, serum and plasma samples, allantibodies. Three of whichthese products employ lateral flow technology, can be used with all blood matrices as samples, and two of whichare manufactured in a standard cassette format, a dipstick format, and a proprietary barrel format. The tests employing the cassette and proprietary barrel formats were approved by the FDA in 2006.  In addition, we have a2006 and are distributed by Inverness Medical Innovations, Inc. (“Inverness”) in the United States.   Our fourth rapid HIV test, which we more recently developed on our patented Dual Path Platform (DPP®) technology, for the detection ofdetects antibodies to HIV in oral fluid samples, as well as wholeall blood serum and plasma samples. The products which employ  lateral flow technology are manufactured and sold under a non-exclusive license we have from Inverness Medical Innovations, Inc. (“Inverness”), which is also our exclusive marketing partner for the FDA-approved products in the United States (as well as Europe and Asia for the product that is known as the “barrel” format product) under its Clearview® brand.  Inverness launched its marketing of these products in the United States in February 2007.  Chembio’s two HIV STAT-PAK® rapid HIV tests (in cassette and dipstick formats) are marketed outside the United States through different partners and channels under our license from Inverness.matrices.
 
On March 13, 2007, we were issued United States patent #7,189,522 for our Dual Path Platform (DPP®) rapid test system.  Additional patent protection for DPP® has issued or is pending worldwide.  DPP® enables Chembio toWe participate in the growing point–of-care diagnostics marketpoint-of-care segment of the nearly $40 billion global in-vitro diagnostic market. The global point-of-care segment of the IVD industry is estimated to be $6-8 billion with a patent-protected point-of-care platform technology.   DPP® devices enable the developmentan overall growth rate of products whose performance we believe exceeds that of comparable tests developed with lateral flow technology.  As stated above we have completed development of an oral fluid HIV test on this new platform7% per annum.  POCTs, by providing prompt and are currently pursuing the commercialization of this product in several markets.  We have also developed and/or are developing several other products on DPP®. We believe that DPP® provides significant advantagesearly diagnosis, can reduce patient stays, lower overall costs, improve therapeutic interventions and improve patient outcomes as a result of prompt and early diagnosis.  They can also prevent needless hospital admissions, simplify testing procedures, avoid delays from central lab batching, and eliminate the need for return visits.  This is not to say that every test should be done at the point-of-care.  A careful analysis needs to be performed when evaluating whether there is a need for a rapid point-of-care platform particularly where challenging sample matrices, such as oral fluid, are involved, or where multiplexing is desired.  We are developing all of our new products using this platform.  Our strategy for the development of this platform technology is also dual; we have entered and are seeking to enter exclusive collaborations with large marketing partners for whom we will develop and manufacture products on the DPP® and we are developing our own products that we may choose to market through selected distribution partners either undertest versus a Chembio, DPP® or other brand.laboratory test.
 
Our products are soldIn the areas of infectious and sexually transmitted diseases (such as Influenza and HIV for example), the utility of a rapid point–of-care test has been well established, and large markets have been established for these kinds of tests globally.  It is within these areas of infectious diseases and sexually transmitted diseases, which tend to medical laboratories and hospitals, governmental and public health entities, non-governmental organizations, and medical professionals. Our products are sold either under our DPP®, STAT-PAK® or SURE CHECK® registered trademarks and/orhave the private labels of our marketing partners, such as is the case with the Inverness Clearview® label for our rapid HIV testshigher growth rates in the United States.point-of-care segment where we have focused and will continue to focus our business, with an emphasis on the U.S. market.
3

PRODUCTS

Lateral Flow Rapid HIV Tests
The major component of our revenue growth in 20082009 was increased sales of our lateral flow rapid HIV tests and related components.  A large percentage of individuals that are HIV positive worldwide are unaware of their status. Part of the reason for this is that even those that do get tested in public health settings will often not return or call back for their test results if samples have to be sent out to a laboratory which can take at least several days to process.  The increased availability, greater efficacy and reduced costs for anti-retroviral treatments (ARVs) for HIV is also having a tremendous impact on the demand for testing, as the stigma associated with the disease is lessened, and the ability to resume normal activities is substantially improved, providing a positive message to those potentially infected.  All four of our rapid HIV tests are qualitative “yes/no” tests for the detection of antibodies to HIV 1 & 2 with results available within approximately 15 minutes.  The tests differ principally only in the method of sample collection and test procedure, flexibility with different sample types, and cost of manufacture. Prior to our agreement with Inverness and, more recently, the development of our DPP® HIV 1/2 Screening Assay for use with oral fluid or blood samples, our rapid HIV tests had been marketed under either our SURE CHECK® or STAT-PAK® trademarks.  Pursuant to our agreement with Inverness, Medical Innovations, Inc., the SURE CHECK® product (which incorporates a proprietary barrel format) is now being marketed by Inverness as Clearview® Complete HIV 1/2 and the cassette format of our HIV 1/2 STAT-PAK (we also have a third product known as HIV 1/2 STAT-PAK dipstick) is now being marketed by Inverness in the United States as Clearview® HIV 1/2 STAT-PAK®.  We continue to market our STAT-PAK® cassette and dipstick outside the United States through other marketing channels.  In addition, in 20082009 we amended the agreement with Inverness, which previously had global exclusivity for the barrel format product, to a non-exclusive in Africa and Latinoutside of North America.    We will begin to market our DPP® oral fluid test globally (including in the United States) as we establish required regulatory clearances and authorizations, which we expect to receive during this year for certain markets in the developing world, though there is no assurance that this will occur.
Regulatory Status:
Rapid HIV Tests
 
Regulatory Status:The FDA approved our Pre-Market Applications (hereinafter “PMA”; see “Governmental Regulations” and Glossary) in April 2006 for our SURE CHECK HIV 1/2 (and also now Inverness’ Clearview® Complete HIV 1/2 )2) and for our HIV 1/2 STAT-PAK (now Inverness’ Clearview® HIV 1/2 STAT-PAK in the United States only) products on May 25, 2006.products.  A Clinical Laboratory Improvement Act (“CLIA”) waiver was granted by the FDA for the HIV 1/2 STAT-PAK onin November 20, 2006.  Labeling changes to2006 and for the two Inverness Clearview® brands for both products were approved during the first quarter of 2007.   CLIA waiver for the Clearview® Complete HIV 1/2 was granted onin October 22, 2007.   CLIA waiver is required in order to market the products for use in hospital emergency rooms, public health clinics and physicians’ offices, where the level of training is traditionally less than the training at clinical laboratories and laboratories in hospitals.  These settings constitute the largest portion of the available market for our products. Our third lateral flow rapid HIV test, HIV 1/2 STAT-PAK Dipstick and our DPP® oral fluid HIV test, though not FDA approved, qualify under FDA export regulations to sell, subject to any required approval by the importing country, to customers outside the United States. The dipstick product is our most competitively priced version of our three rapid HIV tests, and was designed primarily for resource-constrained, donor-funded markets that have large test volume needs.  AlthoughIn addition, we have received approval from a number of potential importing countries for our three of our lateral flow HIV tests, Brazil, Mexico, Nigeria, Ethiopia and Uganda are the countries in which we have realized significant sales.  As a result of favorable evaluations of our HIV 1/2 STAT-PAK and HIV 1/2 STAT-PAK Dipstick products by the World Health Organization (the “WHO”), these products are qualified for procurement by programs funded by the United Nations and their partners’ programs.tests. ..  All three of our lateral flow HIV tests have qualified for procurement under the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (“PEPFAR”).  In October 2009 we submitted supplemental documentation that had been requested to our Notified Body in connection with our efforts to obtain CE marking for the two FDA-approved rapid HIV test products.  In late January 2010 we were informed that additional data was being requested, and we are determining the time and cost.
DPP® HIV 1&2 Assay for Use with Oral Fluid (or Blood) Samples
We have also completed development of and are now commercializing our DPP® HIV 1&2 Assay for use with oral fluid samples.  Oral fluid testing is an established alternative to blood testing for diagnostic tests, including HIV tests.  It provides a fast and easy method for sample collection, enabling non-medical professionals to collect samples for testing.  It is also often patient preferred, providing a more comfortable test.  In certain public health clinics, staffs choose not to handle blood specimens; thus, oral sample collection provides a viable alternative.  The DPP® HIV test, which is based on our patented DPP® technology, also includes a patent-pending system comprised of an oral fluid swab and sample buffer vial. This feature enables samples to be fully extracted in buffer solution before application to the test device, and also allows the extracted sample to be stored and retested.  Internal and field studies have shown sensitivity and specificity well in excess of FDA requirements on oral fluid as well as all blood matrices.
Regulatory Status:  During 2008 Chembio conducted extensive internal panel studies of this product and a limited field study that suggested outstanding performance; two much larger field evaluations were completed in 2009 that will supplement our pending U.S. clinical studies. During the first quartersecond half of 2009 we prepared a proposed clinical trial protocol and submitted it to the FDA in support of our oral fluid DPP® HIV 1/2 test,application for an Investigational Device Exemption (IDE) which we submitted and was granted during the fourth quarter of 2009.  This approved protocol permits us to these same agencies for inclusion in these programs.  We also havemove forward with the clinical trials performance data, along with other evaluations ongoing for this newrequired product and anticipate commencement of clinical trials in the United Statesmanufacturing data, in support of a Pre-Marketing Approval (PMA) application to the FDA. We anticipate commencing and completing the clinical trials and submitting the PMA application during 2010 and receiving approval of the PMA during this year.2011.

Partners Involved in Marketing Our Products

4

PARTNERS INVOLVED IN MARKETING OUR HIV PRODUCTS
 
On September 29, 2006 we executed marketing and license agreements with Inverness.   TheseThe marketing agreements (one for each of the two FDA approved products) each provide Inverness with a 10-year exclusive right for the marketing of our rapid HIV tests in the United States; theStates.  The agreements also grant us a license to Inverness’ lateral flow patents that may be applicable to certain of our other products, including those that we had under development at the time of the grant.grant of the license.  As part of these agreements, we also settled litigation that had been ongoing with another company, StatSure Diagnostics, Inc.(SDS), relating to the proprietary barrel device that is incorporated into our Sure Check® HIV 1/2 product, which is  also marketed exclusively as Inverness Clearview® Complete HIV 1/2 in the United States, Europe and Asia. SDS is a party to the marketing agreement with Inverness and Chembio that pertains to that product.
 
We are beginning to register our DPP® oral fluid HIV test in selected markets receiving funding from the U.S. President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR). PEPFAR recently approved our product as qualified for procurement pursuant to the USAID waiver procedure (for use with oral fluid or blood samples).  Also, as described above, our DPP® oral fluid HIV test is one of three products pending regulatory approval in Brazil pursuant to OEM technology transfer, supply and license agreements we have in place with FIOCRUZ as described below.  We are considering various options for marketing this product in the United States including a direct sales model for certain or all market segments.
4

We have appointed distributors and OEM partners internationally so that we are positioned to service those markets.for our lateral flow HIV tests.  Our focus is on those countries that have received or will receive funding commitmentslargest markets for our lateral flow HIV prevention and treatment, of which rapid HIV testing is an essential part.   The most significant program globally that funds HIV testing istests outside the United States PEPFAR program, which primarily is focused in 15are several countries in sub-Saharan Africa, that are at the epicenter of the disease.Brazil (OEM) and Mexico. During 20082009 we shipped approximately 2.4 million test kits to Nigeria, 1.6 million test kits to Uganda, and approximately 600,000 test kits to Ethiopia, or a total of approximately 4.6 million tests, mostly through the PEPFAR procurement agency knownappointed Bio-Rad Laboratories, Inc. as the Partnership for Supply Chain Management (“PSCM”).  Lesser volumes were shipped to several other countries in Asia, and Latin America. We also shipped HIV test kit components to the Oswaldo Cruz Foundation for the manufacture of tests in Brazil pursuant to our 2004 technology transfer agreement.
Effective in January 2009, Nigeria changed from a parallel testing algorithm to a serial algorithm, and in this change our test’s designation in two of their new protocols was changed to that of a confirmatory test and a tie-breaker test in the third protocol.  This designation has resulted in a dramatic reduction of sales to this country which decrease we anticipate will likely continue for at least several months.  During 2008, the implementationdistributor of our HIV 1/2 STAT-PAK® asproduct in Mexico.  We have distributors interested in distributing our products in Europe once we receive the confirmatory test in Ethiopia’s serial testing algorithm resulted in significantly increased sales to that country,CE Marking, for which increases we anticipate may continue during 2009.  We do not presently anticipate however that the increased sales in Ethiopia will in any case fully offset the decrease in Nigeria.    
We are pursuing new opportunities for distribution of our existing lateral flow HIV tests and new DPP® oral fluid HIV test in a number of markets globally.  As stated earlier, during 2008 we amended our agreement with Inverness so that we may now market the barrel product under Chembio’s trademark, SURE CHECK® HIV 1/2 directly throughout South America and Africa, subject to the payment of royalties to Inverness in accordance with our license to their lateral flow patents.there can be no assurance.
 
OTHER LATERAL FLOW RAPID TESTS
 
We also have commercially available lateral flow tests for Chagas Disease and also a line of tests for the detection of tuberculosis in humans and certain animal species. However, theseThese products represented less than 4%approximately 1.5% of our product revenues during 20082009. . The Company entered the rapid test market segment with lateral flow technology and are not partfor many years, even before the development of our lateral flow HIV tests, our revenues were almost entirely based on this technology, primarily pregnancy tests.  Because of the central focuslimited license we entered with Inverness to manufacture and market only certain applications of lateral flow technology, and also because we have now developed our own patent-protected rapid point-of-care technology platform (DPP®) which we believe provides certain advantages over lateral flow technologies, all of our current businessother products and growth strategy.products that we are developing utilize this patented platform.
 
OTHER DPP® PRODUCTS
Chembio-Branded DPP® Products
DPP® Syphilis Screen & Confirm- DPP® Syphilis Screen & Confirm is a simple multiplex point-of-care test that can detect both non-treponemal and treponemal antibodies to syphilis from a whole blood sample within 20 minutes.  Studies have been performed at the CDC on a total of 459 banked specimens of which  219 were characterized as positive and 240 as negative by RPR (standard lab test for non-treponemal).  Out of the 459 samples, 289 were characterized as positive and 170 characterized as negative by the TPPA test (standard lab treponemal test).  DPP® Syphilis Screen & Confirm non-treponemal had a sensitivity of 90.5% and a specificity of 100% compared to RPR and a sensitivity of 93% and a specificity of 92% compared to TPPA.  This assay offers several market advantages over the current two-tier system of screening and confirmatory testing. This is the first assay in the United States that would afford the opportunity for a single-visit diagnosis and treatment. Retrospective studies have been performed at Chembio and CDC during 2008 and 2009.  A multi-phase field study sponsored by the WHO and with participation by CDC is ongoing.  Interference and cross-reactivity studies have been completed at an external laboratory. FDA regulatory clearance for this test is available through a 510(K) submission.  The FDA has approved our proposed protocol (IDE) for the prospective clinical trials that will be part of this.  We plan to commence the regulatory activities for FDA clearance during the second quarter of 2010 and anticipate that clearance will be granted in the first quarter of 2011.

OEM DPP® Products
Oswaldo Cruz Foundation OEM DPP® Agreements
During 2008 we signed four agreements with the Oswaldo Cruz Foundation (FIOCRUZ) in Brazil relating to products based on our DPP® technology for Leptospirosis, Canine Leishmaniasis, screening for HIV 1/2 with oral fluid samples, and a 5-band multiplex point-of-care confirmation test for HIV 1&2.  These products will initially be manufactured by Chembio but will be distributed by FIOCRUZ under its Bio-Manguinhos Division’s label.  These entities are affiliated with the Brazilian Ministry of Health.  We have completed development of three of these products (Leishmaniasis and the HIV screening and confirmation tests), and we have substantially completed development of the Leptospirosis test.  The leishmaniasis and confirmatory tests have been submitted for and are still pending regulatory approval in Brazil; the HIV screening test regulatory submission has not been made yet.  We now expect that these products will be approved by Brazilian regulatory authorities during the second quarter of 2010. These agreements contemplate an eventual transfer of the manufacture of the subject products to FIOCRUZ over stipulated periods of time subject to Chembio first receiving orders for a minimum amount of products for manufacture by Chembio; thereafter Chembio will receive royalty payments for a number of years based on product sold by FIOCRUZ to the public health programs in Brazil.  In December 2009 Chembio received purchase orders from FIOCRUZ for the three products for which development has been completed and that are pending regulatory approval in the aggregate amount of approximately $2.4 million.  The orders are of course in each case subject to the attainment of regulatory approval for the relevant product, of which there can be no assurance.  In addition, upon attainment of regulatory approval of these three products, Chembio will be due fees from FIOCRUZ stipulated in these agreements in the aggregate amount of approximately $900,000.
5

Our Rapid Test Technologies
 
All of our commercially available current products employ either in-licensed lateral flow technology or our own patented Dual Path Platform (DPP®) technology.
Lateral flow technology involves a sample flowing from the point of application on a test strip to provide a test result, indicated with a labeling reagent that allows the result to beand are visually or otherwise detected, on a portion of a strip downstream from either the point of application of the sample.  Lateral flow technology is well established and widely applied in the development of rapid diagnostic tests.  The functionalityread. Certain of our lateral flow tests is based on the abilitynew DPP® products will incorporate reader technologies that can help record and report test results and reduce subjectivity of an antibody to bindresults sometimes found with a specific antigen (or vice versa) and for the binding to become visible through the use of the colloidal gold and/or colored latex that we use in our products.  The colloidal gold or the colored latex produces a colored line if the binding has occurred (the test line), in which case it means there has been a reactive or positive result.  In any case, a separate line (the control line) will appear to confirm that the test has been validly run in accordance with the instructions for use.
On March 13, 2007, we were issued United States patent number #7,189,522 describing a Dual Path Immunoassay system which we believe provides several advantages over lateral flow technology for certain applications (See “Intellectual Property”).  The Dual Path Platform technology, or DPP®, uniquely provides for the sample application and migration toward the test zone area to be from an independent strip.  This system enables improved sample control, multiplexing and certain other advantages.  DPP® is providing the Company with significant new product development and licensing opportunities, and we are devoting all of our research and development efforts toward these programs.
The sensitivity of a test indicates how strong the sample must be before it can be detected by the test.  The specificity of a test measures the ability of the test to analyze, isolate, and detect only the matters targeted by the test.  The sensitivity and specificity of our rapid HIV tests during our clinical trials undertaken in connection with our FDA PMAs were 99.7% and 99.9%, respectively.visually read tests. Both lateral flow technology and DPP® allow the development of accurate, low cost, easy-to-perform, single-use diagnostic tests for rapid, visual detection of specific antigen-antibody complexes on a test strip.  This format provides a test that is simple (requires neither electricity nor expensive equipment for test execution or reading, nor skilled personnel for test interpretation), rapid (turnaround time approximately 15 minutes), safe (minimizes handling of potentially infected specimens), non-invasive (requires 5-20 micro liters of whole blood easily obtained with a finger prick, or alternatively, serum or plasma), stable (24 months at room temperature storage in the case of our HIV tests), and highly reproducible.
5

Our HIV tests are qualitative (reactive/non-reactive) tests. We have developed proprietary techniques that enable us to achieve high levels of sensitivity and specificity [see definition above] in our diagnostic tests using our proprietary colloidal gold conjugates and buffer systems.  These techniques include the methods we employ in manufacturing and fusing the reagents with the colored latex, or colloidal gold, blocking procedures used to reduce false positives, and methods used in treating the materials used in our tests to obtain maximum stability and resulting longer shelf life.  Wecan also have extensive experience with a variety of lateral flow devices, including the sample collection device used in our SURE CHECK rapid HIV test which eliminates the need for transferring finger-stick whole blood samples from the fingertip onto a test device, because the collection of the sample is performed within a tubular test chamber that contains the lateral flow test strip.  The whole blood sample is absorbed directly onto the test strip through a small opening in one end of the test chamber and an absorbent pad positioned just inside this same end of the test chamber.
During 2007 and 2008 we entered collaborations with companies that have developeduse hand held and desktop readers that canto objectively measure, quantify, record and report test results. Certain of the products we have and/or are developing for our customer in Brazil, the Oswaldo Cruz Foundation, will incorporate some of these readers, and we are developing other products that may be used with or will require use of a reader.
 
Target Market
 
Rapid HIV Tests
The marketingThere are approximately 53,000 new diagnoses of our FDA-approved and CLIA-waived rapid HIV testsinfection in the United States was launchedeach year, according to the CDC.  In time, most of these infections progress to AIDS.  The CDC estimates that approximately 1.1 million individuals in the U.S. are living with HIV, with an estimated 250,000 Americans, or more than 25%, unaware that they are infected.  It is these 250,000 infected people that account for 54% of all new infections per year. Part of the reason for this is that even those that do get tested in public health settings will often not return or call back for their test results if samples have to be sent out to a laboratory which can take at least several days to process.  Healthcare officials believe that by Inverness duringmaking more people aware of their HIV status, it will reduce the number of HIV transmissions.
Rapid HIV testing in the United States has now developed into a 5-6 million test market. This is from zero in 2003 when Orasure received FDA approval for the first quarterrapid HIV test.  We believe that the US professional HIV rapid test market (not including the OTC market) has the potential to increase to 15-18 million tests over the next several years, which would represent about 50% of 2007,all HIV tests done in the United States for clinical purposes.  Assuming an average price to the manufacturers of $10.00 per test, a total potential market of $180 million U.S. market is inferred.
In 2006, the outlook for HIV testing was given a big boost with the release by the CDC of new guidelines for HIV testing. These new CDC recommendations now in place provide that an HIV test should be given as a routine test like any other for all patients between 13 and we estimate64 years of age, regardless of risk, with an opt-out screening option and focused testing procedural (pre and post test counseling) guidelines.  Adoption of the 2006 CDC recommendations by a number of states has begun to have approximately a 10% share of the U.S. rapidan impact.
In addition, in December 2009 Medicare issued new rules that now require it to pay for HIV test market.  tests for individuals covered by Medicare.
In the United States, the need for rapid HIV tests has been developing first in the public health and hospital emergency room and labor and delivery room segments, and to some extent also in the physicians’ office laboratories.   Of the estimated 25-30 million HIV tests performed in clinical settings in the United States, rapid HIV tests now account for approximately 20-25% of this market, or approximately 5-66 million tests of this total.  We believe that the total number of HIV tests will continue to grow, and that theUnited States market share available to rapid HIV tests will also grow.
The pace of the implementation of recommendations that were made in late 2006 by  the United States Centers for Disease Control (“CDC”)  for routine HIV testing of all individuals between the ages of 13 and 64 will be a major factor in the rate of growth of the rapid HIV testing market in the United States.  Endorsement of these recommendations by opinion leaders in the professional medical community are gradually helping to increase the demand for HIV testing in the United States.   In addition, the revelation in a study disclosed in 2008 by CDC that annual new HIV cases in the US, which disproportionately impact African-Americans, had been under-reported for yearsgrow by approximately 40%, underscored the need for improved prevention efforts in the United States. Although the most recent efforts to increase federal funding for STD prevention in the federal stimulus package were unsuccessful, we still believe that there is a good prospect that the current Congress and Administration will seek to increase these programs through other legislative appropriations.15-20% per annum.
 
In the international market, PEPFAR, the large United States funded international AIDS relief program focused on fifteen countries, was reauthorized last yearin 2008 for up to $48 billion for FY2009-2012 (up from $15 billion in 2004-2008); the appropriation for 2009 is approximately $5.5 billion, of which approximately 12% or $900 million is allocated to the Global Fund, the other large international program created in 2001 to combat HIV/AIDS, TB and Malaria..  PEPFAR, The Global Fund and other global initiatives have succeeded in making life-saving treatments available now to well in excess of one million individuals. We believe that this isPEPFAR has a goal by 2013 of treating three million infected individuals and averting 12 million new cases. To achieve these goals more and more people are likely to have the effect of further encouragingget tested.  As more people to get tested, because with the availability of treatment,effective treatments become available at lower costs there is a clearclearer reason to be tested.  Other programs such as UNAIDS are significant participants in the global effort to prevent further transmission and save the lives of those already infected, as well as care for their families that are impacted.
6

For oral fluid testing we believe that in several markets there is a meaningful segment of individuals who will be more inclined to be tested for HIV when offered a non-invasive test. The most well-established market for oral fluid HIV testing is the United States. There is also now an opportunity to participate in the over-the-counter market for HIV tests.  This opportunity received important support by the FDA and CDC in November 2009.  While initial support from public health and regulatory officials was indicated in 2006, a follow-up November 2009 meeting of the FDA Blood Products Advisory Committee on this subject confirmed the support by public health and HIV positive community advocates, and provided further clarity as to the regulatory pathway for such market.
Syphilis Rapid Test
Recent data indicate that approximately 70,000-100,000 new cases of syphilis are occurring annually in the U.S. The CDC's latest Sexually Transmitted Disease study, released in November 2009, reported that: 1) although only 13,500 of new syphilis cases were reported in 2008 (<20% of total amount of estimated new cases), that is still an 18 percent increase from 2007, suggesting increased numbers of new cases, 2) 63 percent of syphilis cases were among men who have sex with men, and 3) syphilis rates among women increased 36 percent from 2007 to 2008.
Syphilis can be treated with antibiotics, but untreated can cause pelvic inflammatory disease, infertility, ectopic pregnancy and can infect newborns.  Treatment cannot be provided without a confirmed diagnosis of an active, previously untreated case of syphilis.
Current testing algorithms require two different tests (called non-treponemal and treponemal markers), each requiring trained personnel in laboratory settings and several days to receive back results, in order to confirm an active, previously untreated case. This product is able to accurately detect the presence or absence of each of these markers in one rapid point-of-care test device, thereby enabling prescription of antibiotics at the point-of-care where there is the presence of both markers.
Development of the POC market for syphilis testing is expected to be comparable to the development of the POC market for HIV testing, as there is a significant public health value to being able to provide results at the point-of-care.  There are several ways to assess the market opportunity for this unique rapid test, although we believe the U.S. rapid test opportunity is a minimum of 3 million tests, which is approximately 20% of the total number syphilis tests performed in the United States today.  Unlike HIV testing, where a positive result first requires a confirmatory test, and even then further tests to measure viral load before expensive treatment decisions are made, an individual with a confirmed active case of syphilis can be prescribed antibiotics immediately.
 
Marketing Strategy
 
Our marketing strategy is to:
 
·  Support, review and assess the marketing and distribution efforts of our rapid HIV tests by Inverness Medical Innovations, Inc.  Inverness, which is a leading marketer of point-of-care diagnostic products, has significantly expanded its distribution footprint since we signed our agreement with Inverness, and we believe that this will enhance opportunities for Inverness to market our rapid HIV tests. In particular, Inverness has been very active in acquiring point-of-care product lines serving hospital emergency rooms and physicians’ offices.
 
·  Leverage our DPP® intellectual property and regulated product development and manufacturing experience to createcontinue creating new collaborations where Chembio can be the exclusive development and manufacturing partner with world classsupporting leading marketing partners.organizations.
 
·  DevelopEstablish strong distribution relationships for our Chembio-branded products in the U.S and abroad and establish a small number of Chembio or DPP® branded productsdirect sales and marketing organization that capitalize onis focused in the advantages of this newly patented point-of-care technology and select distribution partners for such products.public health market segment.
6
7

Competition
 
The diagnostics industry is a multi-billion dollar international industry and is intensely competitive.  Many of our competitors are substantially larger and have greater financial, research, manufacturing and marketing resources.
 
Industry competition in general is based on the following:
 
·  Scientific and technological capability;
 
·  Proprietary know-how;
 
·  The ability to develop and market products and processes;
 
·  The ability to obtain FDA or other required regulatory approvals;
 
·  The ability to manufacture products that meet applicable FDA requirements, (i.e. FDA’s Quality System Regulations) (see Governmental Regulation section);
 
·  The ability to manufacture products cost-effectively;
 
·  Access to adequate capital;
 
·  The ability to attract and retain qualified personnel; and
 
·  The availability of patent protection.
 
We believe our scientific and technological capabilities and our proprietary know-how relating to our in-licensed lateral flow technology rapid tests and to our proprietary know-how related to our patented dual path platform technology, particularly for the development and manufacture of tests for the detection of antibodies to infectious diseases such as HIV, are very strong.
 
Our ability to develop and market other products is in large measure dependent on our having additional resources and/or collaborative relationships.  Some of our product development efforts have been funded on a project or milestone basis.  We believe that our proprietary know-how in lateral flow technology and in our dual path platformDual Path Platform (DPP®) technology has been instrumental in our obtaining the collaborations we have and that we continue to pursue.  We believe that the patent protection that we have with our Dual Path Platform (DPP®) enhances our ability to develop more profitable collaborative relationships and to license out the technology.
 
We believe our regulatory certifications are also a strong asset for developing new products and collaborations. There are only two companies besides Chembio that have approved PMA’s for lateral flow rapid tests, all HIV tests: Trinity Biotech (Ireland) and Orasure Technologies, Inc. (PA).  We believe that this is a significant competitive advantage when considering new products and collaborations.   During 2006 and 2007 we obtained CLIA waivers for each of our FDA PMA approved HIV tests.  These products therefore represent two of the four CLIA-waived rapid HIV tests.  During 2007 and 2008 we received facility and product licenses from the USDA, became certified under ISO 13.485, and received our initial CE mark (for our Chagas product). We anticipate receiving CE marks for our HIV products during the first half of 2009.
Our access to capital is much less than that of several of our competitors, and to the extent we would need to access large amounts of capital, this is a competitive disadvantage.  We believe however that our access to capital is likely to increase if we continue our trend of improved operating results, and in the meantime we are focused on minimizing our capital requirements.  Establishment of strategic collaborations for our DPP® technology also may provide us with access to funding that is potentially less dilutive or non-dilutive.   The simplification of our capital structure that was completed in December 2007 should also improve our access to capital (See Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations – Overview).
To date, we believe we have been competitive in the industry in attracting and retaining qualified personnel.  Because of the greater financial resources of many of our competitors, we may not be able to compete effectively for the same individuals to the extent that a competitor uses its substantial resources to attract any such individuals.  Also, in order to control costs and conserve resources, we have implemented layoffs and salary reductions that larger companies with greater resources may not need to implement.
7

We have been able to obtain patent protection by entering into licensing arrangements for reagents and lateral flow technologies. The March 2007 issuance by the United States Patent & Trademark Office of our Dual Path Platform™ patent gives us our first patent protection for our own rapid test platform, which we believe enhances our competitive position.   Additional protection of this intellectual property is pending worldwide.
Competitive factors specifically related to our HIV tests are product quality, delivery, sensitivity, specificity, ease-of-use, shelf life and price.  Other factors can be sample size required, the presence of a true IgG control, and time to result.  During the last few years, the competitive features of certain products produced by some international competitors have improved.  Most of these companies, whose products are not and in most cases probably could not be FDA approved, typically have substantially lower costs of labor, regulatory approval and compliance, and intellectual property (if any) as compared with Chembio. Price has become an increasingly important factor since U.S. procurement rules still operate under a waiver of Buy America provisions, described below.  Also, as described below, in most of the donor-funded markets in the developing world technical committees controlled by host governments are empowered to make final decisions as to which products will be used in screening programs.    The leading competitors in the international rapid HIV test market are Trinity Biotech (Ireland), Inverness (U.S.) and Standard Diagnostics (Korea).  Uni-Gold® HIV, marketed by Trinity Biotech of Ireland and Determine®, marketed by Inverness Medical, are the market leaders in the developing world, particularly sub-Saharan Africa, which is where most of the funding for rapid HIV tests is being allocated from donor funded programs such as PEPFAR.  Neither the Trinity or Inverness products are FDA-approved, although Trinity does manufacture in Ireland an FDA-approved rapid HIV test, Uni-Gold Recombigen, for marketing in the United States. Inverness’ Orgenics subsidiary in Israel also has a rapid HIV test, Double-Check Gold, as does its subsidiary in China, ABON; neither of these products is FDA-approved. As such, while Inverness is our exclusive marketing partner in the United States, it is also a principal competitor to our rapid HIV tests outside the United States.  Furthermore, in 2006 Trinity Biotech settled litigation with Inverness, and as part of that settlement it committed to have ABON, an Inverness subsidiary, to manufacture all of Trinity’s Uni-Gold® HIV products primarily for the African market.   Standard Diagnostics of Korea also has a low-cost product that is very competitive against each of the other competitors in the developing world.  There are a number of additional competitors, including several based in China and India of varying quality, that produce competitive rapid HIV tests.
Under a now long-established waiver of Buy America provisions, products procured with US taxpayer funds need not be FDA approved or even made in the US so long as they meet reduced quality standards as compared to what would be required for an FDA approved product. Under the waiver guidelines, all manufacturers are invited by PEPFAR to be considered for procurement with United States taxpayer funds. The waiver, which was initially made available because of a dearth of suitable US-made or FDA approved products when PEPFAR was originally authorized, has continued even though there are now several products, including Chembio’s, that are FDA approved. Also, in addition to competing against approximately thirty non-FDA approved, non-US made products that can be purchased under U.S. procurement rules, in order to realize sales in the markets where the donor (mostly U.S.) funds are allocated, the product must additionally be selected by a country’s ministry of health or their designees to be part of a national testing protocol or “algorithm”.  The algorithms typically use multiple rapid tests in sequence or in parallel to screen and confirm patients at the point-of-care and are increasingly allowing for multiple tests to be qualified in these algorithms.  Chembio’s sales in Africa and certain other markets are therefore based on the fact that its test has been one of those selected.  A product’s designation in a donor-funded country’s algorithm is largely followed by most of the implementing agencies and organizations, resulting in the selection process being critical to participation in donor funded procurements in such market, and limiting the impact of marketing activities once these selections have been made. The selection process in each of these countries is not predictable and is based upon a number of factors, including but not limited to product performance, price, and supply chain.
In the developed world, particularly the United States and Europe, the competitive landscape and market dynamics are quite different.  Due to the costs of and quality system requirements associated with US FDA regulatory approval, there are currently only two companies besides Chembio that have products that are both FDA PMA-approved and also CLIA-waived: Orasure Technologies (Bethlehem, PA) with OraQuick®, and Trinity Biotech Ltd. (Ireland) with Uni-Gold® Recombigen. The regulatory costs for FDA approval and fewer number of products in turn results in very different (higher) pricing in the US market as compared with the developing world, with prices in the US averaging $8-12 per test to end user.  This compares to approximately $1.00 per test in the developing world.  As the requirements for the PMA and CLIA waiver are difficult, costly, risky and time-consuming, particularly relative to the size of the market, and because such approval is not required for participation in PEPFAR under the above-described waiver guidelines, we do not anticipate that Inverness has any plan to submit any of its products produced outside the U.S. to the FDA.  Further, our agreements with Inverness provide that in the event one of those submissions is made (or if Inverness acquires a competitive product in the United States), we have the right to terminate our agreement with Inverness or make Inverness’ marketing rights non-exclusive.  In either case, we would retain a license under the Inverness lateral flow patents to market the products under a Chembio brand and/or through third party distribution partners.
8

Orasure has an estimated market share in the U.S. of approximately 70% with its Oraquick ® product.  This product’s main advantages are that it was the first test to market and also that, at least for certain market segments (primarily public health), it can be performed with oral fluid samples, as compared with only blood samples, which is the case for our products as well as Trinity’s.  The main disadvantage of the Orasure product is its relatively higher price. Also, Orasure’s claimed sensitivity with oral fluid samples is lower than with blood samples, and combined with some limited reports of performance (false positive) problems on oral fluid samples, this has created some opportunities for Inverness with our product, as well as for Trinity.
Orasure markets its products directly through its own sales organization to the public health market, has made a significant investment in that market, and has nearly 100% of the three largest states in this market (New York, California and Florida) that together constitute the majority of public health HIV testing in the US.  For the hospital market segment Orasure had an exclusive marketing arrangement with Abbott Diagnostics, but as of January 2009 they terminated this agreement and are expanding their direct sales organization to market directly to the hospital market segment as well.  Trinity also relies on its own sales force to market its product, and does not have any other rapid tests to sell to distributors. The Uni-Gold product that is marketed by Trinity accounts for an estimated 10% of the market.  This product does not detect HIV-2, while our products and Orasure’s both do. Though HIV-2 is a rare strain of HIV, it is an advantage to be able to detect, though there is a cost of 15% of Net Sales to the license for this claim.  Trinity’s product also requires a much larger sample size, and does not have a true IgG control.  This means that a control line, which is intended to confirm that the test procedure has been performed correctly, will appear on their product so long as any liquid material is applied to its sampling area; Chembio’s (and Orasure’s) control line will appear only if a biological sample is applied.  The shelf life of our HIV products is 24 months, which is twice that of both the Uni-Gold and Orasure products.  
We believe that Inverness, as a leading marketer of a broad range of point-of-care tests sold into all U.S. market segments, has a superior marketing organization as compared to either of our U.S. market competitors who are much smaller than Inverness. Inverness has made a significant investment in its launch of our products, in the training of a large marketing organization in the US, and in the acquisition of complementary product lines and sales organizations.  For example, Inverness has significantly augmented its access to emergency room departments in hospitals through its acquisition of Bio-Site, which was the leading company in point-of-care tests for cardiac monitoring, and whose sales force can now add our product to its product portfolio for this important market segment.  We believe that this is an example of the distribution advantages of our marketing partner.
Chembio’s HIV Tests
One of our two product formats, the “barrel” format now marketed by Inverness as Clearview® Complete HIV 1-2, is a unique product format inasmuch as it is a unitized product, meaning that all components necessary to perform a single test are contained in a single pouch.  This “barrel” format provides for a proprietary method of collecting finger-stick whole blood samples that eliminates the need for the step that all other devices require of transferring the sample from the fingertip to the sample well of the test.  Also, the buffer solution in the barrel format is in a unitized vial that is pierced by the barrel tip to initiate the sample migration up the test strip contained inside the “barrel”, and thereby creates a closed system that helps to minimize possible exposure to potentially infectious samples.
Our other FDA PMA approved rapid HIV test, marketed by Inverness as Clearview® HIV 1-2 STAT PAK®, is a rectangular-shaped lateral flow plastic cassette format test wherein the sample is transferred from the sample source (finger tip in the case of finger-stick whole blood samples) to the sample port in the cassette by means of a transfer loop.  Though this step is not required in the barrel format, the cassette is less costly to manufacture, is a more familiar format to customers that have performed other standard design lateral flow tests, and is a more flexible format that utilizes the same procedure for all approved sample matrices (venous whole blood, finger-stick whole blood, serum and plasma). To date this format has accounted for almost all of the sales we have had through Inverness.  However this is in part due to the fact that the barrel format was not CLIA waived until October 2007, approximately a year later than the cassette product, and we anticipate more sales of this product in the future, though still less than the cassette.
Research and Development
 
During 2009 and 2008, and 2007, $2.6$2.9 million and $1.9$2.6 million, respectively, were spent on research and development activities.  Substantially all(including regulatory activities).  These expenses were in part underwritten by funding from R&D contracts and grants of $1.3 million in 2009 and $.7 million in 2008.  All of our new product development activities involve employment of our Dual Path Platform (DPP®) technology for which we were awarded a U.S patent in 2007.  We believe that this platform enables us to pursue many new product development and licensing opportunities. The DPP® technology can provide improved features on certain tests developed with it that include higher sensitivity, earlier detection, improved performance with more challenging sample types (such as oral fluid), and the improved ability to detect multiple analytes (multiplexing) in one test device.
During 2008 we made substantial progress in developing a portfolio of products based on the DPP® technology.    These activities include completing development of certain products and making significant progress toward the development of additional products.  TheseResearch and development and regulatory activities are further explained in detail in Part II Item 7.
9

Regulatory Activities

We continue to make progress on obtaining a Community European (CE) marking for our products to indicate conformity with European Union health, safety and environmental requirements. We have submitted the HIV 1/2 STAT-PAK® technical file to our notified body and should complete all required steps for CE Marking of this product  during the second quarter of 2009.  Under our agreement with Inverness we are to obtain a CE Marking for the Clearview® Complete HIV 1/2.  We are prepared to submit the technical file for this product on behalf of Inverness once we received final proposed labeling from Inverness.

We are also pursuing registrations of our lateral flow and DPP® HIV products in a number of other jurisdictions, and also pursing registrations with the USDA of additional claims for our veterinary tuberculosis products.

During 2008 we received FDA approval for the lowering of the age limits that the tests are approved for from 18 years to 13 years of age.  This lowering of the lower age limit put our approved product claims in line with the 2006 CDC recommendations for routine test of all individuals between the ages of 13 and 64, and we believe that this additional marketing claim for the product will assist Inverness in certain market opportunities with our products.
 
Employees
 
At December 31, 2008,2009, we employed 114104 people, including 110103 full-time employees.  Effective May 2006, weWe have entered into an employment agreementcontracts with our President, Lawrence Siebert, President and Chairman.  Effective March 2007, we entered into an employment agreement with Javan Esfandiari, Executive Vice-Presidentour Senior Vice President of Research and Development.Development, Javan Esfandiari.  Due to the specific knowledge and experience of these executives regarding the industry, technology and market, the loss of the services of either one of them would likely have a material adverse effect on the Company.  The contract with Mr. Siebert, provides that Mr. Siebert will serve as the Chief Executive Officer and President of the Company for an additional three-year term through May 11, 2012.  The contract with Mr. Esfandiari has a term of three years ending March 2013.  We have obtained a key man insurance policy for Mr. Esfandiari.
 
Governmental Regulation
 
The manufacturing and marketing of the Company’s existing and proposed diagnostic products are regulated by the United States Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”), United States Department of Agriculture (“USDA”), certain state and local agencies, and/or comparable regulatory bodies in other countries.  These regulations govern almost all aspects of development, production and marketing, including product testing, authorizations to market, labeling, promotion, manufacturing and record keeping.  The Company’s FDA and USDA regulated products require some form of action by each agency before they can be marketed in the United States, and, after approval or clearance, the Company must continue to comply with other FDA requirements applicable to marketed products, e.g. Quality Systems (for medical devices).  Failure to comply with the FDA’s requirements can lead to significant penalties, both before and after approval or clearance.
 
Most point-of-care diagnostic products are regulated as medical devices by the FDA Centers of Device and Radiological Health, though some are regulated by the FDA Center of Biologics Evaluation and Research.  There are two review procedures by which medical devices can receive FDA clearance or approval.  Some products may qualify for clearance under Section 510(k) of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, in which the manufacturer provides a pre-market notification that it intends to begin marketing the product, and shows that the product is substantially equivalent to another legally marketed product (i.e., that it has the same intended use and is as safe and effective as a legally marketed device and does not raise different questions of safety and effectiveness).  In some cases, the submission must include data from human clinical studies.  Marketing may commence when the FDA issues a clearance letter finding such substantial equivalence.  An applicant must submitFDA clearance of our DPP® Syphilis Screen & Confirm test will be by means of a 510(k) application at least 90 days before marketing of the affected product commences.  Although FDA clearance may be granted within that 90-day period, in some cases as much as a year or more may be required before clearance is obtained, if at all.submission.
8

If the medical device does not qualify for the 510(k) procedure (either because it is not substantially equivalent to a legally marketed device or because it is required by statute and the FDA’s implementing regulations to have an approved application), the FDA must approve PMAa Pre-Marketing Application (“PMA”) application before marketing can begin.  PMA’s must demonstrate, among other matters, that the medical device provides a reasonable assurance of safety and effectiveness.  A PMA application is typically a complex submission, including the results of non-clinical and clinical studies.  Preparing a PMA application is a much more expensive, detailed and time-consuming process as compared with a 510(K) pre-market notification.  Once a PMA has been submitted, the FDA is required to review the submission within a statutory period of time.  However, the FDA’s review may be, and often is, much longer, often requiring one year or more, and may include requests for additional data.  The Company has approved PMAs for the two rapid HIV tests now marketed by Inverness Medical as Clearview® Complete HIV 1-2 and Clearview® HIV 1-2 STAT PAK®.
10

Every company that manufactures medical devices distributed in the United States must comply FDA approval of our DPP® HIV screening assay for use with the FDA’s Quality System Regulations.  These regulations govern the manufacturing process, including design, manufacture, testing, release, packaging, distribution, documentation and purchasing.  Compliance with the Quality System Regulations is required before the FDAoral fluid or blood samples will approve an application, and these requirements also apply to marketed products.  Companies are also subject to other post-market and general requirements, including compliance with restrictions imposed on marketed products, compliance with promotional standards, record keeping and reportingbe pursued by means of certain adverse reactions or events.  The FDA regularly inspects companies to determine compliance with the Quality System Regulations and other post-approval requirements.  Failure to comply with statutory requirements and the FDA’s regulations can lead to substantial penalties, including monetary penalties, injunctions, product recalls, seizure of products, and criminal prosecution.a PMA application.
 
The Clinical Laboratory Improvement Act of 1988 (“CLIA”) prohibits laboratories from performing in vitro tests for the purpose of providing information for the diagnosis, prevention or treatment of any disease or impairment of, or the assessment of, the health of human beings unless there is in effect for such laboratories a certificate issued by the United States Department of Health and Human Services (via the FDA) applicable to the category of examination or procedure performed.  Although a certificate is not required for the Company, it considers the applicability of the requirements of CLIA in the design and development of its products.  The statutory definition of “laboratory” is very broad, and many of our customers are considered labs.  A CLIA waiver will remove certain quality control and other requirements that must be met for certain customers to use the Company’s products and this is in fact critical to the marketability of a product into the point-of-care diagnostics market.   The Company has received a CLIA waiver for each of the two rapid HIV tests now marketed by Inverness Medical as Clearview® Complete HIV 1/2 and Clearview® HIV 1/2 STAT PAK®.  The CLIA waiver was granted by the FDA for HIV 1/2 STAT-PAK on November 20, 2006 and for the Clearview® Complete HIV 1/2 on October 22, 2007.
 
In addition, the FDA regulates the export of medical devices that have not been approved for marketing in the United States.  The Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act contains general requirements for any medical device that may not be sold in the United States and is intended for export.  Specifically, a medical device intended for export is not deemed to be adulterated or misbranded if the product: (1) complies with the specifications of the foreign purchaser; (2) is not in conflict with the laws of the country to which it is intended for export; (3) is prominently labeled on the outside of the shipping package that it is intended for export; and (4) is not sold or offered for sale in the United States.  Some medical devices face additional statutory requirements before they can be exported.  If an unapproved device does not comply with an applicable performance standard or PMA requirement, is exempt from either such requirement because it is an investigational device, or is a banned device, the device may be deemed to be adulterated or misbranded unless the FDA has determined that exportation of the device is not contrary to the public health and safety and has the approval of the country to which it is intended for export.  However, the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act does permit the export of devices to any country in the world, if the device complies with the laws of the importing country and has valid marketing authorization in one of several “listed” countries under the theory that these listed countries have sophisticated mechanisms for the review of medical devices for safety and effectiveness.
 
The Company is also subject to regulations in foreign countries governing products, human clinical trials and marketing, and may need to obtain approval or evaluations by international public health agencies, such as the World Health Organization, in order to sell diagnostic products in certain countries.  Approval processes vary from country to country, and the length of time required for approval or to obtain other clearances may in some cases be longer than that required for United States governmental approvals. On the other hand, the fact that our HIV diagnostic tests are of value in the AIDS epidemic may lead to some government process being expedited.  The extent of potentially adverse governmental regulation affecting Chembio that might arise from future legislative or administrative action cannot be predicted.
 
One or more of the Company’s rapid HIV tests are also approved or pending approval for marketing in several foreign jurisdictions, including but not limited to Brazil, Mexico, and India, as well as a number of other nations in the developing world.
 
Environmental Laws
 
To date, we have not encountered any costs relating to compliance with any environmental laws.
 
Intellectual Property
 
Intellectual Property Strategy
 
Our intellectual property strategy is to:  (1) build our owned intellectual property portfolio around our Dual Path Platform technology; (2) pursue licenses, trade secrets and know-how within the area of lateral flow technology and DPP®;rapid point-of-care testing, and (3) develop and acquire proprietary positions to reagents and new hardware platforms for the development and manufacture of rapid diagnostic tests.
11

Trade Secrets and Know-How
 
We believe that we have developed a substantial body of trade secrets and know-how relating to the development of lateral flow and DPP® based diagnostic tests, including but not limited to the sourcing and optimization of materials for such tests, and how to maximize sensitivity, speed-to-result, specificity, stability and reproducibility. The Company possesses proprietary know-how to develop tests for multiple conditions using colored latex.  Our buffer formulations enable extremely long shelf lives of our rapid HIV tests and we believe that this provides us with an important competitive advantage.
9

Lateral Flow Technology and Reagent Licenses
 
As part of our agreements in 2006 with Inverness for the marketing of our HIV tests, we were granted non-exclusive licenses to their lateral flow technology for certain products manufactured and marketed by Chembio including but not limited to our HIV tests.  Although we believe our DPP® is outside of the scope of lateral flow patents, we consult with patent counsel, and seek licenses and/or redesigns of products that we believe to be in the best interests of the Company and our stockholders.  Because of the costs and other negative consequences of time-consuming patent litigation, we often attempt to obtain a license on reasonable terms.  Nevertheless there is no assurance that Inverness’ lateral flow patents will not be challenged or that other patents containing claims relevant to the Company’s lateral flow or DPP® products will be not be granted and that licenses to such patents, if any, will be available on reasonable terms, if any.    Inverness has aggressively enforced its lateral flow intellectual property, andproperty.  Most recently in 2008 Inverness brought a patent infringement lawsuit against Orasure. The suit was settled in late 2009 with a $3 million payment by Orasure has claimed that their Oraquick product does not infringe theto Inverness patent and that the Inverness patent is invalid.  The lawsuit is in the discovery phase.
In the event that it is determined that a license to any patent is required and it is not possible to negotiate a license agreement under a necessary patent, we may be able to modify the applicable product such that a license would not be necessary. However, this alternative could delay or limit our ability to sell these products in the United States and/or other markets, and/or increase penalties, all of which would adversely affect our results of operations, cash flows and business.considerations.
 
The DPP® technology provides us with our own intellectual property and we believe it also enables tests to be developed with improved sensitivity as compared with comparable tests on lateral flow platforms.  The Company has signed and anticipates signing new development projects based upon the DPP® technology that will provide new manufacturing and marketing opportunities.  We have several other patents issued or pending related to other point-of-care technologies or applications thereof.  The DPP® patent protectionhas been issued in certain other jurisdictions and is being prosecuted in many foreign jurisdictions as well.others.
 
The peptides used in our rapid HIV tests are patented by Adaltis Inc. and are licensed to us under a 10-year non-exclusive license agreement dated August 30, 2002, which was recently amended to reduce2002.  In connection with their bankruptcy, during the royalty rate.third quarter of 2009 we bought out all of our remaining obligations under that agreement.  We also have licensed the antigens used in other tests including our Chagas, Tuberculosis and Leishmaniasis tests.  In prior years we concluded license agreements related to intellectual property rights owned by the United States associated with HIV- 1, and during the first quarter of 2008 we entered into a sub-license agreement for HIV-2 with Bio-Rad Laboratories N.A., the exclusive licensee of the Pasteur Institute’s HIV-2 intellectual property estate.
 
Corporate History
 
On May 5, 2004, we completed a merger with Chembio Diagnostic Systems Inc. through which Chembio Diagnostics Systems Inc. became our wholly-owned subsidiary, and through which the management and business of Chembio Diagnostic Systems Inc. became our management and business.  As part of this transaction, we changed our name to Chembio Diagnostics, Inc.  In 2003, we had sold our prior business, and as a result, we had no specific business immediately prior to the merger.
 

Since the formation of Chembio Diagnostic Systems Inc. in 1985, it has been involved in developing, manufacturing, selling and distributing in-vitro diagnostic tests, including rapid tests beginning in 1995, for a number of conditions in humans and animals.
 
On March 12, 2004, we implemented a 1-for-17 reverse split of our common stock.  All references in this Form 10-K to shares of our common stock have been adjusted to reflect this reverse split.
In February 2010, Crestview Capital Master, L.L.C. ("Crestview Master), a Delaware limited liability company that held 18,907,431 shares of Chembio's common stock, spun off all these shares, constituting approximately 30.5% of Chembio's outstanding shares, to its three equity holders.  One of the three equity holders of Crestview Master immediately spun off, to its approximately 126 equity holders, all of the 12,990,569 shares of Chembio stock that it received in this distribution.  As a result, as of February 24, 2010, Crestview Master no longer owned any shares.  The former direct and indirect equity holders of Crestview Master owned all these shares, with none of these individual stockholders having beneficial ownership of more than 5.61% of the outstanding common stock of Chembio.  Approximately 12,208,505 of the shares distributed are free of restrictions and may be sold or otherwise transferred immediately.  An additional 2,560,822 of the distributed shares are expected to become eligible for resale on March 24.  The other approximately 4,138,104 shares are expected to become eligible for resale on May 25, 2010.

1210

Glossary
Glossary
AIDSAcquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome.  AIDS is caused by the Human Immunodeficiency Virus, HIV.
ALGORITHM (parallel or serial)For rapid HIV testing this refers both to method or protocol (in developing countries to date) for using rapid tests from different manufacturers in combination to screen and confirm patients at the point-of-care, and may also refer to the specific tests that have been selected by an agency or ministry of health to be used in this way.  A parallel algorithm uses two screening tests from different manufacturers and a tie-breaker test only if there is a discrepancy between the screening tests results. A serial algorithm only uses a second confirmatory test if there is a positive result from the screening test, meaning that the number of confirmatory tests used is equal to the positivity rate in the testing venue. A tie-breaker test resolves discrepancies between the screen and the confirmatory test.
ANTIBODYA protein which is a natural part of the human immune system produced by specialized cells to neutralize antigens, including viruses and bacteria that invade the body.  Each antibody producing cell manufactures a unique antibody that is directed against, binds to and eliminates one, and only one, specific type of antigen.
ANTIGENAny substance which, upon entering the body, stimulates the immune system leading to the formation of antibodies. Among the more common antigens are bacteria, pollens, toxins, and viruses.
ARVsAnti-Retroviral Treatments for AIDS
CD-4The CD4+ T-lymphocyte is the primary target for HIV infection because of the affinity of the virus for the CD4 surface marker.  Measures of CD4+ T-lymphocytes are used to guide clinical and therapeutic management of HIV-infected persons.
CDCUnited States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
CLIA waiverClinical Laboratory Improvement Act designation that allows simple tests to be performed in point-of-care settings such as doctors offices, walk-in clinics and emergency rooms.
DIAGNOSTICPertaining to the determination of the nature or cause of a disease or condition.  Also refers to reagents or procedures used in diagnosis to measure proteins in a clinical sample.
EITFEmerging Issues Task Force
FASBFinancial Accounting Standards Board
FDAUnited States Food and Drug Administration
FDICFederal Deposit Insurance Corporation
FASFinancial Accounting Standard
HIVHuman Immunodeficiency Virus.  HIV (also called HIV-1), a retrovirus, causes AIDS.  A similar retrovirus, HIV-2, causes a variant disease, sometimes referred to as West African AIDS.  HIV infection leads to the destruction of the immune system.
IgGIgG or Immunoglobulin are proteins found in human blood. This protein is called an “antibody” and is an important part of the body’s defense against disease. When the body is attacked by harmful bacteria or viruses, antibodies help fight these invaders.
MOHMinistry of Health
MOUMemoranda of Understanding
NGONon-Governmental Organization
OTCOver-the-Counter
PEPFARThe President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief
PMAPre-Marketing Approval –FDA approval classification for a medical device that is not substantially equivalent to a legally marketed device or is otherwise required by statute to have an approved application.  Rapid HIV tests must have an approved PMA application before marketing of such a product can begin.
PROTOCOLA procedure pursuant to which an immunodiagnostic test is performed on a particular specimen in order to obtain the desired reaction.
REAGENTA chemical added to a sample under investigation in order to cause a chemical or biological reaction which will enable measurement or identification of a target substance.
RETROVIRUSA type of virus which contains the enzyme Reverse Transcriptase and is capable of transforming infected cells to produce diseases in the host such as AIDS.
SABStaff Accounting Bulletin
SENSITIVITYRefers to the ability of an assay to detect and measure small quantities of a substance of interest. The greater the sensitivity, the smaller the quantity of the substance of interest the assay can detect.  Also refers to the likelihood of detecting the antigen when present.
SPECIFICITYThe ability of an assay to distinguish between similar materials.  The greater the specificity, the better an assay is at identifying a substance in the presence of substances of similar makeup.
SPUTUMExpectorated matter; saliva mixed with discharges from the respiratory passages
TBTuberculosis (TB) is a disease caused by bacteria called Mycobacterium tuberculosis. The bacteria usually attack the lungs. But, TB bacteria can attack any part of the body such as the kidney, spine, and brain. If not treated properly, TB disease can be fatal.  TB is spread through the air from one person to another. The bacteria are put into the air when a person with active TB disease of the lungs or throat coughs or sneezes. People nearby may breathe in these bacteria and become infected.
UNAIDSJoint United Nations Program on HIV/AIDS
USAIDUnited States Agency for International Development
USDAU.S Department of Agriculture
WHOWorld Health Organization
13
11

 
ITEM 1A.RISK FACTORS
 
You should carefully consider each of the following risk factors and all of the other information provided in this Annual Report.  The risks described below are those we currently believe may materially affect us.  An investment in our Common Stock involves a high degree of risk, and should be considered only by persons who can afford the loss of their entire investment.
 
Risks related to our industry, business and strategy
 
Because we may not be able to obtain necessary regulatory approvals for some of our products, we may not generate revenues in the amounts we expect, or in the amounts necessary to continue our business.
 
All of our proposed and existing products are subject to regulation in the U.S. by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, the U.S. Department of Agriculture and/or other domestic and international governmental, public health agencies, regulatory bodies or non-governmental organizations.  In particular, we are subject to strict governmental controls on the development, manufacture, labeling, distribution and marketing of our products.  The process of obtaining required approvals or clearances varies according to the nature of, and uses for, a specific product.  These processes can involve lengthy and detailed laboratory testing, human or animal clinical trials, sampling activities, and other costly, time-consuming procedures.  The submission of an application to a regulatory authority does not guarantee that the authority will grant an approval or clearance for product.  Each authority may impose its own requirements and can delay or refuse to grant approval or clearance, even though a product has been approved in another country.
 
The time taken to obtain approval or clearance varies depending on the nature of the application and may result in the passage of a significant period of time from the date of submission of the application.  Delays in the approval or clearance processes increase the risk that we will not succeed in introducing or selling the subject products, and we may determine to devote our resources to different products.
 
Changes in government regulations could increase our costs and could require us to undergo additional trials or procedures, or could make it impractical or impossible for us to market our products for certain uses, in certain markets, or at all.
 
Changes in government regulations may adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations because we may have to incur additional expenses if we are required to change or implement new testing, manufacturing and control procedures.  If we are required to devote resources to develop such new procedures, we may not have sufficient resources to devote to research and development, marketing, or other activities that are critical to our business.
 
For example, the European Union and other jurisdictions have a requirement that diagnostic medical devices used to test human biological specimens must receive regulatory approval known as a CE mark, or be registered under the ISO 13.485 medical device directive.  The letters “CE” are the abbreviation of the French phrase “Conforme Européene,” which means “European conformity.”  ISO (“International Organization for Standardization”) is the world’s largest developer of standards with 148 member countries.  As such, export to the European and other jurisdictions without the CE or ISO 13.485 mark is not possible.   In 2007, we received ISO 13.485 certification, in 2008, we received a CE registration for our Chagas test, and during 2009 we expectexpected to receive CE registration for our two FDA approved HIV tests.  However, additional data and documentation has been requested and there are no assurances that we will be able to secure this certification although we are not aware of any material reason why such approval will not be granted.  However, if for any reason a CE registration is not granted, our ability to export our products could be adversely impacted.
 
We can manufacture and sell our products only if we comply with regulations of government agencies such as the FDA and the USDA.  We have implemented a quality system that is intended to comply with applicable regulations.  Although FDA approval is not required for the export of our products, there are export regulations promulgated by the FDA that specifically relate to the export of our products.  Although we believe that we meet the regulatory standards required for the export of our products, these regulations could change in a manner that could adversely impact our ability to export our products.
1412

Our products may not be able to compete with new diagnostic products or existing products developed by well-established competitors, which would negatively affect our business.
 
The diagnostic industry is focused on the testing of biological specimens in a laboratory or at the point-of-care and is highly competitive and rapidly changing.  Our principal competitors often have considerably greater financial, technical and marketing resources than we do.  Several companies produce diagnostic tests that compete directly with our testing product line, including but not limited to, Orasure Technologies, Inverness Medical and Trinity Biotech.  As new products enter the market, our products may become obsolete or a competitor’s products may be more effective or more effectively marketed and sold than ours.  Although we have no specific knowledge of any competitor’s product that will render our products obsolete, if we fail to maintain and enhance our competitive position or fail to introduce new products and product features, our customers may decide to use products developed by our competitors, which could result in a loss of revenues and cash flow.
 
We are developinghave developed an oral fluid rapid HIV test as well as other applications utilizing our Dual Path Platform technology, which we believe could enhance our competitive position in HIV rapid testing and other fields.  During 2008 we completed development of our initial DPP® products for the detection of antibodies to HIV 1 & 2 in oral fluid as well as blood samples, and a product for the detection of canine leishmaniasis.    However we still have technical, manufacturing, regulatory and marketing challenges to meet before we will know whether we can successfully commercialize products incorporating this technology.  There can be no assurance that we will overcome these challenges.
 
We have granted Inverness exclusive rights to market our SURE CHECK® HIV 1/2 in the United States Europe and Asianon-exclusive rights in the rest of the world and exclusive rights to market our HIV 1/2 STAT PAK® in the U.S. only. Inverness has no rapid HIV tests that are approved for marketing in the U.S., we are not aware of any rapid HIV products that Inverness is even contemplating for the U.S., and Inverness is obligated to inform us of any such products as soon as it is able to do so.  Inverness does have rapid HIV tests manufactured by certain of itsseveral subsidiaries outside the U.S. that are being actively marketed outside the U.S., primarily in developing countries. Our HIV 1/2 STAT PAK cassette and dipstick products compete against these Inverness products, and we specifically acknowledge in our agreements with Inverness the existence of such other products.  Moreover, except for a product in the HIV barrel field as defined in our agreement with Inverness, Inverness is permitted under our agreements to market certain types of permitted competing rapid HIV tests in the U.S.  Under these conditions, we could choose to terminate the applicable agreement with Inverness or change the agreement to a non-exclusive agreement, and Inverness would expand the lateral flow license granted to the Company to allow the Company to market the product independently or through other marketing partners.  While we believe that Inverness is committed to successfully marketing our products particularly in the U.S. and other developed countries where our products are or become approved for marketing, Inverness may choose to develop or acquire competing products for marketing in the U.S. as well as other markets where they are marketing our SURE CHECK® HIV 1/2 product, and such an action could have at least a temporary material adverse effect on the marketing of these products until such time as alternative marketing arrangements could be implemented.  While we also believe that the expansion of our license to the Inverness lateral flow patents substantially facilitates our ability to make alternative marketing arrangements, there can be no assurance that the modification of marketing arrangements and the possible corresponding delays or suspension of sales would not have a material adverse effect on our business.
 
In addition, the point-of-care diagnostics industry is undergoing rapid technological changes, with frequent introductions of new technology-driven products and services.  As new technologies become introduced into the point-of-care diagnostic testing market, we may be required to commit considerable additional efforts, time and resources to enhance our current product portfolio or develop new products.  We may not have the available time and resources to accomplish this and many of our competitors have substantially greater financial and other resources to invest in technological improvements.  We may not be able to effectively implement new technology-driven products and services or be successful in marketing these products and services to our customers, which would materially harm our operating results. 
 
WeAlthough we own our DPP® patent, we own no issued patents covering lateral flow technology, and the field of lateral flow technology is complex and characterized by a substantial amount of litigation, so the risk of potential patent challenges is ongoing for us in spite of our pending patent applications.DPP® patent.
 
Although we have been granted non-exclusive licenses to the lateral flow patents owned by Inverness Medical Innovations, Inc. , there is no assurance that their lateral flow patents will not be challenged or that licenses from other parties may not be required, if available at all.  In the event that it is determined that a license is required and it is not possible to negotiate a license agreement under a necessary patent, we may be able to modify our HIV rapid test products and other products such that a license would not be necessary.  However, this alternative could delay or limit our ability to sell these products in the U.S. and other markets, which would adversely affect our results of operations, cash flows and business.
1513

During 2008 Inverness and Church & Dwight commenced a patent infringement suit against Orasure Technologies, Inc. based on Orasure’s alleged infringement of one of Church & Dwight’s and Inverness’ (the parties have joint rights to this patent) main patents covering lateral flow technology.  Orasure has alleged that it does not infringe such patent and that such patent is invalid.   A judgment adverse to Inverness stating that Orasure’s product does not infringe the Inverness patent or invalidating the Inverness patent, which patent Inverness has successfully used to restrict competition in selected product areas core to Inverness’ business, could potentially open up the US rapid HIV test market to other competitors, and thereby have a material and adverse effect on our business.  A settlement by Inverness with Orasure, depending on its terms, could also have a material effect on our business, which effect could be beneficial or detrimental.
On March 13, 2007, our Dual Path Platform Immunoassay Device patent application was issued as United States patent no. 7,189,522.  Additional protection for this intellectual property is pending worldwide.  This platform has shown improved sensitivity as compared with conventional platforms in a number of preliminary studies using well characterized samples.studies.  We believe that this new platform is outside of the scope of currently issued patents in the field of lateral flow technology, thereby offering the possibility of a greater freedom to operate.  However there can be no assurance that our patents or our products incorporating the patent claims will not be challenged at some time in the future.
 
New developments in health treatments or new non-diagnostic products may reduce or eliminate the demand for our products.
 
The development and commercialization of products outside of the diagnostics industry could adversely affect sales of our products.  For example, the development of a safe and effective vaccine to HIV or treatments for other diseases or conditions that our products are designed to detect, could reduce, or eventually eliminate, the demand for our HIV or other diagnostic products and result in a loss of revenues.
 
We may not have sufficient resources to effectively introduce and market our products, which could materially harm our operating results.
 
Introducing and achieving market acceptance for our rapid HIV tests and other new products will require substantial marketing efforts and will require us or our contract partners, sales agents, or distributors to make significant expenditures of time and money.    In some instances we will be significantly or totally reliant on the marketing efforts and expenditures of our contract partners, sales agents, distributors.  If they do not have or commit the expertise and resources to effectively market the products that we manufacture, our operating results will be materially harmed.
 
The success of our business depends, in addition to the market success of our products, on our ability to raise additional capital through the sale of debt or equity or through borrowing, and we may not be able to raise capital or borrow funds in amounts necessary to continue our business, or at all.
 
Our revenues and gross margins have increased significantly in recent periods, and our operating and net losses have decreased significantly in recent periods.  Nevertheless, prior to 2009 we have sustained significant operating losses in 2008, 2007 and 2006.since 2004.  At December 31, 2008,2009, we had a stockholders’ equity of $2.58$3.08 million and a working capital surplus of $1.66$1.49 million.  The Company estimates that its resources are sufficient to fund its needs through the end of 20092010 and beyond or that, in the alternative, it could raise additional capital although the terms under which that capital could be raised would likely be very dilutive to current shareholders. The Company’s liquidity and cash requirements will depend on several factors. These factors include (1) the level of revenues (the Company received $340,000 in 2009 for license fees for which we need to meet certain milestones to earn); (2) the extent to which, if any, that revenue level improves operating cash flows; (3) the Company’s investments in research and development, facilities, marketing, regulatory approvals, and other investments it may determine to make; and (4) the Company’s investment in capital equipment (including production equipment of $323,500 that the Company has contracted for) and the extent to which it improves cash flow through operating efficiencies. There are no assurances that the Company will becomeremain profitable or generate positive cash flow by the end of 2009in 2010 or, in the alternative, be successful in raising sufficient capital to fund its needs through 2009.2010.
 
Our objectiveApproval and launch of increasing internationalour DPP® products in Brazil during 2010 and increased sales to other developing world markets in 2010  is critical to our business plan and if we fail to meet this objective, we may not generate revenues in the amounts we expect, or in amounts necessary to continuefund our business.planned research, development and regulatory expenses in 2010.
 
We intend to attempt to increase international sales of our products.  A number of factors can slow or prevent international sales, or substantially increase the cost of international sales, including:
·  regulatory requirements and customs regulations;
·  cultural and political differences;
·  foreign exchange rates, currency fluctuations and tariffs;
·  dependence on and difficulties in managing international distributors or representatives;
·  the creditworthiness of foreign entities;
·  difficulties in foreign accounts receivable collection; and
·  competition
·  pricing
·  economic conditions and the absence of available funding sources.
 
If we are unable to increase our revenues from international sales, our operating results will be materially harmed.
16
14

We rely on trade secret laws and agreements with our key employees and other third parties to protect our proprietary rights, and we cannot be sure that these laws or agreements adequately protect our rights.
 
We believe that factors such as the technological and creative skills of our personnel, strategic relationships, new product developments, frequent product enhancements and name recognition are essential to our success.  All our management personnel are bound by non-disclosure agreements.  If personnel leave our employment, in some cases we would be required to protect our intellectual property rights pursuant to common law theories which may be less protective than provisions of employment, non-competition or non-disclosure agreements.
 
We seek to protect our proprietary products under trade secret and copyright laws, enter into license agreements for various materials and methods employed in our products, and enter into strategic relationships for distribution of the products.  These strategies afford only limited protection.  We currently have nosome foreign patents thoughissued, and we are seeking additional patent protection in several other foreign jurisdictions for our DPP® technology.  We have licenses to reagents (antigens and peptides) used in several of our products and products under development  We also have a license to manufacture, use and sell products used to screen for antibodies to HIV-2.  In addition, our SURE CHECK®, DPP® and STAT-PAK® trademarks have been registered in the U.S.  Despite our efforts to protect our proprietary assets, and respect the intellectual property rights of others, we participate in several markets where intellectual property rights protections are of little or no value.  This can place our products and our company at a competitive disadvantage.
 
During 2008 and in the first quarter of 2009 we terminated a number of employees who have had access to proprietary and confidential information.  In connection with the termination of several of these employees whose positions were terminated, individuals executed severance agreements that include strong covenants by these former employees to keep our proprietary information confidential.  Despite these and other efforts we make to protect our confidential information, such as entering confidentiality agreements in connection with new business opportunities, unauthorized parties may attempt to copy aspects of our products or to obtain information that we regard as proprietary.  We may be required to expend substantial resources in asserting or protecting our intellectual property rights, or in defending suits related to intellectual property rights.  Disputes regarding intellectual property rights could substantially delay product development or commercialization activities because some of our available funds would be diverted away from our business activities.  Disputes regarding intellectual property rights might include state, federal or foreign court litigation as well as patent interference, patent reexamination, patent reissue, or trademark opposition proceedings in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.
 
To facilitate development and commercialization of a proprietary technology base, we may need to obtain additional licenses to patents or other proprietary rights from other parties.  Obtaining and maintaining these licenses, which may not be available, may require the payment of up-front fees and royalties.  In addition, if we are unable to obtain these types of licenses, our product development and commercialization efforts may be delayed or precluded.
 
Our continued growth depends on retaining our current key employees and attracting additional qualified personnel, and we may not be able to do so.
 
Our success will depend to a large extent upon the skills and experience of our executive officers, management and sales, marketing, operations and scientific staff.  We may not be able to attract or retain qualified employees in the future due to the intense competition for qualified personnel among medical products businesses, geographic considerations, our ability to offer competitive compensation , relocation packages, benefits, and/or other reasons.
 
If we are not able to attract and retain the necessary personnel to accomplish our business objectives, we may experience constraints that will adversely affect our ability to effectively manufacture, sell and market our products to meet the demands of our strategic partners in a timely fashion, or to support internal research and development programs.  Although we believe we will be successful in attracting and retaining qualified personnel, competition for experienced scientists and other personnel from numerous companies and academic and other research institutions may limit our ability to do so on acceptable terms.
 
17

We have entered into employment contracts with our President, Lawrence Siebert, and our Senior Vice President of Research and Development, Javan Esfandiari.  Due to the specific knowledge and experience of these executives regarding the industry, technology and market, the loss of the services of either one of them would likely have a material adverse effect on the Company.  The contract with Mr. Siebert, had aprovides that Mr. Siebert will serve as the Chief Executive Officer and President of the Company for an additional three-year term of two years endingthrough May 2008, which the board of directors extended for one year, and the11, 2012.  The contract with Mr. Esfandiari has a term of three years ending March 2010.2013.  We have obtained a key man insurance policy for Mr. Esfandiari.
 
15

We believe our success depends on our ability to participate in large government programs in the U.S. and worldwide and we may not be able to do so.
 
We believe it to be in our best interests to meaningfully participate in the PEPFAR Program, UN Global Fund initiatives and other programs funded by large donors.  We have initiated several strategies to participate in these programs.programs, such as introduction of our DPP® HIV test for use with oral fluid samples.  Participation in these programs requires alignment and engagement with the many other participants in these programs including the World Health Organization, U.S. Center for Disease Control, U.S. Agency for International Development, foreign governments and their agencies, non-governmental organizations, and HIV service organizations.  If we are unsuccessful in our efforts to participate in these programs, our operating results could be materially harmed.
 
WeAlthough we were profitable in 2009, we have a history of incurring net losses and we cannot be certain that we will be able to achievesustain profitability.
 
Since the inception of Chembio Diagnostic Systems, Inc. in 1985 and through the period ended December 31, 2008, we have incurred net losses.  As of December 31, 2008,2009, we have an accumulated deficit of $37 million.  We incurred net losses of $1.9 million and $2.6 million in 2008 and 2007, respectively.respectively, while showing a net profit of $309,000 in 2009.
 
We expect to continue to make substantial expenditures for sales and marketing, and continue to make expenditures for regulatory submissions, product development and other purposes, though within reasonable limitationspurpose that we believe are necessary in ordermay make it more difficult to continue our making progress towardmaintain profitability without requiring additional capital.for any given period or periods.  Our ability to achievecontinue profitability in the future will primarily depend on our ability to increase sales of our products, reduce production and other costs and successfully introduce new products and enhanced versions of our existing products into the marketplace.  If we are unable to increase our revenues at a rate that is sufficient to achieve profitability, or adequately control and reduce our operating costs, our operating results would be materially harmed.
 
To the extent that we are unable to obtain sufficient product liability insurance or that we incur product liability exposure that is not covered by our product liability insurance, our operating results could be materially harmed.
 
We may be held liable if any of our products, or any product which is made with the use or incorporation of any of the technologies belonging to us, causes injury of any type or is found otherwise unsuitable during product testing, manufacturing, marketing, sale or usage.  We have obtained product liability insurance, we have never received a product liability claim, and have generally not seen product liability claims for screening tests that are accompanied by appropriate disclaimers.  Nevertheless, in the event there is a claim, this insurance may not fully cover our potential liabilities.  In addition, as we attempt to bring new products to market, we may need to increase our product liability coverage which would be a significant additional expense that we may not be able to afford.  If we are unable to obtain sufficient insurance coverage at an acceptable cost to protect us, we may be forced to abandon efforts to commercialize our products or those of our strategic partners, which would reduce our revenues.
 
Risks related to our Common Stock
 
In the past, our Common Stock has been classified as penny stock, and it continues to be extremely illiquid, so investors may not be able to sell as much stock as they want at prevailing market prices.
 
In the past, our Common Stock has been classified as penny stock.  Penny stocks generally are equity securities with a price of less than $5.00 and trade on the over-the-counter market.  As a result, an investor may find it more difficult to dispose of or obtain accurate quotations as to the price of the securities that are classified as penny stocks.  The “penny stock” rules adopted by the Commission under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), subject the sale of the shares of penny stock issuers to regulations that impose sales practice requirements on broker-dealers, causing many broker-dealers to not trade penny stocks or to only offer the stocks to sophisticated investors that meet specified net worth or net income criteria identified by the Commission.  These regulations contribute to the lack of liquidity of penny stocks.
18

At the present time, transactions in our Common Stock are not subject to the “penny stock” rules because our average revenue for 2006, 2007, 2008 and 20082009 exceeded $6 million per year.  However, there can be no assurance that transactions in our Common Stock will not be subject to the “penny stock” rules in the future.
 
The average daily trading volume of our Common Stock on the over-the-counter market was less than 16,000101,000 shares per day over the three months ended March 16, 2009.1, 2010.  If limited trading in our stock continues, it may be difficult for investors to sell their shares in the public market at any given time at prevailing prices.
 
16


Our management and larger stockholders exercise significant control over our Company and may approve or take actions that may be adverse to your interests.

As of March 17, 2009,1, 2010, our named executive officers, directors and 5% stockholders beneficially owned approximately 63.7%13.9% of our voting power.  For the foreseeable future, to the extent that our current stockholders vote similarly, they will be able to exercise control over many matters requiring approval by the board of directors or our stockholders.  As a result, they will be able to:
 
·  control the composition of our board of directors;
 
·  control our management and policies;
 
·  determine the outcome of significant corporate transactions, including changes in control that may be beneficial to stockholders; and
 
·  act in each of their own interests, which may conflict with, or be different from, the interests of each other or the interests of the other stockholders.
 
ITEM 2.PROPERTIES
 
Our administrative offices and research facilities are located in Medford, New York.  We lease approximately 18,20023,400 square feet of industrial space for $11,987$14,683 per month.  The space is utilized for research and development activities (approximately 2,6602,600 square feet), offices (approximately 1,8202,640 square feet) and production (approximately 13,72018,160 square feet).  The lease term expires on April 30, 2009, and the Company has an option to renew for an additional two years.2014.    Additional space may be required as we expand our research and development activities.  We do not foresee any significant difficulties in obtaining any required additional facilities.
As  We entered into a second lease effective February 1st of 2010, the filing dateprinciple terms of this Annual Report,lease are the Company issame as the one entered into in discussion for a lease extension for its administrative offices2009 and research facilities.  The principle terms being discussed are as follows: (a) a lease term of five years;ending April 30, 2014; (b) an initial rent of $11,350 per month;month plus $3,333 for the second lease (March and April of 2010 are free and the month of April in 2011, 2012 and 2013 is also free) ; (c) the monthly rent for year two of the lease (does not apply to second lease) will increase by the lower of (i) the change in the consumer price index, or (ii) five percent; and (d) the monthly rent for years three through five of the lease (years two through four of the second lease) will increase each year by the lower of (i) the change in the consumer price index, or (ii) two and one half percent. Although the Company believes that the extension will be entered into on terms that are substantially similar to the terms being discussed, there is no assurance that this will occur.
 
ITEM 3.LEGAL PROCEEDINGS
 
From time to time, we may be involved in litigation relating to claims arising out of our operations in the normal course of business.  We know of no material, existing or pending legal proceedings against us, nor are we involved as a plaintiff in any material proceeding or pending litigation.  There are no proceedings in which any of our directors, officers or affiliates, or any registered or beneficial shareholder, is an adverse party or has a material interest that is adverse to our interest.
 

1917

 
PART II                                                                      
 
ITEM 5.MARKET FOR REGISTRANT’S COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES
 
Market Information
 
Our common stock is quoted on the OTC Bulletin Board under the symbol “CEMI.”  The table below sets forth the high and low bid prices per share of our common stock for each quarter of our two most recently completed fiscal years.  These prices represent inter-dealer quotations without retail markup, markdown, or commission and may not necessarily represent actual transactions.
 
Fiscal Year 2009High BidLow Bid
First Quarter$.135$.075
Second Quarter$.18$.085
Third Quarter$.23$.12
Fourth Quarter$.39$.20
 
Fiscal Year 2008High BidLow BidHigh BidLow Bid
First Quarter$0.30$0.11$0.30$0.11
Second Quarter$0.26$0.08$0.26$0.08
Third Quarter$0.28$0.15$0.28$0.15
Fourth Quarter$0.21$0.10$0.21$0.10
 
Fiscal Year 2007High BidLow Bid
First Quarter$0.93$0.61
Second Quarter$0.65$0.47
Third Quarter$0.65$0.37
Fourth Quarter$0.57$0.26

Rule 15g-9 of the Securities and Exchange Commission, known as the Penny Stock Rule, imposes requirements on broker/dealers who sell securities subject to the rule to persons other than established customers and accredited investors.  For transactions covered by the rule, brokers/dealers must make a special suitability determination for purchasers of the securities and receive the purchaser’s written agreement to the transaction prior to sale.  The Securities and Exchange Commission also has rules that regulate broker/dealer practices in connection with transactions in “penny stocks.”  Penny stocks generally are equity securities with a price of less than $5.00 (other than securities registered on certain national securities exchanges or quoted on the NASDAQ system, provided that current price and volume information with respect to transactions in that security is provided by the exchange or system), except for securities of companies that have tangible net assets in excess of $2,000,000 or average revenue of at least $6,000,000 for the previous three years.  The Penny Stock Rule requires a broker/ dealer, prior to a transaction in a penny stock not otherwise exempt from the rules, to deliver a standardized risk disclosure document prepared by the Commission that provides information about penny stocks and the nature and level of risks in the penny stock market.  The broker/dealer also must provide the customer with current bid and offer quotations for the penny stock, the compensation of the broker/dealer and its salesperson in the transaction, and monthly account statements showing the market value of each penny stock held in the customer’s account.  The bid and offer quotations, and the broker/dealer and salesperson compensation information, must be given to the customer orally or in writing prior to effecting the transaction and must be given to the customer in writing before or with the customer’s confirmation.  These disclosure requirements have the effect of reducing the level of trading activity in the secondary market for penny stock issues.  As a result of these rules, investors sometimes find it difficult to sell shares of penny stock issuers.  At the present time, transactions in our common stock are not subject to the Penny Stock Rule because our average revenue for 2006, 2007, 2008 and 20082009 exceeded $6 million per year.  However, there can be no assurance that transactions in our common stock will not be subject to the Penny Stock Rule in the future.
 
20

Holders
 
As of January 15, 2009,February 2, 2010, there were approximately 8751,100 record owners of our common stock.
 
Dividends
 
The Company has never paid cash dividends on its common stock and has no plans to do so in the foreseeable future.
 
Equity Compensation Plan Information
18

 
Combined Equity Compensation Plans - Information as of December 31, 2008
Plan Category
Number of Securities to be Issued Upon Exercise of Outstanding Options, Warrants and Rights
Weighted-Average Exercise Price of Outstanding Options, Warrants and Rights
Number of Securities Remaining Available for Future Issuance under Equity Compensation Plans (Excluding Securities Reflected in Column (a))
 (a)(b)(c)
Equity compensation plans approved by security holders1
2,416,6501
$0.3664,566,350
Equity compensation plans not approved by security holders          ------
Total2,416,650$0.3664,566,350

1 The “Number of Securities to be Issued Upon Exercise of Outstanding Warrants and Rights” represents 1,983,000 from the 1999 Stock Option Plan and 433,650 under the 2008 Stock Incentive Plan.   The “Number of Securities Remaining Available for Future Issuance Under Equity Compensation Plans” represents shares issuable under the 2008 Stock Incentive Plan.  The Company currently has no intention to issue additional securities under the 1999 Stock Option Plan.
ITEM 6. SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA
 
Presented in this table are selected financial data for the past five years ending December 31, 2008.2009.  Prior year’s financial statements have been reclassified to conform to current year presentation (See discussion in ITEM 7. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS, Gross Margin).   As of the year ended December 31, 2008 the Company reclassified its royalty and license expenses to cost of goods sold, instead of selling, general and administrative expenses.
 

CHEMBIO DIAGNOSTICS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
 SELECTED HISTORICAL FINANCIAL  DATA
                          
Statement of Operations Data:                         
  December 31, 2009    December 31, 2008    December 31, 2007    December 31, 2006    December 31, 2005   
TOTAL REVENUES $13,834,248    $11,049,571    $9,230,948    $6,502,480    $3,940,730   
                               
GROSS PROFIT  5,860,405 42%  3,851,721 35%  2,795,710 30%  1,608,272 25%  944,648 24%
                               
OVERHEAD COSTS:                              
Research and development expenses  2,883,696 21%  2,605,343 24%  1,906,653 21%  1,401,472 22%  1,364,898 35%
Selling, general and administrative expenses  2,659,382 19%  3,317,046 30%  3,765,221 41%  4,786,993 74%  2,877,737 73%
   5,543,078     5,922,389     5,671,874     6,188,465     4,242,635   
INCOME (LOSS) FROM OPERATIONS  317,327     (2,070,668)    (2,876,164)    (4,580,193)    (3,297,987)  
                               
OTHER INCOME (EXPENSES):  (8,267)    121,898     249,272     (414,827)    45,987   
                               
NET INCOME (LOSS)  309,060 2%  (1,948,770)-18%  (2,626,892)-28%  (4,995,020)-77%  (3,252,000)-83%
                               
Dividends accreted/payable in stock to preferred stockholders and a beneficial conversion feature  -     -     5,645,310     3,210,046     3,517,022   
NET INCOME (LOSS) ATTRIBUTABLE TO COMMON STOCKHOLDERS $309,060    $(1,948,770)-18% $(8,272,202)-90% $(8,205,066)-126% $(6,769,022)-172%
                               
Basic income (loss) per share $0.00    $(0.03)   $(0.57)   $(0.80)   $(0.88)  
                               
Diluted income (loss) per share $0.00    $(0.03)   $(0.57)   $(0.80)   $(0.88)  
                               
Weighted average number of shares outstanding, basic  61,946,435     61,266,954     14,608,478     10,293,168     7,705,782   
                               
Weighted average number of shares outstanding, diluted  75,041,932   �� 61,266,954     14,608,478     10,293,168     7,705,782   
                               

2119

CHEMBIO DIAGNOSTICS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
 SELECTED FINANCIAL  DATA
                          
Statement of Operations Data:                         
  December 31, 2008    December 31, 2007    December 31, 2006    December 31, 2005    December 31, 2004   
TOTAL REVENUES $11,049,571    $9,230,948    $6,502,480    $3,940,730    $3,305,932   
                               
GROSS PROFIT  3,851,721 35%  2,795,710 30%  1,608,272 25%  944,648 24%  623,242 19%
                               
OVERHEAD COSTS:                              
Research and development expenses  2,605,343 24%  1,906,653 21%  1,401,472 22%  1,364,898 35%  1,508,849 46%
Selling, general and administrative expenses  3,317,046 30%  3,765,221 41%  4,786,993 74%  2,877,737 73%  2,217,755 67%
   5,922,389     5,671,874     6,188,465     4,242,635     3,726,604   
LOSS FROM OPERATIONS  (2,070,668)    (2,876,164)    (4,580,193)    (3,297,987)    (3,103,362)  
                               
OTHER INCOME (EXPENSES):  121,898     249,272     (414,827)    45,987     4,471   
                               
NET LOSS  (1,948,770)-18%  (2,626,892)-28%  (4,995,020)-77%  (3,252,000)-83%  (3,098,891)-94%
                               
Dividends accreted/payable in stock to preferred stockholders and a beneficial conversion feature  -     5,645,310     3,210,046     3,517,022     1,943,073   
NET LOSS ATTRIBUTABLE TO COMMON STOCKHOLDERS $(1,948,770)-18% $(8,272,202)-90% $(8,205,066)-126% $(6,769,022)-172% $(5,041,964)-153%
                               
Basic and diluted loss per share $(0.03)   $(0.57)   $(0.80)   $(0.88)   $(0.85)  
                               
Weighted average number of shares outstanding, basic and diluted  61,266,954     14,608,478     10,293,168     7,705,782     5,966,769   
                               
                               
Balance Sheet Data:                              
Working capital $1,663,914    $3,228,724    $5,113,233    $4,707,957    $(504,825)  
Total assets  5,914,941     6,584,997     7,906,577     7,074,644     1,373,760   
Total liabilities  3,337,609     2,322,171     2,297,193     1,963,703     1,950,413   
Shareholders' equity (deficit)  2,577,332     4,262,826     (939,807)    1,052,703     (523,964)  

22

ITEM 7.MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
 
Overview
 
This discussion and analysis should be read in conjunction with the accompanying Consolidated Financial Statements and related notes.  Our discussion and analysis of our financial condition and results of operations are based upon our consolidated financial statements, which have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States. The preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America requires us to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities, disclosure of any contingent liabilities at the financial statement date and reported amounts of revenue and expenses during the reporting period. On an ongoing basis we review our estimates and assumptions. Our estimates were based on our historical experience and other assumptions that we believe to be reasonable under the circumstances. Actual results are likely to differ from those estimates under different assumptions or conditions, but we do not believe such differences will materially affect our financial position or results of operations. Our critical accounting policies, the policies we believe are most important to the presentation of our financial statements and require the most difficult, subjective and complex judgments, are outlined below in ‘‘Critical Accounting Policies,’’ and have not changed significantly.
 
In addition, certain statements made in this report may constitute “forward-looking statements”.  These forward-looking statements involve known or unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that may cause the actual results, performance or achievements of the Company to be materially different from any future results, performance or achievements expressed or implied by the forward-looking statements. Specifically, 1) our ability to obtain necessary regulatory approvals for our products; and 2) our ability to increase revenues and operating income, is dependent upon our ability to develop and sell our products, general economic conditions, and other factors. You can identify forward-looking statements by terminology such as “may,” “could”, “will,” “should,” “expects,” “intends,” “plans,” “anticipates,” “believes,” “estimates,” “predicts,” “potential,” “continues” or the negative of these terms or other comparable terminology. Although we believe that the expectations reflected-in the forward-looking statements are reasonable, we cannot guarantee future results, levels of activity, performance or achievements.
 
Except as may be required by applicable law, we do not undertake or intend to update or revise our forward-looking statements, and we assume no obligation to update any forward-looking statements contained in this report as a result of new information or future events or developments.  Thus, you should not assume that our silence over time means that actual events are bearing out as expressed or implied in such forward-looking statements.  You should carefully review and consider the various disclosures we make in this report and our other reports filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission that attempt to advise interested parties of the risks, uncertainties and other factors that may affect our business.
 
The following management discussion and analysis relates to the business of the Company, including its subsidiaries, which develop, manufacture, and market rapid diagnostic tests that detect infectious diseases. The Company’s main products presently commercially available are three rapid tests for the detection of HIV antibodies in whole blood, serum and plasma samples, all of which employ lateral flow technology and two of which were approved by the FDA in 2006.  In addition, we have a fourth rapid HIV test, more recently developed on our patented Dual Path Platform (DPP®) technology, for the detection of antibodies to HIV in oral fluid samples, as well as in whole blood, serum and plasma samples. The products which employ lateral flow technology are manufactured and sold under a non-exclusive license  we have  from Inverness Medical Innovations, Inc. (“Inverness”), which is also our exclusive marketing partner for the  FDA-approved  products in the United States (as well as Europe and Asia for the product that is known as the “barrel” format product) under its Clearview® brand.  Inverness launched its marketing of these products in the United States in February 2007.  Chembio’s two HIV STAT-PAK® rapid HIV tests (in cassette and dipstick formats) are marketed outside the United States through different partners and channels under our license from Inverness.
Rapid HIV tests represented nearly 90% of the Company’s product revenues in 2008. The Company also has other rapid tests that together represented approximately 10% of sales in 2008. The Company’s products are sold to medical laboratories and hospitals, governmental and public health entities, non-governmental organizations, medical professionals and retail establishments. Chembio’s products are sold under the Company’s STAT PAK® or SURE CHECK ® registered trademarks or under the private labels of its marketing partners, for example the Clearview® label owned by Inverness Medical Innovations, Inc.
23

All of the Company’s future products that are currently being developed are based on its patented Dual Path Platform (DPP®), which is a unique diagnostic point-of-care platform that has certain advantages over lateral flow technology.  In 2008 theThe Company has completed development of its first twofour products that employ the DPP® technology, two of which will be marketed under Chembio’s label (DPP® HIV 1/2 Screening Assay and itDPP® Syphilis Screen & Confirm) and two that have been developed specifically related to private label agreements with The Oswaldo Cruz Foundation (“FIOCRUZ”)  for the Brazilian public health market, as explained below. The DPP® HIV Screening Assay, will be manufactured as an OEM product for the Brazilian market pursuant to one of our agreements with FIOCRUZ.
The Company has a number of additional products under development that employ the DPP® technology.  These product development activities are further explaineddescribed below.
 
Oswaldo Cruz Foundation OEM DPP® Agreements
- During 2008 we signed four agreements with the Oswaldo Cruz Foundation (FIOCRUZ) in Brazil relating to products based on our DPP® technology for Leptospirosis, Canine Leishmaniasis, screening for HIV 1/2 with oral fluid samples, and a 5-band multiplex point-of-care confirmation oftest for HIV 1.1&2.  We have completed development of twothree of thethese products (Leishmaniasis and the HIV oral fluid screening test)and confirmation tests), and we have substantially completed development of the other two.  All fourLeptospirosis test.  Two of thesethe three products are or will be undergoingdeveloped have been submitted for regulatory approval evaluations in Brazil;Brazil and we expect the third will be filed very shortly; we expect that all of these products will be approved by ANVISABrazilian regulatory authorities (ANVISA for distribution by FIOCRUZ in BrazilHIV tests and MAPA for canine test), although there can be no assurance, during 2009,the first part of 2010, triggering initial orders as well as approximately $1MM$1 million in technology transfer fee payments to the Company in 2009.  WeCompany.  
During 2009, we received purchase orders from FIOCRUZ for the three products for which development has been completed and that are pending regulatory approval in the fourth quarteraggregate of 2008 for approximately $500,000 of the Leishmaniasis product; however due to the delay in FIOCRUZ receiving necessary import authorizations for the second and larger portion of this order, approximately $380,000 of this amount could not be shipped in December and was instead shipped during the first quarter of 2009.  Also, based upon additional features that we$2.4 million.  These orders are adding to the HIV confirmatory test, we are finalizing a revised agreement for this product which we believe will provide us with a larger market opportunity for this product in Brazil subject to regulatory approval, and other conditions.
of which there can be no assurance.  If regulatory approval is obtained, we anticipate additional orders in 2011.  We are currently considering entering additional agreements based on a similar model with them in 2010.
20

Bio-Rad Laboratories OEM DPP® Agreement- On April 16,6, 2008, we announcedentered a new development agreement with Bio-Rad Laboratories N.A..N.A., a partdivision of Bio-Rad Laboratories Inc (NYSE:BIO), a leading in-vitro diagnostic and life science company.  The agreement with Bio-Rad is for the development of a newsix band multiplex product that is being developed on our DPP® and which would be marketed by Bio-Rad under a limited exclusive license from Chembio to Bio-Rad that is limited to this field of application. Our agreement with Bio-Rad contemplated that we would enter into a license agreement effective no later than December 2008 subject to Bio-Rad being satisfied with development progress and other conditions..   We in fact did enter into this license agreement in January 2009 with a December 31, 2008 effective date and have received a $340,000 payment for this license.  Development of this product is anticipated to continue through 2009, funded by Bio-Rad at a cost of $125,000 every six months.  The agreement is terminable at any time by Bio Rad and, under certain circumstances, some or all of the $340,000 license fee is refundable.

DPP® HIV Oral Fluid Test Status
Having completedwill complete development of this product by the middle of 2010, by which time Bio Rad will have paid us approximately $600,000 in 2008development costs plus $340,000 for international sales,a DPP® license limited to this product. Thereupon, CE marking and FDA approval will be sought by Bio-Rad with Chembio in a supporting role as manufacturer.    We believe that Bio-Rad has begun discussions with the FDA to discuss this product, its proposed performance claims and the intended clinical protocol to support its regulatory submission.

Battelle/CDC DPP® Influenza Immunity Test – In December 2009 Chembio entered into a milestone-based development agreement for up to approximately $900,000 in connection with the development and initial supply of a multiplex, rapid point-of-care ("POC") influenza immunity test. The agreement contemplates a period of approximately nine months in which the development activity is to be completed. Chembio entered this agreement with Battelle Memorial Institute which has a master contract with the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention ("CDC") to enter into, implement and provide technical oversight of agreements relating to pandemic preparedness on behalf of CDC.   Our work plan has been delivered and been approved, which are the first two milestones triggering approximately $178,000 in payments to Chembio.  No agreement is in place for the manufacture, commercialization or license for this product assuming it is successfully developed in accordance with the specifications.

The objective of the project is to develop a product that can determine an individual's immunity to seasonal and novel influenza viruses, including novel swine H1N1, either in the field or in an outpatient setting. The test will have six different parameters (representing different influenza strains) plus a control line on a single POC DPP® device. The test will allow visual interpretation of results and/or will be used with a portable digital reader that will be customized for this application. Public health experts believe that rapid responses in the field require a POC test for influenza immunity, as well as infection. Current test platform technologies for infection and immunity are not suitable for reliable POC testing.
DPP® Hepatitis C and DPP® Hepatitis C/HIV Oral Fluid Antibody Tests - Prototypes of these products have been developed and are being evaluated in a study that has been organized by the National Center for HIV/AIDS, Viral Hepatitis, STD, and TB Prevention (NCHHSTP) at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) of the Department Of Health and Human Services.  The evaluation will be completed during 2010 and the results should be useful in helping to ascertain the performance characteristics of these products in comparison to other products that will also be in this evaluation.  Chembio’s DPP® HIV 1/2 test is also being evaluated in this study.
DPP® Influenza –We have developed a prototype multiplex test for FLU A/B Antigen Detection.  [This is not to be confused with the immune status antibody detection test we are now indeveloping for the initial stages of commercializing itU.S. CDC]. This prototype, if successfully developed into a commercial product, would be competitive to the current point-of-care FLU A/B products marketed by Quidel, Meridian, Binax (Inverness) and others.  We believe that we can develop a test that performs better than the current market leaders, and so that there is therefore a significant opportunity to participate in the US and global markets.  We are initially pursuing approval and registration of this product in the large markets globally including but not limited to those markets where we have been successful with our current lateral flow tests that only use finger-stick whole blood and other blood matrices (venous whole blood, serum and plasma).  Our product is being included in a study in Africa that is being conducted by a governmental organization interested in the possibility of expanded use of oral fluid based tests.market.  We are also negotiating an agreement with a large global in-vitro diagnostic products companyconsidering additional parameters for this product that would have exclusive marketing rightsfurther differentiate it in the market. This product will be our first commercial antigen detection test on DPP® and we believe that this has independent value to this product indemonstrate the capabilities of our technology to access large markets beyond serological antibody detection markets.  Our current plan is for development to be completed and initiation of our FDA 510(k) submission activities during 2010.

DPP® Leptospirosis – In June, as we previously reported, we were awarded a three-year $3 million Small Business Innovative Research (SBIR) Phase II grant from the United States market underNational Institutes of Health (NIH) to fully develop, validate, and commercialize a co-brandingrapid diagnostic test for Leptospirosis for general use worldwide, and our work is progressing on schedule. The test will be developed with DPP® and will utilize proprietary reagents developed by Cornell University and the Oswaldo Cruz Foundation at the Brazilian Ministry of Health. Development of the producttest will be in collaboration with the Division of Infectious Diseases, Weill Medical College, Cornell University in New York and the Oswaldo Cruz Foundation, the largest biomedical research institution in Latin America.  In the Phase I work completed in 2008, which occurred with this same collaborative group, novel diagnostic targets were identified and evaluated in a prototype test in Chembio’s patented DPP® format. The studies demonstrated that would includethe test prototype had an overall sensitivity of 85% and a specificity of 90% using serum samples of Leptospirosis patients from Brazil and Thailand.  Furthermore, the DPP® trademarkprototype had a sensitivity of 78% in identifying Leptospirosis in the namefirst 7 days of illness, the product.  (See RECENT DEVELOPMENTS AND CHEMBIO’S PLAN OF OPERATIONS FOR THE NEXT TWELVE MONTHS)."window-of-opportunity" during which initiation of antimicrobial therapy provides the greatest benefit.
 
Progress on DPP® Syphilis Screen and Confirm Multiplex Test
During 2008 and 2009 year to date, we made substantial progress on this product, with extensive collaborative efforts with the CDC and others.  We are currently evaluating whether this product meets the performance objectives for the US market while we continue to assess and focus on the market opportunity for this product in the United States.

Other DPP® Development Projects
Our patented DPP® technology, combined with our development and manufacturing experience and know-how, has enabled us to attract and enter into and pursue third-party-funded product development opportunities that in turn add further to our capabilities while subsidizing some of our R&D personnel and overall overhead costs.  This allows us to maintain a larger R&D staff than we could otherwise justify, which also gives us some flexibility in how and when we allocate resources.  Included in our research and development organization is a technical team that we created in 2008.  This team is able to transfer products from R&D into production and assist in validation, is involved in supporting our manufacturing organization when the need arises, and is also able to assist in pure development activities.  Creation of this team was an important accomplishment in 2008.
2421

Other Research & Development Activities - Chembio continues to work with commercial, governmental and private organizations in order to obtain research grants and otherR&D contracts & grant funding for development projects.  These programs have subsidized the Company’s development expenses while expanding the applications for and know-how related to DPP® and creating important collaborative relationships.  We have other grant applications pending. In this regard,April 2009 we have entered into a development agreementServices Agreement with Bio-Rad,the Infectious Disease Research Institute to develop DPP® products for Leishmaniasis and Leprosy for which we have received $125,000 and which, subject to continuedattainment of development milestones, will additionally provide us with approximately $125,000 within the next six months.  The second year provides for another $150,000, subject to the attainment of development milestones.  During the first quarter of 2009 we entered into a funded feasibility study agreement with the Foundation for Innovative and Novel Diagnostics (FIND), a non-profit organization funded by the Gates Foundation, related to development of serological tests for Tuberculosis and Malaria using our DPP®.  The Company received $165,000 from FIND and as a result of our achievement of all milestones, we recognized revenue of $99,000 in the first and other conditions, could result in approximately $200,000second quarters as well as $66,000 during the third quarter with further development activity pending a full evaluation and comparison of development funds for Chembio in 2009.  We also have DPPÒ grants from governmental agencies for $55,000 for leprosy research and $110,000 for Human TB Serology research in 2009.  Our four technology transfer, supply and license agreements with Oswaldo Cruz Foundation of Brazil could result in as much as $1,050,000 of advance royalty payments.  In addition to the projects described, Chembio has applied for other research grants and is working on entering into a number of other development agreements.results.
 
There can be no assurance that any of these projects will continue, meet regulatory or other technical requirements and specifications, and/or that if continued, will result in completed products, or that such products, if successfully completed, will be successfully commercialized.

Platform Enhancements - In addition to the specific products we plan to commercialize we also are pursuing enhancements to our DPP® technology platform during 2010 and 2011.  These enhancements include enabling a simplified test procedure, lowering the overall manufacturing costs, enabling development of combination antibody and antigen assays, and integrating molecular sample amplification systems with our detection system.   We are active in each of these areas and also are pursuing patent protection where applicable.
Regulatory Activities

We continue to make progress on obtaining a Community European (CE) markingCE Mark for FDA approved HIV tests – we provided all testing and related documentation that was requested by our products to indicate conformity with European Union health, safety and environmental requirements. We have submitted the HIV 1/2 STAT-PAK® technical file to our notified body and should complete all required steps for CE Marking of this productNotified Body during the second quarter, however additional data was requested in correspondence we received in January and we are evaluating the cost/benefit of 2009.producing this information at this time. Under our agreement with Inverness, as now amended, we areno longer have the obligation to obtain a CE Marking for the Clearview® Complete HIV 1/2.
Regulatory Approvals in Brazil through the Oswaldo Cruz Foundation (FIOCRUZ) We are prepared to submitanticipate that FIOCRUZ will receive required approvals from its regulatory agencies during the technical filefirst and/or second quarter of 2010 for the DPP® Leishmaniasis, HIV Confirmatory, and the DPP® HIV screening tests.
DPP® HIV 1/2 Screening Assay for Oral Fluid - Field evaluations in Africa have been completed of this product on behalfthat will supplement our pending U.S. clinical studies: During the second half of Inverness once2009 we prepared a proposed clinical trial protocol and submitted it to the FDA in support of our application for an Investigational Device Exemption (IDE) which we submitted and was approved during the fourth quarter of 2009.  This approved protocol permits us to move forward with the clinical trials performance data, along with other required product and manufacturing data, in support of a Pre-Marketing Approval (PMA) application to the FDA. We have commenced the clinical trials at two sites and we anticipate completing the clinical trials and submitting the PMA application during 2010 and receiving approval of the PMA during 2011.
DPP® Syphilis Screen & Confirm - The first phase of a multi-center evaluation sponsored by the World Health Organization commenced during the third quarter and we have received finalonly limited first phase results.  During the third quarter, we submitted a proposed labeling from Inverness.clinical plan to the FDA (Pre-IDE “Investigational Device Exemption”) and we are currently reviewing the FDA response.  We have also begun to identify clinical testing sites, have performed additional validation, interfering substance, and cross-reactivity studies on the product at Chembio and at external laboratories. There is no point-of-care test for syphilis cleared for marketing in the United States, and we believe that our product, with its multiplexed capacity to identify both treponemal and non-treponemal markers, provides a reliable indication of an active, untreated case of syphilis at the point-of-care.
22

The table below provides a preliminary summary estimated timetable for the regulatory approval and commercialization of the DPP® HIV Screening Assay and the DPP® Syphilis Screen & Confirm Assay in major markets.  There can be no assurance that these dates will be accurate.

We are pursuing registrations of our lateral flow and DPP® HIV products in a number of other jurisdictions, and also pursing registrations with the USDA of additional claims for our veterinary tuberculosis products.

MarketDPP® HIV 1/2  Screening AssayDPP® Syphilis Screen & Confirm
Developing World20102010
CE Mark0
2nd Half 2011
First Half 2010
US FDA
2nd  Half 2011
First Half 2011



Recent Events
 
DuringIn May 2009, certain warrants to purchase an aggregate of 2,489,120 shares of common stock expired, at an average exercise price of $.764.  These warrants were related to the quarter ended DecemberSeries A Preferred Stock Offering and other warrants related to the 2004 merger.

In January 2010, certain warrants to purchase an aggregate of 4,960,370 shares of common stock expired, at an average exercise price of $.474.  These warrants were related to the initial 2005 Series B Preferred Stock Offering (see Form 8-K filed on January 31, 2008, Inverness Medical Innovations, Inc. (“Inverness”) notified2005 with the Company that Inverness hadSEC for further details on this offering).

We entered into a contract with Bio-Rad Laboratories, Inc. (“Bio-Rad”)lease effective February 1, 2010 for royalties on Bio-Rad’s patentadditional warehouse space; see Item 2 for the detection of HIV-2 antibodies.  The agreement also provided for Inverness to pay past royalties.  The agreements betweenmore information.

In February 2010, the Company took possession of the automated assembly equipment (mentioned below under Equipment Purchase Commitment).  This equipment is expected to provide for faster throughput and Inverness provide thatthereby increasing capacity of our manufacturing facility, in addition to reducing labor costs.  The machine will need to go through a validation process and is expected to be in serviced during the Company is to share in these past royalties and Inverness requested it be reimbursed for the Company’s sharesecond quarter of these past royalties.  2010.

The Company entered into an employment agreement dated March 4, 2010, and Inverness have agreed that this liability, which is approximately $500,000, is to be paid from future revenues over approximatelyeffective March 5, 2010 (the "Employment Agreement"), with Mr. Esfandiari to continue as the next 18 months.Company's Senior Vice President of Research and Development for an additional term of three years.  Please see Item 11 of this Form 10-K for further details.

For the year ended December 31, 2008 the Company reclassified its royalty and license expenses to cost of goods sold, instead of selling, general and administrative expenses.
On December 19, 2007 (the “Closing Date”), amendments to the governing documents for the Company’s Series A, Series B and Series C Convertible Preferred Stock (collectively, the “Preferred Stock”) and for certain warrants and options (collectively, the “Non-Employee Warrants”), not including options or warrants issued to employees or directors in their capacity as such (these actions collectively, the “Plan”), were approved by the Company and the requisite percentages of the holders of the Preferred Stock and of the Non-Employee Warrants.  Subsequent to these amendments, among other matters, all the Preferred Stock and certain of the Non-Employee Warrants were converted to shares of the Company’s common stock.

2523


RESULTS OF OPERATIONS FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 20082009 AS COMPARED WITH THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 20072008
 
Revenues:

Selected Product Categories: For the years ended        For the years ended       
 December 31, 2008  December 31, 2007  $ Change  % Change  December 31, 2009  December 31, 2008  $ Change  % Change 
                        
HIV $9,192,297  $7,927,676  $1,264,621   15.95% $10,792,947  $9,192,297  $1,600,650   17.41%
TB  281,555   111,403   170,152   152.74%
DPP  619,530   126,000   493,530   391.69%
Other  881,916   725,798   156,118   21.51%  960,016   1,037,471   (77,455)  -7.47%
Net Product Sales  10,355,768   8,764,877   1,590,891   18.15%  12,372,493   10,355,768   2,016,725   19.47%
                
Research grant income  693,803   466,071   227,732   48.86%
License and royalty income  121,896   -   121,896   100.00%
R&D contracts and grants  1,339,859   693,803   646,056   93.12%
Total Revenues $11,049,571  $9,230,948  $1,818,623   19.70% $13,834,248  $11,049,571  $2,784,677   25.20%
                

Revenues for our HIV tests and related components during the year ended December 31, 20082009 increased by $1.26$1.60 million over the same period in 2007.2008.  This was primarily attributable to increased sales in Brazil and sales to our distributor in the United States which increased 148%, or $3.13 million, to $5.24 million in 2009 as compared with $2.11 million in 2008.  This increase offset by the reduction ofreduced sales to Mexico from 2007 that were not repeatedAfrica, which decreased by 21.6%, or $1.53 million, to $5.55 million in 2009 as compared with $7.08 million in 2008.  Sales of our TBDPP product increased because of additionalwe are working with our partner in Brazil to get several products being approved.approved in Brazil.  The increase in research grant income was forR&D contracts and grants and feasibility studies involving our patented DPP® technology, of which $651,000$1,161,000 was received and $694,000$1,340,000 was earned in 2008, utilizing $43,000 in2009, adding $21,000 to deferred revenues as of December 31, 2007.  Sales to Africa (see Note 13 of the financial statements) were primarily from Nigeria of approximately $2.86 million.  We have been advised recently that our designation in Nigeria as one of the screening tests has changed to that of the confirmatory test as this country moves from a parallel to a serial testing algorithm, which we expect will significantly reduce our sales to Nigeria in 2009.
 
Gross Margin:

Gross Margin related to For the years ended       
Net Product Sales: December 31, 2008  December 31, 2007  $ Change  % Change 
Gross Margin related to Net Product Sales:
 For the years ended         
 December 31, 2009  December 31, 2008  $ Change  % Change 
                            
Gross Margin per Statement of Operations $3,851,721  $2,795,710  $1,056,011   37.77% $5,860,405  $3,851,721  $2,008,684   52.15%
Less: Research grant income  693,803   466,071   227,732   48.86%
Less:R&D contracts and grants, license and royalties 1,461,755   693,803   767,952   110.69%
Gross Margin from Net Product Sales $3,157,918  $2,329,639  $828,279   35.55% $4,398,650  $3,157,918  $1,240,732   39.29%
Gross Margin %  30.49%  26.58%          35.55 %  30.49 %        
 
The increase in our gross margin resulted primarily from increased quantities of our product sales and increased average unit prices on product sales as a result of the increased sales to Inverness, which are at higher average unit prices, and component sales.decreased sales to Africa, which are at lower average unit prices.
 
For the year ended December 31, 2008, the Company reclassified its royalty and license expenses to cost of goods sold.  For all periods prior to the quarter ended December 31, 2008 these expenses were previously reflected in selling, general and administrative expenses.  Without this reclassification of royalty and license expenses from SG&A expense to Cost of Goods Sold, the gross margin from product sales would have been $4.465 million, or 43.1%, and $3.396 million, or 38.7%, for the years ended December 31, 2008 and 2007, respectively.
2624


Research and Development:
 
This category includes costs incurred for product research and development, regulatory approvals, technical support, evaluations and registrations.

Selected expense lines: For the years ended        For the years ended         
 December 31, 2008  December 31, 2007  $ Change  % Change  December 31, 2009  December 31, 2008  $ Change  % Change 
Clinical & Regulatory Affairs:                            
Wages and related costs $262,191  $188,050  $74,141   39.43% $321,830  $262,191  $59,639   22.75%
Consulting  27,231   87,763   (60,532)  -68.97%  35,560   27,231   8,329   30.59%
Share-based compensation  12,916   -   12,916   100.00%
Clinical trials  138,792   29,664   109,128   367.88%  69,499   138,792   (69,293)  -49.93%
Other  60,821   (35,915)  96,736   -269.35%  32,056   60,822   (28,766)  -47.30%
Total Regulatory $489,035  $269,562  $219,473   81.42% $471,861  $489,036  $(17,175)  -3.51%
                                
R&D Other than Regulatory:                                
Wages and related costs $1,354,557  $959,679  $394,878   41.15% $1,541,295  $1,354,557  $186,738   13.79%
Consulting  138,436   102,075   36,361   35.62%  74,194   138,436   (64,242)  -46.41%
Share-based compensation  84,935   189,843   (104,908)  -55.26%  62,180   84,935   (22,755)  -26.79%
Materials and supplies  307,662   268,566   39,096   14.56%  462,806   282,281   180,525   63.95%
Other  230,718   116,928   113,790   97.32%  271,360   256,098   15,262   5.96%
Total other than Regulatory $2,116,308  $1,637,091  $479,217   29.27% $2,411,835  $2,116,307  $295,528   13.96%
                                
Total Research and Development $2,605,343  $1,906,653  $698,690   36.64% $2,883,696  $2,605,343  $278,353   10.68%
 
Expenses for Clinical & Regulatory Affairs for the year ended December 31, 2008 increased2009 decreased by $219,500$17,000 as compared to the same period in 2007.2008. This was primarily due to an increaseexpenses we incurred in expenses related to internal DPP testing,2008 for external clinical trials we contracted forconducted in order to lower the age limitation of our FDA approved rapid HIV tests from 18 to 13 years of age and also due toin 2008, which did not recur.  This decrease was partially offset by an increase in wages and related costs as we added to our regulatory staff, offset by a decrease in the use of consultantscosts.
 
ExpensesR&D expenses other than Clinical & Regulatory Affairs increased by $479,200$295,000 in the year ended December 31, 20082009 as compared with the same period in 20072008 and were primarily related to an increase in personnel and material costs required to perform the work related to funded feasibility studiesresearch and development contracts and grants received, all related to our patented DPP® technology, and to the establishment of a technical group within the R&D department in order to support product validations and transfers to production.technology.  These increases were partially offset by a decrease in consulting cost and the reduced cost of share-based compensation related to the value of common stock and employee stock options issued to an employee pursuant to a contract.and amortized.  
 
Subject to the continuation of grant and feasibility income, the Company currently plans to continue research and development spending at levels that will, net of grant and feasibility study income, result in a net decrease in this spending category.
2725


Selling, General and Administrative Expense:

Selected expense lines: For the years ended        For the years ended         
 December 31, 2008  December 31, 2007  $ Change  % Change  December 31, 2009  December 31, 2008  $ Change  % Change 
                            
Wages and related costs $1,261,511  $1,642,185  $(380,674)  -23.18% $1,075,532  $1,261,511  $(185,979)  -14.74%
Consulting  187,494   232,184   (44,690)  -19.25%  165,371   187,494   (22,123)  -11.80%
Commissons  365,774   31,762   334,012   1051.61%  302,515   365,774   (63,259)  -17.29%
Share-based compensation  187,908   152,319   35,589   23.36%  98,356   187,908   (89,552)  -47.66%
Marketing materials  38,379   75,570   (37,191)  -49.21%  22,779   38,379   (15,600)  -40.65%
Investor relations  123,654   224,843   (101,189)  -45.00%  72,888   123,654   (50,766)  -41.05%
Legal, accounting and SOX 404 compliance  551,335   643,562   (92,227)  -14.33%
Legal, accounting and Sox 404 compliance  470,843   556,118   (85,275)  -15.33%
Travel, entertainment and trade shows  92,576   154,819   (62,243)  -40.20%  61,316   92,576   (31,260)  -33.77%
Other  508,415   607,977   (99,562)  -16.38%  389,782   503,632   (113,850)  -22.61%
Total S, G &A $3,317,046  $3,765,221  $(448,175)  -11.90% $2,659,382  $3,317,046  $(657,664)  -19.83%


Selling, general and administrative expenses for the year ended December 31, 20082009 decreased by 12%20% as compared with the same period in 2007.  Reduced personnel2008.  During the second half of 2008 and continuing in 2009 the Company implemented a series of cost reductions that have resulted in lower S,G&A expenses investor relations expenses, and professional fees were partially offset by increases in almost every category in 2009 year to date with the exception of sales commissions that resulted fromwhich, decreased as a result of a decrease in commissionable sales in Brazil that increased significantly in 2008(and not from the Company’s cost reductions) as compared with 2007.  The decreased cost of professional fees (legal, accounting and section 404 of Sarbanes-Oxley) were related to the reduction of legal fees related to the Plan (see Recent Events above), which were almost all incurred in 2007.  These decreased costs were partially offset by increased fees to our independent auditors.2008 period.

 
Other Income and Expense:

Other Income and Expense For the years ended       
 For the years ended       
 December 31, 2008  December 31, 2007  $ Change  % Change  December 31, 2009  December 31, 2008  $ Change  % Change 
                            
Other income $95,812  $120,862  $(25,050)  -20.73% $(6,696 $95,812  $(102,508)  -106.99%
Interest income  34,403   145,289   (110,886)  -76.32%  9,032   34,403   (25,371)  -73.75%
Interest expense  (8,317)  (16,879)  8,562   -50.73%  (10,603)  (8,317)  (2,286  -27.49%
Total Other Income and Expense $121,898  $249,272  $(127,374)  -51.10%
Total Other Income and (Expense) $(8,267) $121,898  $(130,165)  -106.78%
 
Other income and (expense) for the year ended December 31, 20082009 decreased 21%107% as compared with the same period in 20072008 primarily as a result of a decrease in the net amounts received from New York State related to a program for qualified emerging technology companies.   Interest income for the year ended December 31, 20082009 decreased due to a decrease in available funds to invest in interest bearing accounts.   Decreased interest expense in 2008 as compared with 2007 reflects the impact of lower interest payments for capital leases nearing the end of their terms

26


RESULTS OF OPERATIONS FOR THE THREE MONTHS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2009 AS COMPARED WITH THE THREE MONTHS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2008
CHEMBIO DIAGNOSTICS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARY
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
FOR THE THREE MONTHS ENDED
(UNAUDITED)
       
  December 31, 2009  December 31, 2008 
REVENUES:      
Net product sales $3,127,454  $2,244,753 
License and royalty income  38,186   - 
Research grant income  385,801   206,141 
TOTAL REVENUES  3,551,441   2,450,894 
         
Cost of product sales  1,920,636   1,835,604 
         
GROSS PROFIT  1,630,805   615,290 
         
OPERATING EXPENSES:        
Research and development expenses  755,836   652,906 
Selling, general and administrative expenses  657,310   620,695 
   1,413,146   1,273,601 
INCOME (LOSS) FROM OPERATIONS  217,659   (658,311)
         
OTHER INCOME (EXPENSES):        
Other income  -   107,363 
Interest income  1,949   4,446 
Interest expense  (2,394)  (3,901)
   (445)  107,908 
         
INCOME (LOSS) BEFORE INCOME TAXES  217,214   (550,403)
         
Provision for income taxes  -   - 
         
NET INCOME (LOSS) $217,214  $(550,403)
         
Basic earnings (loss) per share $0.00  $(0.01)
         
Diluted earnings (loss) per share $0.00  $(0.01)
         
Weighted average number of shares outstanding, basic  61,950,988   61,944,901 
         
Weighted average number of shares outstanding, diluted  75,365,550   61,944,901 
         
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements
27

Revenues:
Product Categories: For the three months ended       
  December 31, 2009  December 31, 2008  $ Change  % Change 
             
HIV $2,963,671  $1,963,383  $1,000,288   50.95%
DPP  -   126,000   (126,000)  -100.00%
Other  163,783   155,370   8,413   5.41%
Net Product Sales  3,127,454   2,244,753   882,701   39.32%
License and royalty income  38,186   -   38,186   100.00%
R&D contracts and grants  385,801   206,141   179,660   87.15%
Total Revenues $3,551,441  $2,450,894  $1,100,547   44.90%
Revenues for our HIV tests during the three months ended December 31, 2009 increased by approximately 51% or $1,000,000 over the same period in 2008.  This was primarily attributable to increased sales in North America, primarily from sales to Inverness of our HIV products which increased by $1,292,000 to $1,833,000, and partially offset by a decrease in sales to Brazil of $374,000.  The increase in R&D contracts and grants was primarily due to revenue our recent NIH grant for Leptospirosis, which was effective as of June 1, 2009.  License and royalty income represents our royalties from Brazil under our 2004 technology transfer and license agreement.


Gross Margin:
Gross Margin related to Net Product Sales:
 For the three months ended         
  December 31, 2009  December 31, 2008  $ Change  % Change 
                 
Gross Margin per Statement of Operations $1,630,805  $615,290  $1,015,515   160.05%
Less:R&D contracts and grants, license and royalties  423,987   206,141   217,846   105.68%
Gross Margin from Net Product Sales $1,206,818  $409,149  $797,669   194.96%
 Gross Margin %  38.59 %  18.23 %        
The increase in our gross margin resulted primarily from increased sales volume and average unit prices as a result of the increased sales to Inverness, which are at higher average unit prices and decreased sales to Africa, which are at lower average unit prices.  The increase in our gross margin in the three months ended December 31, 2009 also includes a decrease of $225,000 in the royalty expense paid to Inverness as partial reimbursement for Inverness’ royalty payments to Bio-Rad Laboratories, Inc. pursuant to Inverness’ HIV-2 sublicense agreement with Bio-Rad.

28



Research and Development:
This category includes costs incurred for regulatory approvals, product evaluations and registrations.
  For the three months ended         
  December 31, 2009  December 31, 2008  $ Change  % Change 
Clinical & Regulatory Affairs:                
Wages and related costs $96,284  $67,294  $28,990   43.08%
Consulting  5,610   2,548   3,062   120.17%
Share-based compensation  4,667   -   4,667   100.00%
Clinical trials  23,448   -   23,448   100.00%
Other  7,852   7,727   125   1.62%
Total Regulatory $137,861  $77,569  $60,292   77.73%
                 
R&D Other than Regulatory:                
Wages and related costs $420,088  $361,630  $58,458   16.17%
Consulting  10,646   33,455   (22,809)  -68.18%
Share-based compensation  9,722   9,738   (16)  -0.16%
Materials and supplies  102,491   91,536   10,955   11.97%
Other  75,028   78,978   (3,950)  -5.00%
Total other than Regulatory $617,975  $575,337  $42,638   7.41%
                 
Total Research and Development $755,836  $652,906  $102,930   15.76%
Total expenses for Clinical & Regulatory Affairs for the three months ended December 31, 2009 increased by approximately $60,000 as compared to the same period in 2008.  An increase in compensation in Clinical and Regulatory Affairs of $29,000, was the primary reason for the increase in wages and related costs.  In addition, start up costs for clinical trials of our DPP® oral fluid HIV test also contributed to this increase.
Total expenses for R&D Other than Clinical & Regulatory Affairs increased by approximately $43,000 in the three months ended December 31, 2009 as compared with the same period in 2008.  These increases were primarily related to an increase in compensation, materials and supplies related to R&D contracts and grants, partially offset by a reduction in the use of consultants and other expenses.  

Selling, General and Administrative Expenses:
 Selected expense lines:  For the three months ended       
 December 31, 2009  December 31, 2008  $ Change  % Change 
                 
Wages and related costs $324,131  $257,778  $66,353   25.74%
Consulting  22,250   45,912   (23,662)  -51.54%
Commissons  15,952   50,894   (34,942)  -68.66%
Share-based compensation  30,414   14,082   16,332   115.98%
Marketing materials  5,419   15,831   (10,412)  -65.77%
Investor relations  35,839   11,906   23,933   201.02%
Legal, accounting and Sox 404 compliance  123,500   81,562   41,938   51.42%
Travel, entertainment and trade shows  13,849   20,730   (6,881)  -33.19%
Other  85,956   122,000   (36,044)  -29.54%
Total S, G &A $657,310  $620,695  $36,615   5.90
Selling, general and administrative expenses (S,G&A) for the three months ended December 31, 2009 increased by 5.9% as compared with the same period in 2008.  This was primarily due to increased wages and related expenses related to bonuses paid to compensate employees who had taken pay reductions during the first six months of the 2009 year.

29

Other Income and (Expense):
  For the three months ended       
  December 31, 2009  December 31, 2008  $ Change  % Change 
                 
Other income (expense) $-  $107,363  $(107,363)  -100.00%
Interest income  1,949   4,446   (2,497)  -56.16%
Interest expense  (2,394)  (3,901)  1,507   -38.63%
Total Other Income and (Expense) $(445) $107,908  $(108,353)  -100.41%
Other income and (expenses) for the three months ended December 31, 2009 decreased approximately $108,000 as compared with the same period in 2008, primarily as a result of a decrease in the net amounts received from New York State related to a program for qualified emerging technology companies.
 
LIQUIDITY AND CAPITAL RESOURCES

  For the years ended       
  December 31, 2008  December 31, 2007  $ Change  % Change 
             
Net cash used in operating activities $(1,194,227) $(1,345,796) $151,569   -11.26%
Net cash used in investing activities  (397,462)  (410,425)  12,963   -3.16%
Net cash (used in) provided by financing activities  (23,458)  293,204   (316,662)  -108.00%
NET (DECREASE) IN CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS $(1,615,147) $(1,463,017) $(152,130)  10.40%
  For the years ended       
  December 31, 2009  December 31, 2008  $ Change  % Change 
             
Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities $251,927  $(1,194,227) $1,446,154   -121.10%
Net cash used in investing activities  (376,988)  (397,462)  (8,754)  2.20%
Net cash provided by (used) in financing activities  (18,926 )  (23,458)  33,760   -143.92%
NET DECREASE IN CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS $(143,987) $(1,615,147) $1,471,160   -91.09%
 
The Company had a decrease in cash for the year ended December 31, 20082009 as compared to a lessergreater decrease in cash for the same period in 2007.2008. The decrease during the 2009 period is primarily attributable to cash used on deposits and acquisition of fixed assets, partially offset by cash provided from operations. The decrease in the 2008 and 2007 periodsperiod is primarily attributable to the cash used in operations.
 
The Company had a working capital surplus of $1,664,000$1,494,000 at December 31, 20082009 and a working capital surplus of $3,229,000$1,664,000 at December 31, 2007.2008.  The Company estimates that its resources are sufficient to fund its needs through the end of 20092010 and beyond or that, in the alternative, it could raise additional capital although the terms under which that capital could be raised would likely be very dilutive to current shareholders.  The Company’s liquidity and cash requirements will depend on several factors. These factors include (1) the level of revenues (the Company received $340,000 in 2009 for license fees for which we need to meet certain milestones to earn)earn and the Company expects to receive up to $1 million in license fees from Brazil, although there can be no assurance); (2) the extent to which, if any, that revenue level improves operating cash flows; (3) the Company’s investments in research and development, facilities, marketing, regulatory approvals, and other investments it may determine to make; (5) the payment of obligations and commitments (including a license fee payable of $875,000 due at the end of 2010); and (4) the investment in capital equipment (including production equipment of $323,500 that the Company has contracted for) and the extent to which it improves cash flow through operating efficiencies. There are no assurances that the Company will become profitable or generate positive cash flow by the end of 20092010 or, in the alternative, be successful in raising sufficient capital to fund its needs through 2009.2010.
 
RECENT DEVELOPMENTS AND CHEMBIO’S PLAN OF OPERATIONS FOR THE NEXT TWELVE MONTHS
 
Please see section entitled Recent Events above.

2008

DuringIn 2009 Chembio achieved record revenues, gross margin, operating results and cash flow, including its first ever quarterly and full year profits since its reverse merger in 2004. Following net losses from 2004-2008, including our smallest loss in 2008 Chembio increased total revenues by 20%of nearly $2 million, we swung to $11.05MM, increased gross profit by 38% to $3.85MM (based onnet income of $309,000 in 2009.  This was a notable achievement given that 2009 was the presentation in Item 6 Selected Financial Data wherein our reclassification of Royalty Expense and License Fees, reclassified to Cost of Goods Sold in our audited statements for 2008, were also reclassified, for 2004-2007 for comparative purposes), and decreased Selling, General & Administrative Expense by 12% to $3.32MM.  Research and Development Expense, net of Research Grant Income, increased 33% to $1.91MM.

2008 revenue growthworst economy since World War II.  We believe this achievement was attributable to several factors, including: (1) the $3.13 million, or 148%, increase in our continued collaboration in Brazil with Oswaldo Cruz Foundation and to strong sales growth to Africa, including but not limited to Nigeria, to and through major programs led by the Global Fund and PEPFAR.  Even though ourrapid HIV test sales to Inverness were less in 2008more than in 2007, this was primarilyoffset a result of purchases made by Inverness at the time of the launch in 2007 in excess of the actual demand from their customers in 2007, which in turn was in part a result of delays$1.53 million, or 21.6%, decrease in our obtaining bothinternational HIV rapid test sales.  Higher average selling prices in the age claim amendment and the CLIA waiverU.S. market for the barrel product (See Item 1. Business: Regulatory Activities).  We believe Inverness’ sales of our products increased significantly in 2008 versus 2007, notwithstanding a voluntary component (control kit) recall that occurred during the first half of 2008. With continued sales increases by Inverness to its customers in 2009, which we believe is likely, we would expect to see commensurate increases in our sales to Inverness, as we believe that Inverness’ inventories have been substantially reduced as compared to 2008.

Our improved gross margin percentage, even after the fourth quarter 2008 royalty expenses related to prior quarters, occurred as a result of continued cost and efficiency improvements as well as improved product mix, primarily as a result of lower unit production costs for components sold to Brazil.  Decreased SG&A costs were achieved through termination of positions within these departments and reduction in other costs throughout this cost area.   Our net increase in Research & Development expenses included our costs of completing the lowering of the age limit of our FDA approved rapid HIV tests helped to produce a 36.8%, or $1.16 million, increase in our gross margin on product sales, from $3.16 million in 2008 to $4.32 million in 2009.  These increased U.S. market revenues reflect the continued expansion in the U.S. rapid HIV test market, and relatively stable funding as wellrapid testing has taken hold, and expanded into more hospitals and public health testing venues.  The increased average selling prices for our FDA PMA approved HIV rapid test products that are sold in the U.S. market as compared with those in the cost of establishingdeveloping world provide us with a technical department within R&Dmuch more attractive return on the manufacturing, regulatory compliance and other costs (patent license fees and such as royalty expense) that can alternatively support operations, transfer new productsare applicable to operations, research process improvements, andthese products.  This return is much lower on our international sales primarily due to the extent there is available capacity within this group, support traditional R&D activities.
29

2009

Based upon (1)lower average selling prices of competitive products manufactured in Asia that do not have the growing basesame costs of businessregulatory compliance, labor and other items that we have in the United States with our products; (2) a 392%, or $494,000, increase in DPP® product sales attributable to our OEM agreements for new DPP® products with FIOCRUZ in Brazil.  While such amount was significantly less than what we had anticipated, and this product was used by FIOCRUZ for regulatory submissions for the three DPP® products that have been submitted for regulatory approval in Brazil, these shipments at least allowed us to bring these products through our two FDA-approved CLIA-waivedmanufacturing process.  We are optimistic that the four DPP® products we have under agreement will produce significant DPP® product and technology revenues during 2010 and beyond, although there can be no assurance of this; (3) A 93%, or $646,000, increase in R&D contracts and grants to $1.34 million in 2009 from $694,000 in 2008 more than offset the $278,000 increase in our research and development expenses from $2.61 million in 2008 to $2.88 million in 2009, as more commercial, governmental and non-governmental organizations entered into development programs with us related to our DPP® technology as we reported during 2009; and (4) 20% reduction in our SG&A expenses from $3.32 million in 2008 to $2.66 million in 2009, which decrease followed an 11.9% reduction in 2008 over 2007 and a 21.3% reduction in 2007 over 2006.
30

The December 31, 2009 cash balance was $144,000 less than at December 31, 2008.  This was primarily due to $792,000 that was paid to Inverness pursuant to our agreement of December 2008 in which we agreed to amortize a $1.01 million liability to Inverness based on a percentage of their sales of our products beginning in 2009. Based on Inverness’ anticipated sales of our products in 2010, we anticipate that the liability mentioned above will be fully amortized in the first part of  2010, thereby freeing up this cash flow used to extinguish the obligation to Inverness for other corporate purposes. Also contributing to the cash decrease was a $675,000 account receivable balance that was outstanding at the year end (which amount was paid in January 2010) and $400,000 that we invested during 2009 in new equipment and facilities (primarily our new assembly system that we took delivery of in February 2010). Partially offsetting these cash outflows were our net income, non-cash expenses, and receipt of a $340,000 license fee deposit from Bio-Rad Laboratories, Inc.
Our results in 2009 clearly guide our strategy for growth in 2010 and beyond. We believe we can best leverage our DPP® intellectual property together with our U.S.-based manufacturing and regulatory credentials by bringing proprietary products (such as our DPP® oral fluid HIV test and our Screen and Confirm Syphilis test) to the U.S. public health and other markets.  Based on our current year and long range plan, we are optimistic that revenues will grow significantly in the foreseeable future, although there can be no assurance of this.
Significant revenue growth in 2010 could be realized, based on the following assumptions: (1) Increased sales of our rapid HIV tests resulting bothin the U.S. market as the total market and our products’ market share increases; (2) increased international sales of our HIV rapid tests primarily based on maintaining current accounts, increased sales to Nigeria where we resumed sales activity in the fourth quarter of 2009 for the first time since 2008; (3) DPP® product sales and license fees from the expansionour contracts with FIOCRUZ (including regulatory approvals required in Brazil) and completion of the marketproduct development phase in our program with Bio-Rad Laboratories, Inc. which would result in recognizing the $340,000 license fee we received in 2009; (4) a substantial increase in our R&D contracts and from market share gains bygrants primarily based on the $900,000 development contract we entered in December 2009 with Battelle Memorial Institute and having a full year of the $2.9 million NIH grant for Leptospirosis we received in June 2009, and;  (5) improved manufacturing efficiencies based on the delivery in February of our marketing partner Inverness Medical; (2) continued growth opportunitiescustomized automated assembly system which we invested in during 2009 for both our rapidlateral flow and DPP® products, and lower costs for certain raw materials used in our HIV test products globally, and; (3) our expectation that 2009tests which we will bring our first significant revenues from our DPP® technology, primarilyrealize as a result of the contracts we signedour having bought out a license agreement in connection with the Oswaldo Cruz Foundationinsolvency procedures of the licensor in 2008,2009.
We have received purchase orders from FIOCRUZ for the three products pending regulatory approval for an aggregate of over $2 million, and have an aggregate of approximately $1 million in license fees that will be payable when the products are approved.  However the fees will not be paid and these orders cannot be processed and shipped unless and until regulatory approval is obtained in Brazil, which we believe we are positioned for increases in our revenues and improvement in our overall operating results in 2009.

Our base plan for 2009 assumes the following: (1) Growth in our sales to Inverness, as it makes gains in hospital and public health markets and because inventory levels that it brought into 2008 have been normalized,  (2) conservative assumptions with regard to our international HIV business,  primarily including a significant reduction from Nigeria, partially offset by expected growth from our HIV business through new distribution opportunities in Asia, Africa, South America and, upon receipt of our CE Mark, Europe, and (3) successful execution for approval and sales of our DPP® products pursuant to the contracts we signed with Oswaldo Cruz Foundation in 2008.

We intend to continue improving our manufacturing efficiencies and controlling our SG&A expenses, resulting in continued anticipated improvements in our operating results.  Even though we made significant cost reductions during 2008, given the reduced sales from Nigeria, an extremely uncertain economy, and the most challenging financing environment for debt or equity of our time,will occur during the first quarterhalf of 2009 we made additional cost reductions in all departments of the Company, including elimination of a number of salaried positions2010, but for which there can be no assurance.
The anticipated increased product and implementation of a company-wide pay reduction program for all salaried employees earning at least $30,000, with appropriately larger reductions for those earning higher amounts. During 2008 and 2009 year-to-date we have also eliminated salaries in our sales and marketing and administrative areas, which represented annualized costs in excess of $500,000, exclusive of benefits and other attendant costs.  Though this limits some new business development opportunities, many of our new sales opportunities are being developed either through OEM customer relationships, exclusive distribution arrangements, and/or commissioned agents, all of which have enabled us to reduce our sales and marketing costs significantly.

Research & Development expenses in 2009 are budgeted as flat overall when compared with 2008.  However, based upon current and pending research and development income from grants,revenues, if realized will be accompanied by increased product costs and research and development contracts and feasibility studies (and associated staffing requirements for such commitments), our netexpenses which will be attributable to the increased R&D cost in 2009 (R&D income less totalwork primarily required by the above-mentioned R&D expense) should decrease substantiallycontracts & grants; such expenses may also increase as well.  Having these external funds for R&D is helping usa result of other initiatives that we have identified that we may be undertaking to increasefurther expand and enhance our experience and capabilities while limiting our cash investment.  Should pending contracts not materialize, we will make commensurate adjustments to our Research & Development expenses.technology portfolio.

In addition, we have commenced training for the conduct of clinical trials related to the DPP® products we anticipate launching in Brazil through Oswaldo Cruz Foundation this year, our contract development workplanned FDA PMA application for Bio-Rad Laboratories, and several other research and development programs, our main DPP® products that we are focusing our R&D activities on are our DPP® oral fluid HIV 1/2 screening testtest.  We anticipate that the total costs for use with oral fluidsthee trials during 2010 for this and related regulatory activities could approach $2 million.  Moreover, additional regulatory expenses for preparing our DPP® Syphilis Screen and& Confirm test and our DPP® Flu A/B tests for 510(k) submissions will also require significant resources, though not nearly as much as the aforementioned PMA.  We are in discussionsmay attempt to enter an agreement with a largemarketing partner for one more of these products which could result in vitro diagnostics marketing organizationour being reimbursed for a portion of our regulatory expenses for one or more of these products, but there can be no assurance of this occurring or if it  occurs, its timing.  We can also defer some or all of these costs to ensure that if an actual agreement is completed,we can finance them with operating cash flow, though this would fund all external regulatory costs, co-brand this product withimpact commercialization timetables.
Although we believe that there are still opportunities to increase our DPP® trademark,international HIV test sales and commitwe plan to minimum sales of the productdo so in exchange2010, we are cognizant that these markets will continue to be largely driven by price and therefore difficult for our grantingU.S.-based cost structure (though still contributing margin), and very difficult to it exclusive U.S. marketing rightsforecast due to this product.  Wetheir reliance on host governments’ decisions which can suddenly and arbitrarily result in changes even though they are also actively pursuing opportunitiesfunded by foreign aid budgets, mainly PEPFAR.  On the other hand, based on the outstanding data from a recent field study by the United States Centers for Disease Control of our oral fluid HIV test in Africa, where it was compared with two leading blood tests and an oral fluid test of a competitor’s, we believe that there could well be significant opportunities for this product in the international marketsmarket, in which we are one of only two oral fluid HIV tests approved for procurement by PEPFAR, as compared with dozens now that only work on blood matrices.  Further, we believe that if studies that having been completed can show that oral fluid tests can improve prevention strategies by encouraging more people to be tested, and particularly if we can continue to lower our productions costs for this product to be more competitively priced for this market, the international opportunity for this product will be significant indeed.
31

If the assumptions set forth above hold true, of which there is no assurance – particularly where timing is concerned – we believe that our operating cash flow from our existing business will likely be sufficient to fund a substantial portion of the research and development and regulatory expenses required in order to begin commercializing these new products in 2011, though there can no assurance of this.  We believe that we already participatemust invest in as well as others, and we are very encouraged by the interest we have receivedthese new product approvals in this product offering.order to meet our long range plan for significant growth.
 
We will endeavor to time the increases in our research and development expenses, with the increased R&D contracts and grants we anticipate receiving as described above.  However, delays in achievement of milestones and/or their approval for the purpose of funding of payments that may be due to us can occur.
We also anticipate that our SG&A expenses, after having decreased in each of the last three years, will not continue this trend into 2010.  This is attributable to:  a) our having reduced this expense so significantly over the last three years; b) expenses we may incur in 2010 that are associated with the potential establishment of our own Chembio/DPP® branded product line in 2011; and c) expenses we may incur related to expansion of our board of directors and investor relations activities as compared to 2009.
Accordingly, in order to increase the likelihood that the regulatory approvals and commercialization of new DPP® products occur on a timely basis, we may choose to raise some additional capital if we believe such capital will best ensure our ability to execute our business plan on a timely basis.
Equipment Purchase Commitment:

In January of 2009, the Company entered into an agreement with an equipment manufacturer to design and build equipment that will be used to automate the assembling of our tests and lower our production costs.  The estimated cost of $323,500 is being paid in installments.  In addition in June and November of 2009, the Company entered into an agreement with an equipment manufacturer to design and build a mold for its DPP® tests.  The estimated cost of $113,800 is being paid in installments.
30

Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates


The preparation of the financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the amounts reported in the financial statements and accompanying notes.  Actual results could differ materially from those estimates.
 
We believe that there are several accounting policies that are critical to understanding our historical and future performance, as these policies affect the reported amounts of revenue and the more significant areas involving management’s judgments and estimates.  These significant accounting policies relate to revenue recognition, research and development costs, valuation of inventory, valuation of long-lived assets and income taxes.  These policies, and the related procedures, are described in detail below.
 
Revenue Recognition –
 
We sell our products directly through our sales force and through distributors.  Revenue from direct sales of our product are recognized upon shipment to the customer.  Income from researchR&D contracts and grants are recognized in earnings in the period in which the related expenditures are incurred.incurred.  Sales are recorded net of discounts, rebates and returns.
 
Research & Development Costs –
 
Research and development activities consist primarily of new product development, continuing engineering for existing products, regulatory and clinical trial costs.  Costs related to research and development efforts on existing or potential products are expensed as incurred.
 
Valuation of Inventories –
 
Inventories are stated at the lower of cost or market, using the first-in, first-out method (FIFO) to determine cost.  Our policy is to periodically evaluate the market value of the inventory and the stage of product life cycle, and record a reserve for any inventory considered slow moving or obsolete.    For example, each additional 1% of obsolete inventory would reduce such inventory by approximately $18,000.$15,000.
 
32

Allowance for doubtful accounts –
 
Our policy is to review our accounts receivable on a periodic basis, no less than monthly.  On a quarterly basis an analysis is made of the adequacy of our allowance for doubtful accounts and adjustments are made accordingly.   The current allowance is approximately .83%1.1% of accounts receivable.  For example each additional 1% of accounts receivable that becomes uncollectible would reduce such balance of accounts receivable by approximately $12,000.$18,000.
 
Income Taxes
 
Income taxes are accounted for under FAS No. 109, “AccountingASC740 "Accounting for Income Taxes.”  FAS No. 109ASC740 requires the asset and liability method of accounting for deferred income taxes.  Deferred tax assets and liabilities are determined based on the difference between the financial statement and tax bases of assets and liabilities.  Deferred tax assets or liabilities at the end of each period are determined using the tax rate expected to be in effect when taxes are actually paid or recovered.  For example, ifeven though we do nothave become profitable, we may be unable to utilize our deferred tax asset, which approximates $8,598,000$8,418,000 at December 31, 2008.2009.
 
FAS 109ASC740 also requires that a valuation allowance be established when it is more likely than not that all or a portion of a deferred tax asset will not be realized.  A review of all available positive and negative evidence needs to be considered, including a company’s current and past performance, the market environment in which the company operates, length of carryback and carryforward periods and existing contracts that will result in future profits.
 
Forming a conclusion that a valuation allowance is not needed is difficult when there is negative objective evidence such as cumulative losses in recent years.  Cumulative losses weigh heavily in the overall assessment.  As a result, we determined that it was appropriate to establish a valuation allowance for the full amount of our deferred tax assets.
 
The Company adopted the provisions of FASB Interpretation No. 48, Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes (“FIN 48”) on January 1, 2007. FIN 48ASC740 also prescribes a comprehensive model for recognizing, measuring, presenting and disclosing in the consolidated financial statements tax positions taken or expected to be taken on a tax return, including a decision whether to file or not to file in a particular jurisdiction.
 
The calculation of our tax liabilities involves the inherent uncertainty associated with the application of complex tax laws. We are subject to examination by various taxing authorities. We believe that as a result of our losses sustained to date, any examination would result in a reduction of our net operating losses rather than a tax liability.  As such, we have not provided for additional taxes estimated under FIN 48,ASC740, Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes.
 
The above listing is not intended to be a comprehensive list of all of our accounting policies.  In many cases, the accounting treatment of a particular transaction is specifically dictated by accounting principles, generally accepted in the United States of America, with no need for management’s judgment in their application.  There are also areas in which management’s judgment in selecting any viable alternative would not produce a materially different result.  See our audited financial statements and notes thereto which contain accounting policies and other disclosures required by accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.
31


ITEM 8.FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA
 
The Consolidated Financial Statements and schedules that constitute Item 8 are attached at the end of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.  An index to these Financial Statements and schedules is also included on page F-1 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
 
ITEM 9.CHANGES IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE.
 
There have been no disagreements, or transactions or events similar to those which involved such disagreements or reportable events, with former accountants on any matter of accounting principles or practices, financial statement disclosure or auditing scope or procedure, which disagreements, if not resolved to the satisfaction of the former accountant, would have caused it to make reference to the subject matter disagreements in connection with any of its reports.
 
33

ITEM 9A.CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES
 
(a)           Disclosure Controls and Procedures.  Under the supervision and with the participation of our senior management, consisting of our chief executive officer and our chief financial officer, we conducted an evaluation of the effectiveness of the design and operation of our disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), as of the end of the period covered by this report (the "Evaluation Date").  Based on that evaluation, the Company’s management, including our chief executive officer and chief financial officer, concluded that as of the Evaluation Date our disclosure controls and procedures were effective to ensure that information required to be disclosed by us in the reports that we file under the Exchange Act is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in SEC rules and forms.  Our disclosure controls and procedures include, without limitation, controls and procedures designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed by us in our Exchange Act reports is accumulated and communicated to our management, including our chief executive officer and chief financial officer, as appropriate to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure.
 
Management's Annual Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting.  The Company's management is responsible for establishing and maintaining an adequate system of internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rule 13a-15(f)).  Our internal control over financial reporting is a process, under the supervision of our chief executive officer and chief financial officer, designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States.  These internal controls over financial reporting processes include policies and procedures that:
 
(1)  Pertain to the maintenance of records that in reasonable detail accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the Company;
 
(2)  Provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the Company are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of the Company; and
 
(3)  Provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use or disposition of the Company's assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.
 
Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements.  Therefore, even those systems determined to be effective can provide only reasonable assurance of achieving their control objectives.
32

In evaluating the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting, our management used the criteria set forth by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO) in Internal Control - Integrated Framework.  Based on this evaluation, our management concluded that our internal control over financial reporting was effective as of December 31, 2008.2009.
 
This annual report does not include an attestation report of our registered public accounting firm regarding internal control over financial reporting.  Management's report was not subject to attestation by our registered public accounting firm pursuant to temporary rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission that permit the Company to provide only management's report in this annual report.
 
(b)           Changes in Internal Control over Financial Reporting.  There were no changes in our internal control over financial reporting identified in connection with the evaluation required by paragraph (d) of Rule 13a-15 or Rule 15d-15 under the Exchange Act that occurred during the Company’s last fiscal quarter of the period covered by this report that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting.
 
ITEM 9B.OTHER INFORMATION
 
Not applicable.

3334


PART III
 
ITEM 10.DIRECTORS, EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE
 
 Directors and Executive Officers
 
Lawrence A. Siebert (52)(53), President, Chief Executive Officer and Director.  Mr. Siebert was appointed President of Chembio Diagnostics, Inc. and a member of our board of directors upon consummation of the merger.  Mr. Siebert has been Chairman of Chembio Diagnostic Systems Inc. for approximately thirteen years and it’sits President since May 2002.  Mr. Siebert’s background is in private equity and venture capital investing.  From 1982 to 1991, Mr. Siebert was associated with Stanwich Partners, Inc, which during that period invested in middle market manufacturing and distribution companies.  From 1992 to 1999, Mr. Siebert was an investment consultant and business broker with Siebert Capital Corp. and Siebert Associates LLC, and was a principal investor in a privately held test and measurement company which was sold in 2002.  Mr. Siebert received a JD from Case Western Reserve University School of Law in 1981 and a BA with Distinction in Economics from the University of Connecticut in 1978.  Mr. Siebert as president and CEO is an integral part of the Chembio management team.  His experience in the rapid test field and financing markets made him an excellent candidate for serving on the board and as its chairman.
 
Richard J. Larkin (52)(53), Chief Financial Officer.  Mr. Larkin was appointed as Chief Financial Officer of Chembio Diagnostics, Inc. upon consummation of the merger.  Mr. Larkin oversees our financial activities and information systems.  Mr. Larkin has been the Chief Financial Officer of Chembio Diagnostic Systems Inc. since September 2003.  Prior to joining Chembio Diagnostic Systems Inc., Mr. Larkin served as CFO at Visual Technology Group from May 2000 to September 2003, and also led their consultancy program that provided hands-on expertise in all aspects of financial service, including the initial assessment of client financial reporting requirements within an Enterprise Resource Planning (Manufacturing) environment through training and implementation.  Prior to joining VTG, he served as CFO at Protex International Corporation from May 1987 to January 2000.  Mr. Larkin holds a BBA in Accounting from Dowling College and is a member of the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants.
 
Javan Esfandiari (42)(43), Executive VP of Research and Development.  Mr. Esfandiari joined Chembio Diagnostic Systems, Inc, in 2000.  Mr. Esfandiari co-founded, and became a co-owner of Sinovus Biotech AB where he served as Director of Research and Development concerning lateral flow technology until Chembio Diagnostic Systems Inc. acquired Sinovus Biotech AB in 2000.  From 1993 to 1997, Mr. Esfandiari was Director of Research and Development with On-Site Biotech/National Veterinary Institute, Uppsala, Sweden, which was working in collaboration with Sinovus Biotech AB on development of veterinary lateral flow technology.  Mr. Esfandiari received his B.Sc. in Clinical Chemistry and his M. Sc. in Molecular Biology from Lund University, Sweden.  He has published articles in various veterinary journals and has co-authored articles on tuberculosis serology with Dr. Lyashchenko.
 
Richard Bruce (55)(56), Vice President, Operations. Mr. Bruce was hired in April 2000 as Director of Operations. He is responsible for manufacturing, maintenance, inventory, shipping, receiving, and warehouse operations.  Prior to joining Chembio Diagnostic Systems Inc., he held director level positions at Wyeth Laboratories from 1984 to 1993. From 1993 to 1998, he held various management positions in the Operations department at Biomerieux.  From 1998 to 2000, he held a management position at V.I. Technologies.  Mr. Bruce has over thirty years of operations management experience with Fortune 500 companies in the field of in-vitro diagnostics and blood fractionation.  Mr. Bruce received his BS in Management from National Louis University in 1997.
 
Tom Ippolito (46)(47), VP of Regulatory Affairs, QA and QC.  Mr. Ippolito joined Chembio in June 2005. He has over twenty years experience with in vitro diagnostics for infectious diseases, protein therapeutics, vaccine development, Process Development, Regulatory Affairs and Quality Management. Over the years, Mr. Ippolito has held Vice President level positions at Biospecific Technologies, Corp. from 2000 - 2005, Director level positions in Quality Assurance, Quality Control, Process Development and Regulatory Affairs at United Biomedical, Inc. from 1987 - 2000. Mr. Ippolito is the Course Director for “drug development process” and “FDA Regulatory Process” for the BioScience Certificate Program at the New York State University of Stony Brook, a program he has been a part of since its inception in 2003.
 
Dr. Gary Meller (58)(59), Director.  Dr. Meller was elected to our Board of Directors on March 15, 2005, and currently serves on the Company’s Audit, Compensation and Nominating and Corporate Governance Committees, including as Chairman of the Compensation Committee.  Dr. Meller has been the president of CommSense Inc., a healthcare business development company, since 2001.  CommSense Inc. works with clients in Europe, Asia, North America, and the Middle East on medical information technology, medical records, pharmaceutical product development and financing, health services operations and strategy, and new product and new market development.  From 1999 until 2001 Dr. Meller was the executive vice president, North America, of NextEd Ltd., a leading internet educational services company in the Asia Pacific region.  Dr. Meller also iswas a limited partner and a member of the Advisory Board of Crestview Capital Master LLC, which iswas our largest stockholder. Dr. Meller is a graduate of the University of New Mexico School of Medicine and has an MBA from the Harvard Business School.  Dr. Meller’s experience in the medical field both domestic and foreign (especially his experience with CommSense Inc.) as well as his financing experience made him an excellent candidate for serving on the board.

3435

Kathy Davis (52)(53), Director.  Ms. Davis was elected to the Company’s Board of Directors in May 2007, and currently serves on the Company’s Audit, Compensation and Nominating And Corporate Governance Committees, including as Chairman of each of the Audit Committee and the Nominating And Corporate Governance Committee.  Since January 2007, Ms. Davis is presentlyhas been the owner of Davis Design Group LLC, a company that provides analytical and visual tools for public policy design.  Previously, from February 2005 to December 2006, she served as the Chief Executive Officer of Global Access Point, a start up company with products for data transport, data processing, and data storage network and hub facilities.  From October 2003 to January 2005, Ms. Davis was Lieutenant Governor of the State of Indiana, and from January 2000 to October 2003 was Controller of the City of Indianapolis.  From 1989 to 2003, Ms. Davis held leadership positions with agencies and programs in the State of Indiana including State Budget Director, Secretary of Family & Social Services Administration, and Deputy Commissioner of Transportation. From 1982 to 1989 Ms. Davis held increasingly senior positions with Cummins Engine, where she managed purchasing, product cost, manufacturing, engineering, and assembly of certain engine product lines.  Ms. Davis also led the startup of and initial investments by a $50 million Indiana state technology fund, serves on the not-for-profit boards of Noble of Indiana, Indiana Museum of African American History, University of Evansville Institute of Global Enterprise, and Purdue College of Science Dean’s Leadership Council and Indiana University School of Public and Environmental Affairs Dean’s Advisory Council. She has a Masters of Business Administration from Harvard Business School and a Bachelor of Science in Mechanical Engineering from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.  Ms. Davis has varied experience in business, political and financial areas made her an excellent candidate for serving on the board.
 
 Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliances
 
Section 16(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), requires the Company’s directors, executive officers and beneficial owners of more than 10% of the Company’s common stock to file with the Securities and Exchange Commission initial reports of ownership and reports of changes in ownership of common stock and other equity securities of the Company.  The Company believes that during the year ended December 31, 2008,2009, each person who was an officer, director and beneficial owner of more than 10% of the Company’s common stock complied with all Section 16(a) filing requirements, except for the following: (i) one Form 4 for Former Director James D. Merselis, due on March 24, 2008, wasGary Meller filed on March 25, 2008.October 30, 2009 that covered two reports and three transactions that were not reported on a timely basis; and (ii) one Form 4 for Lawrence Siebert filed on October 30, 2009 that covered one report and seven transactions; (iii) one Form 4 for Richard Larkin filed on October 30, 2009 that covered one report and seven transactions; (iv) one Form 4 for Katherine Davis that covered one report and two transactions; and (iv) one Form 4 for Javan Esfandiari that covered one report and eleven transactions.
 
Code of Ethics
 
The Company has adopted a code of ethics that applies to its principal executive officer, principal financial officer, principal accounting officer, controller, and persons performing similar functions.  A copy of the Company’s code of ethics is filed as Exhibit 14.1 to this Form 10-K.available on the Company’s website at www.chembio.com.
 
 Identification of Audit Committee; Audit Committee Financial Expert
 
The Company’s board of directors has established an audit committee.  Katherine L. Davis and Dr. Gary Meller each serves on the audit committee, with Ms. Davis serving as chairman.  The Company’s board of directors has determined that Ms. Davis is an audit committee financial expert and is independent.


3536


ITEM 11.                      EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION
 
The following table summarizes all compensation recorded by the Company in each of the last two completed fiscal years for our principal executive officer, our two most highly compensated executive officers other than our principal executive officer whose annual compensation exceeded $100,000, and two additional individuals for whom disclosure would have been made in this table but for the fact that the individual was not serving as an executive officer of our company at December 31, 2008.$100,000.

Name /
Principal
Position
Year
Salary1
($)
Bonus2
($)
Option Awards3
($)
Stock
Awards
($)
All Other Compensation5
($)
Total
($)
Year
Salary1
($)
Bonus2
($)
Option Awards3
($)
Stock
Awards
($)
All Other Compensation5
($)
Total
($)
Lawrence A. Siebert4
2008 $265,000 $ 26,000 $  36,695 $         - $   8,267 $335,9622009 $     265,000 $  110,200 $    37,950 $           - $            7,200 $     420,350
CEO2007   243,135    26,000           -           -     9,314   278,4482008        265,000       26,000          36,695                -                  8,267        335,962
      
Richard J. Larkin2008 $163,076 $ 15,000 $  12,193 $         - $   1,781 $192,050
CFO2007   153,654    15,000           -           -     1,304   169,958
        
Javan Esfandiari2008 $215,692 $ 16,000 $  45,297 $  28,702 $   5,872 $311,5642009 $     230,192 $    29,400 $       28,200 $   5,000 $            4,883 $     297,675
VP-R&D2007   171,192    21,000     99,993     89,850     5,510   387,5462008        215,692       16,000          45,297       28,702                  5,872      311,563
        
Tom Ippolito2008 $173,631 $ 12,000 $    8,129 $         - $   1,708 $195,4672009 $     181,500 $    35,600 $    21,150 $           - $              140 $     238,390
VP-Regulatory2007   152,481    12,000            -        381   164,8622008        173,631       12,000            8,129            -                  1,708      195,468
        
Richard Bruce2008 $151,923 $ 12,000 $    8,129 $         - $     933 $172,984
VP-Operations2007   140,654    12,000            -        990   153,644
      
1 Salary is total base salary.
2 Any bonusBonuses earned wasin 2009 were partially based on reaching certain objectives, which included revenue dollar levels and operating profit levels, additional amounts earned were discretionary.  Bonuses earned in 2008 were paid solely on a discretionary basis, and not pursuant to any bonus plan.
3 The estimated fair value of any option or common stock granted was determined at the date of grant by using the Black-Scholes option pricing model.in accordance with ASC 718, "Share-Based  Payment".
4 Mr. Siebert also serves as a director on the Company’s board of directors.  Mr. Siebert does not receive any compensation for this director role.
5 Other compensation includes an employer match to 401(K) contributions and car allowances where applicable.
 
Employment Agreements
 
Mr. Siebert.  Effective May 11, 2008,2009, the Company’s Board of Directors approved the Company’s extension of the June 15, 2006 employment agreement (the “Employment Agreement”) with Lawrence A. Siebert, the Company’s President and Chief Executive Officer, for an additional one-yearthree-year term.  On June 15, 2006, Mr. Siebert and the Company entered into an Employment Agreement, effective May 10, 2006, which was to terminate on May 10, 2008.2008, extended in 2008 to May 10, 2009.  Pursuant to the Employment Agreement, Mr. Siebert serves as the President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company and received an initial salary of $240,000 per year, which had been increased to $265,000 per year until Mr. Siebert agreed to a 15 percent reduction, to $225,000, effective January 19, 2009.  Mr. Siebert’s salary was restored to $265,000 per annum effective in July 2009.  Mr. Siebert also is eligible for a bonus of up to 50% of his salary, consisting of (i) a bonus of up to 25% of his salary that is at the complete discretion and determination of the board of directors, and (ii) a bonus of up to an additional 25% of his salary that will be determined based upon revenue and earnings performance criteria established each year by the board of directors.  Mr. Siebert is eligible to participate in any profit sharing, stock option, retirement plan, medical and/or hospitalization plan, and/or other benefit plans except for disability and life insurance that the Company may from time to time place in effect for the Company’s executives during the term of Mr. Siebert’s employment agreement.  If Mr. Siebert’s Employment Agreement is terminated by the Company without cause, or if Mr. Siebert terminates his Employment Agreement for a reasonable basis, including within 12 months of a change in control, the Company is required to pay as severance Mr. Siebert’s salary for six months.  Mr. Siebert has agreed for a period of two years after the termination of his employment with the Company not to induce customers, agents, or other sources of distribution of the Company’s business under contract or doing business with the Company to terminate, reduce, alter, or divert business with or from the Company.  The terms of the extended May 1,11, 2009 and May 11, 2008 Employment AgreementAgreements are identical to the June 15, 2006 Employment Agreement, except that under the May 11, 2008 extended Employment Agreement, Mr. Siebert received additional consideration in the form of incentive stock options to purchase 250,000 shares of the Company’s common stock exercisable at $0.13 per share, which was the closing price of the Company's common stock on June 3, 2008.  The incentive stock options are immediately exercisable and they expire on the June 3, 2013.
 

3637

Mr. Esfandiari.  The Company entered into an employment agreement dated April 23, 2007,March 4, 2010, and to be effective March 5, 20072010 (the "Employment Agreement"), with Mr. Esfandiari to continue as the Company's Senior Vice President of Research and Development for an additional term of three years.  Mr. Esfandiari's salary under the Employment Agreement is $185,000$245,000 for the first year, $210,000$255,000 for the second year, and $235,000$265,000 for the final year.  Mr. Esfandiari is eligible for a cash bonus of up to 50% of his base salary for each respective year, consisting of (i) a cash bonus of up to 37.5%30% of his calendar year base salary based on the performance of the Company's Dual Path Platform Technology, which is directly related to certain annual revenue targets budgeted by management of the Company, andCompany; (ii) a cash bonus of up to 12.5%10% of his calendar year base salary based on the attainment of certain specific research and development objectives, as determined by the Board, and (iii) a cash bonus of up to 10% of his calendar year base salary that is at the complete discretion and determination of the board of directors.  The Company also granted Mr. Esfandiari, a stock grant of 200,000 shares of the Company's common stock. 100,000 shares vested when the employment agreement was executed, 50,000 shares vested on the first anniversary date of the Employment Agreement, and 50,000 shares vested on the second anniversary of the Employment Agreement. In addition, although none were granted, the Employment Agreement provided that Mr. Esfandiari could have been granted up to 50,000 shares of the Company's common stock for 2007 and 2008 based upon the performance of the Company's Dual Path Platform Technology, which is directly related to certain annual revenue targets budgeted by management of the Company.  Pursuantpursuant to the Company's 19992008 Stock OptionIncentive Plan, the Company also granted Mr. Esfandiari incentive stock options to purchase 300,000 shares of the Company's common stock. The price per share of these options is equal to the fair market value of the Company's common stock as of the close of the market on April 23, 2007,March 5, 2010, which is the date on which the Agreement was entered into.effective. Of these stock options to purchase 100,000 shares ofvest on the stockeffective date, options vested when the employment agreement was executed,to purchase an additional 100,000 shares of the stock options vested on the firstsecond anniversary of the Employment Agreement, and options to purchase an additional 100,000 shares of the stock options vested on the secondthird anniversary of the Employment Agreement.  Mr. Esfandiari is eligible to participate in any profit sharing, stock option, retirement plan, medical and/or hospitalization plan, and/or other benefit plans except for disability and life insurance that the Company may from time to time place in effect for the Company’s executives during the term of Mr. Esfandiari’s employment agreement.  If Mr. Esfandiari’s employment agreement is terminated by the Company without cause, or if Mr. Esfandiari terminates his employment agreement for a reasonable basis, as defined in the Employment Agreement including within 12 months of a change in control, the Company is required to pay as severance Mr. Esfandiari’s salary for twelve months.

Neither Mr. Larkin, Mr. Ippolito nor Mr. Bruce hasdoes not have an employment contract with the Company.
Executive Bonus Plan

The Company has established a bonus plan for its executives who do not have a contract.  For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2010, there were three executives eligible for this bonus plan.  Each executive can earn up to 25% of that executive’s salary in the form of a bonus.  Half of the amount, or 12.5%, is determined by the Compensation Committee in its discretion, and the other half is subject to the Company’s attaining certain objectives based on revenue and operating profit levels for the fiscal year for which the bonus is paid.  The plan, during 2009, called for a sliding percentage of the executive’s salary, from zero to 6.25% for attaining 85% to 100% of revenue goals, and from zero to 6.25% of the executive’s salary for attaining between zero percent to 150% of the designated operating profit goals.  The Company achieved 98.3% of its revenue goals for 2009, resulting in a bonus of 5.5% of each executive’s salary, and achieved greater than 150% of its operating profit goal, resulting in a bonus of 6.25% of salary, for a total of 11.75% of salary.  In addition, the Compensation Committee approved approximately 8% of salary in discretionary bonuses for the subject executives, bringing the total bonus to approximately 20% of salary.  Goals for 2010 have not yet been established.
37

OUTSTANDING EQUITY AWARDS AT FISCAL YEAR-END 2008
 Option Awards Stock Awards 
NameNumber of Securities Underlying Unexcercised Options Excerciseable (#)
Number of Securities Underlying Unexcercised Options Unexcersable
(#)
Option Exercise Price
($)
Option Expiration DateOption Vesting Date 
Number of Shares of Stock That Have Not Vest
(#)
Market Value of Shares of Stock That Have Not Vested
($)
Foot-
note
Lawrence A. Siebert          250,000                 0.136/3/20136/3/2008   3
             75,000                 0.222/15/20132/15/2008   1
             10,000                 0.4812/31/20084/17/2006   2
             10,000                 0.485/4/20114/17/2006   2, 5
             50,000                 0.485/28/20114/17/2006   2, 3, 5
             50,000                 0.485/28/20111/1/2007   2, 3, 5
             50,000                 0.485/4/20115/5/2004   2, 5
          
          
Richard J. Larkin            75,000                 0.222/15/20132/15/2008   1
             25,000                 0.485/17/20104/17/2006   2, 5
             25,000                 0.485/17/20101/1/2007   2, 5
             18,750                 0.483/24/20113/24/2006   2, 5
             18,750                 0.483/24/20111/1/2007   2, 5
             50,000                 0.459/15/20105/5/2004   4
          
          
Javan Esfandiari            60,000                 0.222/15/20132/15/2008   1
               5,000                 0.4812/31/20084/17/2006   2, 5
             25,000                 0.485/17/20104/17/2006   2, 5
             25,000                 0.485/17/20101/1/2007   2, 5
             18,750                 0.483/24/20113/24/2006   2, 5
             18,750                 0.483/24/20111/1/2007   2, 5
               5,000                 0.485/4/20114/17/2006   2, 5
             25,000                 0.485/28/20114/17/2006   2, 5
             25,000                 0.485/28/20114/17/2006   2, 5
             25,000                 0.485/28/20115/28/2007   2, 5
             30,000                 0.485/4/20115/5/2004   2, 5
           100,000                 0.484/23/20124/23/2007   2, 3, 5
           100,000                 0.484/23/20123/5/2008   2, 3, 5
            100,000                0.484/23/20123/5/2009   2, 3, 5
                     50,000                5,5006
          
          
Tom Ippolito            50,000                 0.222/15/20132/15/2008   2
             15,000                 0.483/24/20113/24/2006   2, 5
          
          
Richard Bruce            50,000                 0.222/15/20132/15/2008   2
               5,000                 0.4812/31/20084/17/2006   2, 5
             12,500                 0.485/17/20104/17/2006   2, 5
             12,500                 0.485/17/20101/1/2007   2, 5
             12,500                 0.483/24/20113/24/2006   2, 5
             12,500                 0.483/24/20111/1/2007   2, 5
               5,000                 0.485/4/20114/17/2006   2, 5
             10,000                 0.485/4/20115/5/2004   2, 5
             20,000                 0.485/4/20115/5/2004   2, 5
          
          
38

1 All options issued with a $.62 exercise price were issued during 2006 as part of the Company’s 1999 Stock Option Plan.  Pursuant to this plan, the Company granted 244,000 options to all employees.
2 All options issued with a $.75 exercise price and an April 17, 2006 vesting date were issued on April 17, 2006 as part of the Company’s 1999
OUTSTANDING EQUITY AWARDS AT FISCAL YEAR-END 2009

  Option Awards Stock Awards 
Name Number of Securities Underlying Unexcercised Options Excerciseable (#)
Number of Securities Underlying Unexcercised Options Unexcersable
(#)
Option Exercise Price
($)
Option Expiration DateOption Vesting Date 
Number of Shares of Stock That Have Not Vest
(#)
Market Value of Shares of Stock That Have Not Vested
($)
Foot-
note
Lawrence A. Siebert            133,333                0.135/6/20145/6/2012   5
             133,333                0.135/6/20145/7/2011   5
             133,333                0.135/6/20145/6/2010   5
            250,000                 0.136/3/20136/3/2008   3
              75,000                 0.222/15/20132/15/2008   2
              50,000                 0.135/28/20111/1/2007   1, 4
              50,000                 0.135/28/20114/17/2006   1, 4
              10,000                 0.135/4/20114/17/2006   4
              50,000                 0.135/4/20115/5/2004   4
           
Javan Esfandiari            100,000                0.135/6/20145/6/2012   5
             100,000                0.135/6/20145/7/2011   5
             100,000                0.135/6/20145/6/2010   5
            100,000                 0.134/23/20123/5/2009   1, 4
            100,000                 0.134/23/20123/5/2008   1, 4
              60,000                 0.222/15/20132/15/2008   2
              25,000                 0.135/28/20115/28/2007   4
            100,000                 0.134/23/20124/23/2007   1, 4
              18,750                 0.133/24/20111/1/2007   4
              25,000                 0.135/17/20101/1/2007   4
              25,000                 0.135/28/20114/17/2006   1, 4
              25,000                 0.135/28/20114/17/2006   1, 4
                5,000                 0.135/4/20114/17/2006   4
              25,000                 0.135/17/20104/17/2006   4
              18,750                 0.133/24/20113/24/2006   4
              30,000                 0.135/4/20115/5/2004   4
           
Tom Ippolito             75,000                0.135/6/20145/6/2012   5
              75,000                0.135/6/20145/7/2011   5
              75,000                0.135/6/20145/6/2010   5
       ��      50,000                 0.222/15/20132/15/2008   2
              15,000                 0.133/24/20113/24/2006   4

1 Stock Option Plan.  Pursuant to this plan, the Company granted 244,000 options to all employees.  On April 17, 2006, the Company’s Compensation Committee approved the cancellation of each employee stock option award issued under the 1999 Stock Option Plan where the exercise price was greater than $0.75 per share of the Company’s common stock, and the issuance of a new stock option award under the 1999 Stock Option Plan, for the same number of shares of the Company’s common stock, with an exercise price of $0.75 per share of the Company’s common stock for each cancelled stock option award. The market price of the common stock of the Company on April 17, 2006 was $0.72 per share. In total, stock option awards to acquire 795,000 shares of Company common stock were cancelled, and stock option awards to acquire 795,000 shares of Company common stock were issued. Other than the change in the exercise price, all of the terms and conditions in each newly issued stock option award are identical to the cancelled stock option award it replaced, with the following exceptions: (i) Lawrence A. Siebert’s stock option award for 50,000 shares of the Company’s common stock, exercisable on May 28, 2006 and terminating on May 28, 2011, was replaced with a stock option award for 50,000 shares of the Company’s common stock, exercisable on January 1, 2007 and terminating on May 28, 2011;(ii) Avi Pelossof’s stock option awards for 72,500 shares of the Company’s common stock, exercisable on May 28, 2005 and on May 28, 2006 and both terminating on May 28, 2011 was replaced with a stock option award for 72,500 shares of the Company’s common stock, exercisable on January 1, 2007 and terminating on May 28, 2011.
3 Options issued in connection with an employment contract and under the 2008 Stock Incentive Plan.
4 All other options shown were issued prior to 2006 as part of the Company's 1999 Stock Option Plan.
52 On February 15, 2008 the Company’s Compensation Committee approved the reduction of the exercise price to $0.48 per share of each employee stock option award issuedCompany granted options under the 1999 Stock Option Plan for which the exercise price was greater than $0.48 per share.Plan.
6 Stock3 Options issued in connection with an employment contract and under the 2008 Stock Incentive Plan.
4 On May 7, 2009, the Compensation Committee of the Company reduced, to $0.13 per share, the exercise price of each outstanding employee option that was issued under the 1999 Equity Incentive Plan (the “1999 Plan”) for which the exercise price was greater than $0.44 per share of the Company’s common stock.  There was no other change made to the terms of the stock options other than the reduction in the exercise price. A total of 1,036,750 options were affected and the fair value difference of the options before and after the reduction was $31,660 and was expensed in the three months ended June 30, 2009.
5 On May 7, 2009 in accordance with the terms of the Company’s 2008 Stock Incentive Plan, the Company granted certain employees of the Company, options to purchase an aggregate of 2,925,000 shares of the Company’s common stock.  The exercise price for these options is equal to $0.13 per share.  The options become exercisable in thirds on the first, second and third anniversaries of the date of the grant.  Each option granted will expire and terminate, if not exercised sooner, upon the earlier to occur of (a) 30 days after termination of the employee’s employment with the Company or (b) the fifth anniversary of the date of grant.  The fair value of these options is being amortized over the vesting life of the options.
39


 
DIRECTOR COMPENSATION
 
Name 
Fees Earned or Paid in Cash
($) 1
  
Option Awards
($) 2
  
Total
($)
 
Katherine L. Davis $25,750  $22,987  $48,737 
             
Gary Meller  24,250   23,316   47,566 
             
James D. Merselis3
  20,500   7,816   28,316 
             
Al Carus4
  14,750   23,635   38,385 
DIRECTOR COMPENSATION

Name 
Fees Earned or Paid in Cash
($) 1
  
Option Awards
($) 2
  
Total
($)
 
Katherine L. Davis $29,500  $31,950  $61,450 
             
Gary Meller  26,500  $31,950   58,450 
             
James D. Merselis3
  1,000   -   1,000 
 
1 Fees earned or paid in cash represents an annual retainer a yearly fee and fees for meeting expenses: (a) Mr. CarusMs. Davis received $9,000 in an $18,000 annual retainer for the portion of the year that he servedfee as a member of the board of directors, a $1,250$2,500 annual retainerfee as audit committee chairman and $4,500$9,000 in meeting fees paid during 2008;2009; (b) Mr. MerselisMeller received an $18,000 annual retainerfee as a member of the board of directors, and $2,500 in meeting fees paid during 2008; (c) Dr. Meller received an $18,000 annual retainer as a member of the board of directors, and $6,250$8,500 in meeting fees; (d) Ms. DavisMr. Merselis received an $18,000 annual retainer as a member of the board of directors, a  $1,250 retainer as audit committee chairman and $6,500$1,000 in meeting fees.
2 Each outside member of the board of directors is granted, an optiononce every five years, the right to purchase 180,000375,000 shares of the company’s common stock with an exercise price equal to the market price on the date of the grant as part of their annual compensation. One-fifth of these options are exercisable on the date of grant, one-fifth become exercisable on the first anniversary of the date of grant, and additional one-fifths become exercisable on the second through fourth anniversary of the date of grant.  The fair value of options at the date of grant was estimated using the Black-Scholes option pricing model.
3 Mr. Merselis resigned from our Board of Directors on February 9, 2009.
4Mr. Carus resigned from our Board of Directors on July 20, 2008.

Director Compensation
 
All non-employee directors are paid an $18,000 annual retainer, semi-annually, and once every five years, on the date of the annual meeting of stockholders that directors are elected or re-elected (every 5 years), receive stock options to acquire 180,000375,000 shares of the Company's common stock, with an exercise price equal to the market price on the date of the grant.  Stock options to acquire 36,00075,000 shares become exercisable on the date of grant, and options to acquire an additional 36,00075,000 shares become exercisable on the date of each of the four succeeding annual meetings of stockholders if and to the extent that the non-employee director is reelected as a director at each such annual meeting.  The audit committee chairman is paid an annual retainer of $2,500, paid semi-annually.  In addition, the non-employee directors are paid $1,000 in cash for each board of directors' meeting attended, and paid $500 in cash for each telephonic board of directors meeting.  The non-employee directors who are members of a committee of the board of directors are paid $500 in cash for each committee meeting attended, or $750 in cash for each committee meeting attended if that non-employee director is the committee chairman.

Compensation Committee Interlocks and Insider Participation
No executive officer of the Company served as a member of the Board of any other public company during the year ended December 31, 2009. No member of the Compensation Committee serves as an executive officer of any other public company during the year ended December 31, 2009. No interlocking relationship exists between the members of our Compensation Committee and the Board or compensation committee of any other company.




3940




ITEM 12.SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT AND RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS
 
The following table sets forth certain information regarding the beneficial ownership of our common stock by each person or entity known by us to be the beneficial owner of more than 5% of the outstanding shares of common stock, each of our directors and each of our “named executive officers” and all of our directors and executive officers as a group as of March 17, 2009.1, 2010.
 
Name and Address of Beneficial Owner Amount and Nature of Beneficial Owner  Percent of Class  Amount and Nature of Beneficial Owner  Percent of Class 
Siebert, Lawrence (1)
3661 Horseblock Road
Medford, NY 11763
 6,933,615   11.11%  6,933,615   11.10%
Esfandiari, Javan (2)
3661 Horseblock Road
Medford, NY 11763
 779,580   1.25%  777,573   1.24%
Larkin, Richard (3)
3661 Horseblock Road
Medford, NY 11763
 267,672   0.43%  267,672   0.43%
Ippolito, Tom (4)
3661 Horseblock Road
Medford, NY 11763
 65,000   0.10%  65,000   0.10%
Bruce, Richard (5)
3661 Horseblock Road
Medford, NY 11763
 135,075   0.22%  135,075   0.22%
Meller, Gary (6)
3661 Horseblock Road
Medford, NY 11763
 354,300   0.57%  534,300   0.86%
Davis, Katherine L. (7)
3661 Horseblock Road
Medford, NY 11763
  75,650   0.12%  150,650   0.24%
GROUP (8)
  8,610,892   13.53%  8,863,585   13.89%
              
Vicis Capital Master Fund
126 East 56th Street, Tower 56, Suite 700
New York, NY 10022
 4,608,707   7.44%
Millenium 3 Opportunity Fund, LLC (9)
4 Becker Farm Road
Roseland, NJ 07068
 4,006,610   6.31%
Inverness Medical Innovations, Inc.
51 Sawyer Road, Suite 200
Waltham, MA 02453
 5,367,840   8.67%  5,367,840   8.66%
Crestview Capital Master, LLC
95 Revere Drive, Suite A
Northbrook, IL 60062
 18,907,432   30.52%
Crestview Capital Offshore Fund, Inc.
95 Revere Drive, Suite A
Northbrook, IL 60062
  3,356,040   5.41%

Beneficial ownership is determined in accordance with the Rule 13d-3(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and generally includes voting or investment power with respect to securities.  Except as subject to community property laws, where applicable, the person named above has sole voting and investment power with respect to all shares of our common stock shown as beneficially owned by him.
 
The beneficial ownership percent in the table is calculated with respect to the number of outstanding shares (61,944,901) of the Company's common stock outstanding as of March 17, 2009.  Each stockholder's ownership is calculated as the number of shares of common stock owned plus the number of shares of common stock into which any preferred stock, warrants, options or other convertible securities owned by that stockholder can be converted within 60 days.
40

The term “named executive officer” refers to our principal executive officer, our two most highly compensated executive officers other than the principal executive officer who were serving as executive officers at the end of 2008, and two additional individuals for whom disclosure would have been provided but for the fact that the individuals were not serving as executive officers of the Company at the end of 2008.
 
41

 (1)Includes 495,000485,000 shares issuable upon exercise of options exercisable within 60 days.  Does not include 400,000 shares issuable upon exercise of options that are not exercisable within the next 60 days.
 (2)Includes 562,500557,500 shares issuable upon exercise of options exercisable within 60 days and 2,007days.  Does not include 300,000 shares issuable upon exercise of warrants.options that are not exercisable within the next 60 days.
 (3)Includes 212,500 shares issuable upon exercise of options exercisable within 60 days.  Does not include 275,000 shares issuable upon exercise of options that are not exercisable within the next 60 days.
 (4)Includes 65,000 shares issuable upon exercise of options exercisable within 60 days.  Does not include 225,000 shares issuable upon exercise of options that are not exercisable within the next 60 days.
 (5)Includes 140,000 shares issuable upon exercise of options exercisable within 60 days.
(6)Includes 159,000135,000 shares issuable upon exercise of options exercisable within 60 days.  Does not include 108,000225,000 shares issuable upon exercise of options that are not exercisable within the next 60 days.
(6)Includes 234,000 shares issuable upon exercise of options exercisable within 60 days.  Does not include 300,000 shares issuable upon exercise of options that are not exercisable within the next 60 days.
 (7)Includes 75,650150,650 shares issuable upon exercise of options exercisable within 60 days. Does not include 108,000300,000 shares issuable upon exercise of options that are not exercisable within the next 60 days.
 (8)Includes footnotes (1)-(8)
 (9)Includes 1,557,376 shares issuable upon exercise of warrants..

 
 
 Equity Compensation Plan Information
 
Combined Equity Compensation Plans - Information as of December 31, 2008
Combined Equity Compensation Plans - Information as of December 31, 2009
Combined Equity Compensation Plans - Information as of December 31, 2009
Plan Category
Number of Securities to be Issued Upon Exercise of Outstanding Options, Warrants and Rights
Weighted-Average Exercise Price of Outstanding Options, Warrants and Rights
Number of Securities Remaining Available for Future Issuance under Equity Compensation Plans (Excluding Securities Reflected in Column (a))
 
Number of Securities to be Issued Upon Exercise of Outstanding Options, Warrants and Rights
(a)
  
Weighted-Average Exercise Price of Outstanding Options, Warrants and Rights
(b)
 
Number of Securities Remaining Available for Future Issuance under Equity Compensation Plans (Excluding Securities Reflected in Column (a)
(c)
(a)(b)(c)
Equity compensation plans approved by security holders1
2,416,650$0.3664,566,350 5,586,9001 $0.152 1,821,350
Equity compensation plans not approved by security holders          ------ --   -- --
Total2,416,650$0.3664,566,350 5,586,900  $0.152 1,821,350

1 The “Number of Securities to be Issued Upon Exercise of Outstanding Options, Warrants and Rights” represents 1,983,0002,408,250 from the 1999 Stock Option Plan and 433,6503,178,650 under the 2008 Stock Incentive Plan.   The “Number of Securities Remaining Available for Future Issuance underUnder Equity Compensation Plans” includesrepresents shares issuable under the 2008 Stock Incentive Plan.  The Company currently has no intention to issue additional securities under the 1999 Stock Option Plan.


4142


ITEM 13.CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS, AND DIRECTOR INDEPENDENCE.
 
The executive officers of the Company are as follows: Lawrence A. Siebert, president and chairman of the board of directors of the Company, Richard J. Larkin, chief financial officer of the Company, and Javan Esfandiari, executive vice president of Research and Development of the Company.

On February 15, 2008,May 7, 2009, the Compensation Committee approvedof the reduction ofCompany reduced, to $0.13 per share, the exercise price to $0.48 per share of each outstanding employee stock option awardthat was issued under the 1999 Stock OptionEquity Incentive Plan (the “1999 Plan”) for which the exercise price was greater than $0.48$0.44 per share.  As a resultshare of this price reduction, the following numberCompany’s common stock.  There was no other change made to the terms of employeethe stock options owned byother than the Company’s officersreduction in the exercise price. A total of 1,036,750 options were affected.  Mr. Siebert, Mr. Esfandiari and directors atMr. Larkin had options to purchase common stock that time under the 1999 Stock Option Plan qualified for this price reduction: (i) Mr. Siebert: 170,000 options; (ii) Mr. Larkin: 87,500 options; (iii) Mr. Esfandiari: 532,500 options; (iv) Mr. Aromando: 100,000 options; (v) Mr. Ippolito: 15,000 options; (vi) Mr. Bruce: 90,000 options; (vii) Mr. Carus: 252,000 options; (viii) Dr. Meller: 252,000 options;were so reduced of 160,000, 497,500 and (ix) Ms. Davis: 180,000 options.137,500, respectively.

In addition, on February 15, 2008May 7, 2009 in accordance with the Compensation Committee granted, to certainterms of the Company’s existing officers at that time2008 Stock Incentive Plan, the Company granted certain employees of the Company, options to purchase an aggregate of 2,925,000 shares of the Company’s common stock under the 1999 Stock Option Plan as follows: (i) Mr. Siebert, 75,000 options; (ii) Mr. Larkin, 75,000 options; (iii) Mr. Esfandiari, 60,000 options; (iv) Mr. Bruce, 50,000 options; (v) Mr. Ippolito, 50,000 options; and (vi) Mr. Aromando, 25,000 options.stock.  The exercise price for each of these options is $0.22equal to $0.13 per share, which was the closing market price for the Company’s common stock on February 15, 2008.share.  The options vestbecome exercisable in thirds on the first, second and third anniversaries of the date of the grant, and eachgrant.  Each option granted will expire and terminate, if not exercised sooner, upon the earlier to occur of (a) 30 days after termination of the employee’s employment with the Company or (b) the fifth anniversary of the date of grant.

Avi Pelossof, the Company’s Vice President of Sales  Mr. Siebert, Mr. Esfandiari and Marketing from May 5, 2004 to January 31, 2007, exercised 100,000 options in December 2006 at $0.60 per share, and another 50,000 options in January 2007 at $0.75 per share.
Robert Aromando, the Company’s Executive Vice President of Commercial Operations was hired in May of 2007.  In June 2007 in connection with his joining the Company, he was grantedMr. Larkin received options to purchase 100,000 shares of common stock at an exercise price of $0.62 per share.  These options will become exercisable one year from the date of grant.  As discussed above, on February 15, 2008, the exercise price for these options was reduced to $0.48.  Mr. Aromando left the employ of the Company in August 2008400,000, 300,000 and since then his options have expired.

Dr. Gary Meller, a non-employee director of the Company, currently serves as a limited partner and a member of the Advisory Board of Crestview Capital Master LLC, referred to herein as Crestview, which was the lead investor, investing $3 million, in our Series B Preferred Stock private placement in January 2005, and which subsequently invested an additional $1 million in our Series B Preferred Stock private placement in March 2006.  Crestview also invested $2 million in our Series C Preferred Stock private placement in September 2006.  Details of these transactions are set forth below. Crestview currently is the largest stockholder of the Company, with beneficial ownership of approximately 30.5 percent of our common stock.

As referred to above, in January 2005, for a purchase price of $3 million, Crestview acquired 60 shares of our Series B Preferred Stock, and warrants to purchase 4,672,130 shares of our common stock at a warrant exercise price of $0.61 per share.  As described below, in December 2007, these shares of Preferred Stock and warrants were exchanged for shares of the Company’s common stock.
In March 2006, for a purchase price of $1 million, Crestview acquired 20 shares of Series B Preferred Stock with warrants to purchase 1,557,377 shares of common stock at a warrant exercise price of $0.61 per share.  These shares were issued in connection with the Company’s January 2005 private placement as described herein.  In September 2006, for a purchase price of $2 million, we issued 40 shares of Series C Preferred Stock to Crestview together with warrants to purchase 625,000 shares of common stock at an exercise price of $1.00 per share.
In January 2007, because of comments from the staff of the SEC concerning the Company’s registration statement No. 333-138266 (the “Prospectus”), Crestview agreed to reduce the number of its shares of common stock covered by the Prospectus to 2,000,000.  Crestview also agreed to waive any penalties that the Company would otherwise owe Crestview because of the failure to register all of Crestview’s shares in the Prospectus.  In consideration for this waiver, the Company agreed that, upon request by Crestview, the Company will file one or more registration statements with the SEC in order to register the resale of other shares beneficially owned by Crestview.  The cost of any such registration statements shall be borne by the Company.
In addition to Crestview’s $2,000,000 investment in the Company’s September 2006 private placement of Series C Preferred Stock, the Company also received an investment of $2,000,000 on that date from Inverness Medical Innovations, Inc. (“Inverness”).  At that time, a Certificate of Designation for the Series C Preferred Stock was filed with the Secretary of State of Nevada reflecting the agreed upon conversion price of $0.85 per share of common stock.  This private placement of Series C Preferred Stock was completed on October 5, 2006, and it raised an aggregate of $8,150,000 (including the $2,000,000 invested by each of Crestview and Inverness).  During the period between September 29, 2006 and October 5, 2006, we requested the assistance of Crestview and others in identifying prospective investors for us.
42

On December 19, 2007 (the “Closing Date”), amendments to the governing documents for the Company’s Series A, Series B and Series C Convertible Preferred Stock (collectively, the “Preferred Stock”) and for certain warrants and options (collectively, the “Non-Employee Warrants”), not including options or warrants issued to employees or directors in their capacity as such (these actions collectively, the “Plan”), were approved by the Company and the requisite percentages of the holders of the Preferred Stock and of the Non-Employee Warrants.  Subsequent to these amendments, all shares of Preferred Stock were converted to common stock and certain of the Non-Employee Warrants were exercised, including the following: Mr. Siebert’s 38.74442 shares of Series A Preferred Stock were converted into 2,421,526 shares of common stock at $0.48 per share, his 1.08545 shares of Series B Preferred Stock were converted into 113,067 shares of common stock at $0.48 per share, and Mr. Siebert purchased 337,500 shares of common stock through the exercise of warrants at an exercise price of $0.40 per share, for a total of $135,000 in cash; Mr. Larkin on December 19, 2007 pursuant to the Plan converted .50392 shares of his Series A Preferred Stock into 37,794 shares of common stock at $.40 per share, in addition he received 369 shares of common stock as payment of dividends on the series A preferred.  He also received 3,050 shares of common stock in the exercise of warrants pursuant to the Plan at $.40 per share, or a total of $1,220 in cash, Inverness’ 40 shares of Series C Preferred Stock were converted into 4,166,666 shares of common stock,  and Inverness exercised all of its Series C Warrants to purchase a total of 625,000 shares of common stock for an aggregate purchase price of $250,000 and Crestview’s 82.32274 shares of Series B Preferred Stock were converted into 10,290,342 shares of the Company’s common stock, Crestview’s 40 shares of Series C Preferred Stock were converted into 4,166,666 shares of common stock, Crestview exercised a portion of its Series B Warrants to purchase a total of 60,451 shares of common stock for an aggregate purchase price of $24,180.40, and Crestview exercised all of its Series C Warrants to purchase a total of 625,000 shares of common stock for an aggregate purchase price of $250,000.
In June 2008, pursuant to the Plan (see above), Mr. Siebert, exercised 2,205,731 warrants, on a cashless basis, into 332,940 shares of common stock, Mr. Larkin exercised 27,436 warrants, on a cashless basis, into 4,141 shares of common stock, and Crestview exercised 6,169,055 warrants, on a cashless basis, into 931,177 shares of common stock.275,000, respectively.
 
During the quarter ended December 31, 2008, Inverness notified the Company that Inverness had entered into a contract with Bio-Rad Laboratories, Inc. (“Bio-Rad”) for royalties on Bio-Rad’s patent for the detection of HIV-2 antibodies.  The agreement also provided for Inverness to pay past royalties.  The agreements betweenOn June 25, 2009, the Company and Inverness provide that the Company is to share in this expense andMedical Innovations, Inc. (Inverness) entered into a letter agreement whereby certain obligations aggregating approximately $1,010,000 as such Inverness requested it be reimbursed for the Company’s share of past royalties.  The Company negotiated with Inverness that this liability isDecember 31, 2008 were agreed to be paid from future revenues overrevenues.  The obligations include the Company’s share under its agreements with Inverness for the amount of HIV-2 royalties that Inverness paid when Inverness entered into an HIV-2 license agreement with Bio-Rad Laboratories, Inc. of approximately the next 18 months.  In addition Inverness agreed to allow$485,000 and royalties owed by Chembio to pay its royalty obligationon lateral flow licenses to Inverness on Chembio’sof approximately $525,000 as of December 31, 2008. Under the agreement Inverness will retain an additional 10% of Clearview® HIV 1/2 STAT-PAK® net sales to third parties in the same way and over the same period.5% of Clearview® Complete HIV 1/2 net sales until these obligations are extinguished.   The approximate aggregate balance due is $242,000 as of December 31, 2009.
 
Director Independence
 
Our common stock trades on the OTC Bulletin Board.  As such, we are not currently subject to corporate governance standards of listed companies, which require, among other things, that the majority of the board of directors be independent.
 
We are not currently subject to corporate governance standards defining the independence of our directors, and we have chosen to define an “independent” director in accordance with the NASDAQ Global Market's requirements for independent directors (NASDAQ Marketplace Rule 4200).directors.  Under this definition, we have determined that Katherine L. Davis currently qualifies as independent director.  We do not list the “independent” definition we use on our Internetinternet website.

43



ITEM 14.PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTANT FEES AND SERVICES
 
All fees discussed below were paid to ParenteBeard LLC, except 2008 amounts, which were paid to Lazar Levine & Felix LLP.  Remaining fees for the December 31, 2008 audit will be paid in 2009 to Parente Randolph, LLC.  In February 2009, Lazar Levine & Felix LLP merged its practice into Parente Randolph, LLC, which subsequently changed their name to ParenteBeard LLC.
 
Audit Fees
 
For the years ended December 31, 20082009 and 2007,2008, the Company’s independent accounting firm billed the Company $136,000$100,000 and $119,000,$136,000, respectively, for fees for the audit of the Company’s annual financial statements and review of financial statements included in the Company’s Forms 10-Q and 10-K.
 
Audit-Related Fees
 
For the years ended December 31, 20082009 and 2007,2008, the independent accounting firm, did not provide the Company with any assurance and related services reasonably related to the performance of the audit or review of the Company’s financial statements that are not reported above under “Audit Fees.”
 
Tax Fees
 
For the years ended December 31, 20082009 and 2007,2008, the independent accounting firm billed the Company $13,500$20,000 and $10,000,$13,500, respectively, for professional services for tax compliance, tax advice and tax planning.
 
All Other Fees
 
For the years ended December 31, 20082009 and 2007,2008, the independent accounting firm billed the Company $2,500none and $8,500$2,500 for fees associated with the preparation and filing of the Company’s registration statements, responses to SEC comment letters and other related matters.
 
Audit Committee Pre-Approval Policies
 
The Audit Committee (and prior to the adoption of the Audit Committee, the Board of Directors) approves in advance all audit and non-audit services performed by the independent accounting firm.  There are no other specific policies or procedures relating to the pre-approval of services performed by the independent accounting firm.
 
As disclosed in the Company's Amendment No. 2 to Form 8-K/A filed with the SEC on March 3, 2009, on February 15, 2009, the practice of Lazar Levine & Felix LLP was acquired by Parente Randolph, LLC (“Parente”) in a transaction pursuant to which Lazar merged its operations into Parente and certain of the professional staff and principals of Lazar joined Parente either as employees or partners of Parente.  On February 19, 2009, as a result of this transaction, Lazar resigned from its role as principal auditor of the Company’s financial statements.  The Company, through and with the approval of the Audit Committee of the Company’s Board of Directors, engaged Parente as its independent registered public accounting firm.
Lazar’s reports regarding the Company’s financial statements for the fiscal years ended December 31, 2007 and 2006 did not contain any adverse opinion or disclaimer of opinion and were not qualified or modified as to uncertainty, audit scope or accounting principles.  During the years ended December 31, 2008 and 2007, and during the interim period from the end of the most recently completed fiscal year through February 19, 2009, the date of resignation, there were no disagreements with Lazar on any matter of accounting principles or practices, financial statement disclosure or auditing scope or procedures, which disagreements, if not resolved to the satisfaction of Lazar would have caused it to make reference to such disagreement in its reports.

During the years ended December 31, 2008 and 2007, and during the interim period from the end of the most recently completed fiscal year through February 19, 2009, the date of engagement, the Company did not consult with Parente regarding the application of accounting principles to a specified transaction, either completed or proposed, or the type of audit opinions that might be rendered by Parente on the Company’s financial statements.  Parente did not provide the Company a written report or any oral advice that was an important factor considered by the Company in reaching a decision as to any accounting, auditing or financial reporting issue.

In addition, during the years ended December 31, 2008 and 2007, and during the interim period from the end of the most recently completed fiscal year through February 19, 2009, the date of engagement, the Company did not consult with Parente on any matter that was either the subject of a disagreement (as defined in Item 304(a)(1)(iv) of Regulation S-K and the related instructions to this item) or a reportable event (as described in Item304(a)(1)(v) of Regulation S-K).  As such none of the required disclosures under Item 304(a)(2)(ii) apply.
44

ITEM 15.                      EXHIBITS, FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULES
Number                      Description                                                                                              & #160; 60;                                           
3.1Articles of Incorporation, as amended. (3)(2)
3.2Amended and Restated Bylaws. (1)
4.2Registration Rights Agreement, dated as of May 5, 2004, by and among the Registrant and the Purchasers listed therein. (2)
4.4Amended Form of Common Stock Warrant issued pursuant to the May 4, 2004 Stock and Warrant Purchase Agreement. (16)
4.5Form of $0.90 Warrant issued to Mark L. Baum pursuant to the Consulting Agreement dated as of May 5, 2004 between the Registrant and Mark L. Baum. (2)
4.6Form of $0.60 Warrant issued to Mark L. Baum pursuant to the Consulting Agreement dated as of May 5, 2004 between the Registrant and Mark L. Baum. (2)
4.8Form of Common Stock Warrant issued pursuant to the January 26, 2005 Securities Purchase Agreement. (9)(7)
4.9Amended Form of Common Stock Warrant issued pursuant to the January 26, 2005 Securities Purchase Agreement. (16)
4.10Registration Rights Agreement, dated as of January 26, 2005, by and among the Registrant and the purchasers listed therein. (9)
4.11Form of Warrant, dated June 29, 2006, issued pursuant to Company and purchasers of the Company’s Secured Debentures.  (4)(7)
4.12Registration Rights Agreement, dated June 29, 2006. (4)(3)
4.14Registration Rights Agreement, dated as of September 29, 2006, by and among the Registrant and the Purchasers listed therein. (6)(3)
4.15Form of Common Stock Warrant issued pursuant to the Securities Purchase Agreements dated September 29, 2006 (6)(5).
4.16Amended Form of Common Stock Warrant issued pursuant to the Securities Purchase Agreements dated October 5, 2006. (16)(5)
4.17Amended Form of Common Stock Warrant issued to Placement Agents pursuant to the October 5, 2005 Securities Purchase Agreement. (16)(9)
4.18*Form of Employee Option Agreement. (16)
4.19Amended Form of Warrant used for Consultant Services, and in connection with the Company’s 2004 merger. (16)(9)
4.201999 Equity Incentive Plan. (14)(11)
4.202008 Stock Incentive Plan. (15)(12)
10.1*Employment Agreement dated June 15, 2006 with Lawrence A. Siebert. (5)(4)
10.2*Employment Agreement dated April 23, 2007 with Javan Esfandiari. (13)
10.3Series A Convertible Preferred Stock and Warrant Purchase Agreement (the “Stock and Warrant Purchase Agreement”), dated as of May 5, 2004, by and among the Registrant and the purchasers listed therein. (2)(10)
10.4Securities Purchase Agreement (the “Securities Purchase Agreement”), dated as of January 26, 2005, by and among the Registrant and the purchasers listed therein. (9)(7)
10.5Amendment No. 1 to Securities Purchase Agreement, dated as of January 28, 2005 by and among the Registrant and the purchasers listed therein. (10)(8)
10.7Security Purchase Agreement, dated June 29, 2006, among the Company and purchasers of the Company’s Secured Debentures. (4)(3)
10.11Securities Purchase Agreement (the “Securities Purchase Agreement”), dated as of September 29, 2006, by and among the Registrant and the Purchasers listed therein. (6)(5)
10.11Securities Purchase Agreement (the “Securities Purchase Agreement”), dated as of September 29, 2006, by and among the Registrant and the Purchasers listed therein. (5)
10.12Letter of Amendment to Securities Purchase Agreements dated as of September 29, 2006 by and among the Registrant and the Purchasers listed therein. (6)(5)
10.13HIV Barrel License, Marketing and Distribution Agreement, dated as of September 29, 2006, by and among the Registrant, Inverness and StatSure. (6)(5)
10.14HIV Cassette License, Marketing and Distribution Agreement, dated as of September 29, 2006, between the Registrant and Inverness. (6)(5)
10.15Non-Exclusive License, Marketing and Distribution Agreement, dated as of September 29, 2006, between the Registrant and Inverness. (6)(5)
10.16Joint HIV Barrel Product Commercialization Agreement, dated as of September 29, 2006, between the Registrant and StatSure. (6)
10.19License and Supply Agreement dated as of August 30, 2002 by and between Chembio Diagnostic Systems Inc. and Adaltis Inc. (8)(5)
14.1Ethics Policy (11)(13)
21List of Subsidiaries.
23.1Consent of Parente RandolphParenteBeard LLC, Independent Accountants.
23.2Consent of Lazar Levine & Felix LLP, Independent Accountants.
31.1Certification of the Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
31.2Certification of the Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
32Certification of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
45

(1)Incorporated by reference to the Registrant’s registration statement on Form SB-2 filed with the Commission on August 23, 1999 and the Registrant’s FormRegistrant's Forms 8-K filed on May 14, 2004, December 20, 2007.2007 and April 18, 2008.
(2)Incorporated by reference to the Registrant’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Commission on May 14, 2004.
(3)Incorporated by reference to the Registrant’s annual report on Form 10-KSB filed with the Commission on March 31, 2005.
(4)(3)Incorporated by reference to the Registrant’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Commission on July 3, 2006.
(5)(4)Incorporated by reference to the Registrant’s Current ReportsReport on Form 8-K filed with the Commission on June 21, 2006 and June 5, 2008.2006.
(6)(5)Incorporated by reference to the Registrant’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Commission on October 5, 2006.
(7)Incorporated by reference to the Registrant’s registration statement on Form SB-2/A filed with the Commission on August 4, 2004.
(8)(6)Incorporated by reference to the Registrant’s registration statement on Form SB-2 filed with the Commission on June 7, 2004.
(9)(7)Incorporated by reference to the Registrant’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Commission on January 31, 2005.
(10)(8)Incorporated by reference to the Registrant’s registration statement on Form SB-2 filed with the Commission on March 28, 2005.
(11)(9)Incorporated by reference to the Registrant’s annual report on Form 10-KSB filed with the Commission on March 30, 2006.12, 2008.
(12)Incorporated by reference to the Registrant’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Commission on January 30, 2007.
(13)(10)Incorporated by reference to the Registrant’s Current Report on Form 8-K/A filed with the Commission on May 3, 2007.
(14)(11)Incorporated by reference to the Registrant’s definitive proxy statement on Schedule 14A filed with the Commission on May 11, 2005.
(15)(12)Incorporated by reference to the Registrant’s definitive proxy statement on Schedule 14A filed with the Commission on April 14, 2008.
(16)(13)Incorporated by reference to the Registrant’s annual report on Form 10-KSB filed with the Commission on March 12, 2008.30, 2006.
(*)An asterisk (*) beside an exhibit number indicates the exhibit contains a management contract, compensatory plan or arrangement which is required to be identified in this report.




4645


SIGNATURES
 
In accordance with Section 13 or 15(d) of the Exchange Act, the registrant has caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.
 
CHEMBIO DIAGNOSTICS, INC.
 

 
Date:  March 18, 20095, 2010                                      By /s/ Lawrence A. Siebert                                                          
Lawrence A. Siebert
President, Chief Executive Officer and
Chairman of the Board
 

 
In accordance with the requirements of the Exchange Act, this report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities and on the dates indicated.
 
Signatures
Title
Date
 
/s/ Lawrence A. Siebert
Lawrence A. Siebert
 
Chief Executive Officer, President and Chairman Of The Board
(Principal Executive Officer)
 
March 18, 20095, 2010
 
/s/ Richard J. Larkin
Richard J. Larkin
 
Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial & Accounting Officer)
 
March 18, 20095, 2010
 
/s/ Gary Meller
Dr. Gary Meller
 
Director
 
March 18, 20095, 2010
 
/s/ Katherine L. Davis
Katherine L. Davis
 
Director
 
March 18, 20095, 2010

4746


CHEMBIO DIAGNOSTICS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIESSUBSIDIARY
  
Index to Consolidated Financial Statements
  
—INDEX—
 Page(s)
Report of Independent Registered Independent Public Accounting Firm - SuccessorF-2
Report of Registered Independent Public Accounting Firm - PredecessorF-3
  
Consolidated Financial Statements: 
  
Balance Sheets 
December 31, 20082009 and 20072008F-4F-3
  
Statements of Operations 
Years ended December 31, 20082009 and 20072008F-5F-4
  
Statements of Changes in Stockholders’ Equity 
Years ended December 31, 20082009 and 20072008F-6F-5
  
Statements of Cash Flows 
Years ended December 31, 20082009 and 20072008F-7F-6
  
Notes to Consolidated Financial StatementsF-8F-7 - F-23F-22




F - 1F-1


REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
 
To The Board of Directors
Chembio Diagnostics, Inc. and SubsidiariesSubsidiary
Medford, New York 11763
 
We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheetsheets of Chembio Diagnostics, Inc. and SubsidiariesSubsidiary (the “Company”) as of December 31, 2009 and 2008 and the related consolidated statements of operations, stockholders' equity and cash flows for each of the yeartwo years in the period ended December 31, 2008.2009.  These financial statements are the responsibility of the Company's management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audit.audits.
 
We conducted our auditaudits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States).  Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement.  The Company is not required to have, nor were we engaged to perform, an auditaudits of its internal control over financial reporting.  Our audit included consideration of internal control over financial reporting as a basis for designing audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Company's internal control over financial reporting.  Accordingly, we express no such opinion.  An audit also includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements, assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation.  We believe that our auditaudits provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.
 
In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the consolidated financial position of Chembio Diagnostics, Inc. and SubsidiariesSubsidiary as of December 31, 2009 and 2008, and thetheir consolidated results of its operations and itstheir cash flows for each of the yeartwo years in the period ended December 31, 20082009 in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.



PARENTE RANDOLPH,
PARENTEBEARD LLC

/s/ PARENTE RANDOLPH,BEARD LLC

New York, New York
March 18, 20094, 2010



F-2


CHEMBIO DIAGNOSTICS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARY
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
AS OF
       
- ASSETS -      
  December 31, 2009  December 31, 2008 
CURRENT ASSETS:      
Cash and cash equivalents $1,068,235  $1,212,222 
Accounts receivable, net of allowance for doubtful accounts of $20,000 and $10,301 for 2009 and 2008, respectively  1,776,327   809,303 
Inventories  1,555,903   1,819,037 
Prepaid expenses and other current assets  266,637   225,153 
TOTAL CURRENT ASSETS  4,667,102   4,065,715 
         
FIXED ASSETS, net of accumulated depreciation
  580,213   881,406 
         
OTHER ASSETS:        
License agreements, net of current portion  700,000   940,000 
Deposits on manufacturing equipment  338,375   - 
Deposits and other assets  29,560   27,820 
         
TOTAL ASSETS $6,315,250  $5,914,941 
         
- LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY -        
CURRENT LIABILITIES:        
Accounts payable and accrued liabilities $1,906,163  $2,383,021 
Current portion of loan payable  9,600   - 
Deferred research and development revenue  360,833   - 
License fee payable  875,000   - 
Current portion of obligations under capital leases  21,536   18,780 
TOTAL CURRENT LIABILITIES  3,173,132   2,401,801 
         
OTHER LIABILITIES:        
Loan payable - net of current portion  14,931   - 
Obligations under capital leases - net of current portion  39,273   60,808 
License fee payable - net of current portion  -   875,000 
TOTAL LIABILITIES  3,227,336   3,337,609 
         
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES        
         
STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY:        
Preferred stock – 10,000,000 shares authorized, none outstanding  -   - 
Common stock - $.01 par value; 100,000,000 shares authorized, 61,979,901 and 61,944,901 shares issued and outstanding for 2009 and 2008, respectively  619,799   619,449 
Additional paid-in capital  39,453,522   39,252,350 
Accumulated deficit  (36,985,407)  (37,294,467)
TOTAL STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY  3,087,914   2,577,332 
         
TOTAL LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS' EQUITY $6,315,250  $5,914,941 
         
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements

 
F - 2

REPORT OF REGISTERED INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM


To The Board of Directors
Chembio Diagnostics, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Medford, New York
We have audited the consolidated balance sheet of Chembio Diagnostics, Inc. and Subsidiaries (the “Company”) as of December 31, 2007 and the consolidated statements of operations, stockholders' equity and cash flows for the year ended December 31, 2007.  These financial statements are the responsibility of the Company's management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audit.
We conducted our audit in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States).  Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement.  The Company is not required to have, nor were we engaged to perform, an audit of its internal control over financial reporting.  Our audit included consideration of internal control over financial reporting as a basis for designing audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Company's internal control over financial reporting.  Accordingly, we express no such opinion.  An audit also includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements, assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation.  We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.
In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the consolidated financial position of Chembio Diagnostics, Inc. and Subsidiaries as of December 31, 2007, and the consolidated results of its operations and its cash flows for the year ended December 31, 2007 in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.



LAZAR LEVINE & FELIX LLP

/s/ LAZAR LEVINE & FELIX LLP

New York, New York
March 7, 2008

F - 3


CHEMBIO DIAGNOSTICS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
AS OF
       
- ASSETS -      
  December 31, 2008  December 31, 2007 
       
CURRENT ASSETS:      
Cash and cash equivalents $1,212,222  $2,827,369 
Accounts receivable, net of allowance for doubtful accounts of $10,000 for 2008 and 2007  809,303   946,340 
Inventories  1,819,037   1,453,850 
Prepaid expenses and other current assets  225,153   243,748 
TOTAL CURRENT ASSETS  4,065,715   5,471,307 
         
FIXED ASSETS, net of accumulated depreciation
  881,406   829,332 
         
OTHER ASSETS:        
License agreements, net of current portion  940,000   255,948 
Deposits and other assets  27,820   28,410 
         
  $5,914,941  $6,584,997 
         
- LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY -        
CURRENT LIABILITIES:        
Accounts payable and accrued liabilities $2,383,021  $2,175,791 
Deferred research and development revenue  -   43,334 
Current portion of obligations under capital leases  18,780   23,458 
TOTAL CURRENT LIABILITIES  2,401,801   2,242,583 
         
OTHER LIABILITIES:        
Obligations under capital leases - net of current portion  60,808   79,588 
License fee payable - net of current portion  875,000   - 
TOTAL LIABILITIES  3,337,609   2,322,171 
         
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES        
         
STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY:        
Preferred stock – 10,000,000 shares authorized, none outstanding  -   - 
Common stock - $.01 par value; 100,000,000 shares authorized 61,944,901 and 60,537,534 shares issued and outstanding as of 2008 and 2007, respectively  619,449   605,375 
Additional paid-in capital  39,252,350   39,003,148 
Accumulated deficit  (37,294,467)  (35,345,697)
TOTAL STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY  2,577,332   4,262,826 
         
  $5,914,941  $6,584,997 
         
See accompanying notes
F - 4


CHEMBIO DIAGNOSTICS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES 
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS 
FOR THE YEARS ENDED 
       
       
       
  December 31, 2008  December 31, 2007 
REVENUES:      
Net sales $10,355,768  $8,764,877 
Research grant income  693,803   466,071 
TOTAL REVENUES  11,049,571   9,230,948 
         
Cost of sales  7,197,850   6,435,238 
         
GROSS PROFIT  3,851,721   2,795,710 
         
OPERATING EXPENSES:        
Research and development expenses  2,605,343   1,906,653 
Selling, general and administrative expenses  3,317,046   3,765,221 
TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES  5,922,389   5,671,874 
         
LOSS FROM OPERATIONS  (2,070,668)  (2,876,164)
         
OTHER INCOME (EXPENSES):        
Other income - net  95,812   120,862 
Interest income  34,403   145,289 
Interest expense  (8,317)  (16,879)
   121,898   249,272 
         
LOSS BEFORE INCOME TAXES  (1,948,770)  (2,626,892)
         
Provision for income taxes  -   - 
         
NET LOSS  (1,948,770)  (2,626,892)
         
Dividends payable in stock to preferred stockholders  -   5,645,310 
         
NET LOSS ATTRIBUTABLE TO COMMON STOCKHOLDERS $(1,948,770) $(8,272,202)
         
Basic and diluted loss per share $(0.03) $(0.57)
         
Weighted average number of shares outstanding, basic and diluted  61,266,954   14,608,478 
         
See accompanying notes 
F - 5F-3

 

CHEMBIO DIAGNOSTICS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CHANGES IN STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY
FOR THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2008 AND 2007
  Series A Preferred Stock  Series B Preferred Stock  Common Stock  Additional paid in capital  Accumulated Deficit  Total 
  Shares  Amount  Shares  Amount  Shares  Amount  Amount  Amount  Amount 
Balance at December 31, 2006 149.92119  $2,504,313  113.93591  $3,555,786  11,296,961  $112,970  $19,960,618  $(27,073,494) $(939,807)
                                  
Preferred Stock related:                                 
Accretion of  preferred dividend -   331,375  -   491,302  -   -   -   (1,385,594)  (562,917)
Payment of dividends -   (391,343) -   (758,087) 3,442,467   34,425   1,705,505   -   590,500 
                                  
Common Stock Issued:                                 
Common converted from preferred (including Series C) (149.92119)  (2,444,345) (113.93591)  (3,289,001) 41,861,540   418,615   16,425,733   (4,259,717)  6,851,285 
For services -   -  -   -  200,000   2,000   117,800   -   119,800 
                                  
Warrants and options:                                 
Consultants/Advisory Board -   -  -   -  -   -   20,000   -   20,000 
Exercised -   -  -   -  3,736,566   37,365   1,082,996   -   1,120,361 
Fee for plan -   -  -   -  -   -   (561,816)  -   (561,816)
Stock option compensation -   -  -   -  -   -   252,312   -   252,312 
                                  
Net loss for 2007 -   -  -   -  -   -   -   (2,626,892)  (2,626,892)
                                  
Balance at December 31, 2007 -   -  -   -  60,537,534   605,375   39,003,148   (35,345,697)  4,262,826 
                                  
Warrants and options:                                 
Excercised -   -  -   -  1,407,367   14,074   (14,074)  -   - 
Stock option compensation -   -  -   -  -   -   263,276   -   263,276 
                                  
Net loss for 2008 -   -  -   -  -   -   -   (1,948,770)  (1,948,770)
                                  
Balance at December 31, 2008 -  $-  -  $-  61,944,901  $619,449  $39,252,350  $(37,294,467) $2,577,332 
                                  
See accompanying notes
CHEMBIO DIAGNOSTICS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARY
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
FOR THE YEARS ENDED
       
       
  December 31, 2009  December 31, 2008 
REVENUES:      
Net product sales $12,372,493  $10,355,768 
License and royalty income  121,896   - 
Research grant income  1,339,859   693,803 
TOTAL REVENUES  13,834,248   11,049,571 
         
Cost of product sales  7,973,843   7,197,850 
         
GROSS PROFIT  5,860,405   3,851,721 
         
OPERATING EXPENSES:        
Research and development expenses  2,883,696   2,605,343 
Selling, general and administrative expenses  2,659,382   3,317,046 
   5,543,078   5,922,389 
INCOME (LOSS) FROM OPERATIONS  317,327   (2,070,668)
         
OTHER INCOME (EXPENSES):        
Other income (expense)  (6,696)  95,812 
Interest income  9,032   34,403 
Interest expense  (10,603)  (8,317)
   (8,267)  121,898 
         
INCOME (LOSS) BEFORE INCOME TAXES  309,060   (1,948,770)
         
Provision for income taxes  -   - 
         
NET INCOME (LOSS) $309,060  $(1,948,770)
   -   - 
Basic earnings (loss) per share $0.00  $(0.03)
         
Diluted earnings (loss) per share $0.00  $(0.03)
         
Weighted average number of shares outstanding, basic  61,946,435   61,266,594 
   -   - 
Weighted average number of shares outstanding, diluted  75,041,932   61,266,594 
         
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements


 
F - 6F-4

 

CHEMBIO DIAGNOSTICS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARY
 CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CHANGES IN STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY
FOR THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2009 AND 2008
               
 Common Stock  Additional Paid in Capital  Accumulated Deficit  Total 
 Shares  Amount  Amount  Amount  Amount 
Balance at December 31, 2007 60,537,534  $605,375  $39,003,148  $(35,345,697) $4,262,826 
                    
Warrants and options:                   
Excercised 1,407,367   14,074   (14,074)  -   - 
Stock option compensation -   -   263,276   -   263,276 
                    
Net loss for 2008 -   -   -   (1,948,770)  (1,948,770)
                    
Balance at December 31, 2008 61,944,901   619,449   39,252,350   (37,294,467)  2,577,332 
                    
Warrants and options:                   
Excercised 35,000   350   4,200   -   4,550 
Stock option compensation -   -   196,972   -   196,972 
                    
Net income for 2009 -   -   -   309,060   309,060 
                    
Balance at December 31, 2009 61,979,901  $619,799  $39,453,522  $(36,985,407) $3,087,914 
                    
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements


CHEMBIO DIAGNOSTICS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
FOR THE YEARS ENDED
       
       
  December 31, 2008  December 31, 2007 
INCREASE (DECREASE) IN CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS:      
       
CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES:      
Cash received from customers $11,186,608  $9,802,348 
Cash paid to suppliers and employees  (12,406,921)  (11,276,554)
Interest received  34,403   145,289 
Interest paid  (8,317)  (16,879)
Net cash used in operating activities  (1,194,227)  (1,345,796)
         
CASH FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES:        
Acquisition of fixed assets  (397,462)  (410,425)
Net cash used in investing activities  (397,462)  (410,425)
         
CASH FLOWS FROM FINANCING ACTIVITIES:        
Proceeds from exercise of options and warrants, net of cash cost of financing of $561,816 in 2007  -   558,545 
Payment of accrued interest  -   (93,160)
Payment of dividends  -   (120,000)
Payment of capital lease obligation  (23,458)  (52,181)
Net cash used in financing activities  (23,458)  293,204 
         
NET (DECREASE)  IN CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS  (1,615,147)  (1,463,017)
Cash and cash equivalents - beginning of the period  2,827,369   4,290,386 
         
Cash and cash equivalents - end of the period $1,212,222  $2,827,369 
         
RECONCILIATION OF NET LOSS TO NET CASH USED IN OPERATING ACTIVITIES:        
         
Net Loss $(1,948,770) $(2,626,892)
Adjustments:        
Depreciation and amortization  345,388   283,359 
Loss on retirement of fixed assets  -   12,146 
Provision for doubtful accounts  -   (32,922)
Common stock, options and warrants issued as compensation  291,979   342,163 
Changes in assets and liabilities:        
Accounts receivable  137,037   436,822 
Inventories  (365,187)  (344,900)
Prepaid expenses and other assets  (10,108)  (9,706)
Other assets and deposits  (683,462)  64,948 
Deferred revenue  (43,334)  - 
Accounts payable and accrued expenses  207,230   529,186 
Licenses fee payable  875,000   - 
Net cash used in operating activities $(1,194,227) $(1,345,796)
         
Supplemental disclosures for non-cash investing and financing activities:        
Value of common stock issued upon cashless warrant exercise $14,074  $- 
Value of warrants/options/stock issued allocated to additional paid-in capital  -   61,181 
Accreted dividend to preferred stock  -   1,385,594 
Value of Common stock issued as payment of dividend  -   1,739,930 
Value of Preferred stock converted to common stock  -   5,733,346 
Assets acquired under capital leases  -   110,810 
         
See accompanying notes


F - 7F-5

 

CHEMBIO DIAGNOSTICS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARY
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
FOR THE YEARS ENDED
       
       
  December 31, 2009  December 31, 2008 
INCREASE (DECREASE) IN CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS:      
       
CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES:      
Cash received from customers $12,871,921  $11,186,608 
Cash paid to suppliers and employees  (12,618,423)  (12,406,921)
Interest received  9,032   34,403 
Interest paid  (10,603)  (8,317)
Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities  251,927   (1,194,227)
         
CASH FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES:        
Proceeds from sale of fixed assets  13,750   - 
Acquisition of and deposits on fixed assets  (390,738)  (397,462)
Net cash used in investing activities  (376,988)  (397,462)
         
CASH FLOWS FROM FINANCING ACTIVITIES:        
Proceeds from option exercises  4,550   - 
Payment of loan obligation  (4,697)  - 
Payment of capital lease obligation  (18,779)  (23,458)
Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities  (18,926 )  (23,458)
         
NET DECREASE  IN CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS  (143,987)  (1,615,147)
Cash and cash equivalents - beginning of the period  1,212,222   2,827,369 
         
Cash and cash equivalents - end of the period $1,068,235  $1,212,222 
         
RECONCILIATION OF NET LOSS TO NET CASH PROVIDED BY (USED IN) OPERATING ACTIVITIES:      
         
Net income (loss) $309,060  $(1,948,770)
Adjustments:        
Depreciation and amortization  362,338   345,388 
Provision for doubtful accounts  9,699   - 
Loss on sale of fixed asset  6,696   - 
Share based compensation  198,220   291,979 
Changes in assets and liabilities:        
Accounts receivable  (976,723)  137,037 
Inventories  263,134   (365,187)
Prepaid expenses and other assets  (42,732)  (10,108)
Deposits and other assets  238,260   (683,462)
Deferred revenue  360,833   (43,334)
Accounts payable and accrued expenses  (476,858)  207,230 
Licenses fee payable  -   875,000 
Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities $251,927  $(1,194,227)
         
Supplemental disclosures for non-cash investing and financing activities:        
Value of common stock issued upon cashless warrant exercise $-  $14,074 
 Purchase of fixed assets through a loan  29,228     
         
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements


F-6

CHEMBIO DIAGNOSTICS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIESSUBSIDIARY
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 20082009 AND 20072008
 

NOTE  1 —    1—DESCRIPTION OF BUSINESS:
 
Chembio Diagnostics, Inc. (the “Company” or “Chembio”) and its subsidiariessubsidiary, Chembio Diagnostic Systems, Inc., develop, manufacture, and market rapid diagnostic tests that detect infectious diseases. The Company’s main products are three rapid tests for the detection of HIV antibodies in whole blood, serum and plasma samples, two of which were approved by the FDA in 2006; the third is sold for export only.  Rapid HIV tests represented nearly 90%88% of the Company’s product revenues in 2008.2009.   The Company also has other rapid tests that together represented approximately 10%12% of sales in 2008.2009.   The Company’s products are sold to medical laboratories and hospitals, governmental and public health entities, non-governmental organizations, medical professionals and retail establishments.establishments both domestically and internationally. Chembio’s products are sold under the Company’s STAT PAK®, SURE CHECK® or SURE CHECK ®DPP® registered trademarks, or under the private labels of its marketing partners, for example the Clearview® label owned by Inverness Medical Innovations, Inc., which is the Company’s exclusive marketing partner for its rapid HIV lateral flow test products in the United States.  These products employ lateral flow technologies that are proprietary and/or licensed to the Company.  All of the Company’s products that are currently being developed are based on its patented Dual Path Platform (DPP®), which is a unique diagnostic point-of-care platform that has certain advantages over lateral flow technology.  In 2008 and 2009 to date, the Company has completed development of its first twofour products that employ the DPP®, and the Company has a number of additional products under development that employ the DPP®.

The accompanying consolidated financial statements have been prepared in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America, which contemplate continuation of the Company as a going concern. Although revenues and gross margins increased in the year ended December 31, 2008 as compared to the same period in 2007, the Company continues to generate significant operating losses. At December 31, 2008, the Company had a positive stockholders’ equity of $2,577,000 and working capital of $1,664,000. The Company estimates that its resources are sufficient to fund its needs through the end of 2009 and beyond or that, in the alternative, it could raise additional capital although the terms under which that capital could be raised would likely be very dilutive to current shareholdersThe Company’s liquidity and cash requirements will depend on several factors. These factors include (1) the level of revenues (the Company received $340,000 in 2009 for license fees for which we need to meet certain milestones to earn); (2) the extent to which, if any, that revenue level improves operating cash flows; (3) the Company’s investments in research and development, facilities, marketing, regulatory approvals, and other investments it may determine to make; and (4) the investment in capital equipment (including production equipment of $323,500 that the Company has contracted for) and the extent to which it improves cash flow through operating efficiencies. There are no assurances that the Company will become profitable or generate positive cash flow by the end of 2009 or, in the alternative, be successful in raising sufficient capital to fund its needs through 2009.

NOTE  2 —    2—SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES:
 
(a)  Principles of Consolidation:
 
The consolidated financial statements include the accounts of the Company, and its wholly owned subsidiary.  All intercompany transactions and balances have been eliminated in consolidation.
 
(b)  Use of Estimates:
 
The preparation of consolidated financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America requires management to make estimatesassumptions and assumptionsestimates that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the datedates of the consolidated financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period.periods covered thereby. Actual results could differ from thosethese estimates.
F - 8

 CHEMBIO DIAGNOSTICS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2008 AND 2007 Judgments and estimates of uncertainties are required in applying the Company’s accounting policies in certain areas. The following are some of the areas requiring significant judgments and estimates: determinations of the useful lives of assets, estimates of allowances for doubtful accounts, cash flow and valuation assumptions in performing asset impairment tests of long-lived assets, estimates of the realizability of deferred tax assets and inventory reserves.
 
(c)  Fair Value of Financial Instruments:
 
Fair values of cash and cash equivalents, accounts receivable, prepaid expenses and other current assets and accounts payable, loans and accrued expenses reflected in these financial statements approximate carrying value as these are short-term in nature.
 
(d)  Statements of Cash Flows:
 
For purposes of the statements of cash flows the Company considers all highly liquid investments with an original maturity of three months or less to be cash equivalents.
 
F-7

CHEMBIO DIAGNOSTICS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARY
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2009 AND 2008
(e)  Concentrations of Credit Risk:
 
Financial instruments which potentially subject the Company to concentrations of credit risk consist principally of temporary cash investments and trade receivables. The Company places its temporary cash instruments with well-known financial institutions and, at times, may maintain balances in excess of the $250,000 FDIC Insurance limit.  The Company monitors the credit ratings of the financial institutions to mitigate this risk.  The Company maintains three accounts with a well established multi-national bank and as of December 31, 20082009 had approximately $1.1 millionan aggregate of $818,000 above these limits.the federally insured limit. Concentration of credit risk with respect to trade receivables is principally mitigated by the Company’s obtaining ofability to obtain letters of credit from certain foreign customers, and its diverse customer base both in number of customers and geographic locations.  We currently do not require collateral.
 
(f)  Inventories:
 
Inventories, consisting of material, labor and manufacturing overhead, are stated at the lower of cost or market.  Cost is determined on the first-in, first-out method.
 
(g)  Fixed Assets:
 
Fixed assets are stated at cost less accumulated depreciation.  Depreciation is computed using the straight linestraight-line method over the estimated useful lives of the respective assets, which range from three to seven years.  Leasehold improvements are amortized over the useful life of the asset or the lease term, whichever is shorter.
 
(h)  License Agreement:
 
In February 2008, the Company entered into a sublicense agreement (see Note 6) for which it hashad initially recorded an asset of $1,000,000.  This asset is being expensed over an estimated economic life of ten years.  The current portion of this asset is $100,000 and is reported in prepaid expenses and other current assets.  The long-term portion as of December 31, 20082009 is $800,000$700,000 and is reflected in other assets along with other unexpensed long-term license fees of $140,000.assets.

(i)  Impairment of Long-Lived Assets and Intangible Assets
 
In accordance with FAS No. 144,ASC 360, "Accounting for the Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets", long-lived assets to be held and used are analyzed for impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the related carrying amounts may not be recoverable.  The Company evaluates at each balance sheet date whether events and circumstances have occurred that indicate possible impairment.  If there are indications of impairment, the Company uses future undiscounted cash flows of the related asset or asset grouping over the remaining life in measuring whether the assets are recoverable.  In the event such cash flows are not expected to be sufficient to recover the recorded asset values, the assets are written down to their estimated fair value.  We believe that the carrying values of our long-lived tangible and intangible assets were realizable at December 31, 2008.
F - 9

 CHEMBIO DIAGNOSTICS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2008 AND 20072009.
 
(j)  Revenue Recognition:
 
The Company recognizes revenue in accordance with Securities and Exchange Commission Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 104, “Revenue Recognition” (“SAB 104”).  Under SAB 104, revenue is recognized when there is persuasive evidence of an arrangement, delivery has occurred or services have been rendered, the sales price is determinable, and collectability is reasonably assured.  Revenue typically is recognized at time of shipment.  Sales are recorded net of discounts, rebates and returns.
 
The Company recognizes income from research projectsR&D contracts and grants when earned.  Grants are invoiced after expenses are incurred.  AnyRevenues from projects or grants funded in advance are deferred until earned.
 
(k)  Shipping and Handling Costs:
F-8

CHEMBIO DIAGNOSTICS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARY
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2009 AND 2008
 
We incur shipping and handling costs associated with the shipment of goods to customer and independent distributors.  All shipping and handling amounts billed to customers are included in net sales.   All shipping and handling costs associated with the shipment of goods to customers are netted against the amounts billed and are reflected in net sales.  All other shipping and handling costs are included in selling, general and administrative expenses.
 
(l)(k)  Research and Development:
 
Research and development costs are charged to expenseexpensed as incurred.
 
(m)(l)  Stock Based Compensation:
 
The Company’s 2008 Stock Incentive Plan and 1999 Stock Option Plan (“Plans”) are accounted for in accordance with the recognition and measurement provisions of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards ("FAS") No. 123 (revised 2004), Share-Based Payment ("FAS 123(R)"). FAS 123(R)ASC 718. ASC 718 requires compensation costs related to share-based payment transactions, including employee stock options, to be recognized in the financial statements. In addition, the Company adheres to the guidance set forth within Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC") Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 107 ("SAB 107"), which provides the Staff's views regarding the interaction between FAS No. 123(R)ASC 718 and certain SEC rules and regulations and provides interpretations with respect to the valuation of share-based payments for public companies.  See Note 12 for further details.
 
(n)(m)  Income Taxes:
 
The Company accounts for income taxes under the provisions of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 109, “AccountingASC 740 "Accounting for
Income Taxes” (FAS 109)Taxes".  Under FAS 109,ASC 740, deferred tax assets and liabilities are determined based on the difference between the financial statement carrying amounts and the tax bases of assets and liabilities using enacted tax rates in effect in the years in which the differences are expected to reverse.

Effective January 1, 2007, we adopted the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) Interpretation No. 48, Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes, an interpretation of FASB Statement No. 109 (“FIN 48”).  FIN 48ASC 740 also prescribes a more-likely-than-not threshold for financial statement recognition and measurement of a tax position taken, or expected to be taken, in a tax return. FIN 48ASC 740 also provides guidance related to, among other things, classification, accounting for interest and penalties associated with tax positions, and disclosure requirements. Any interest and penalties accrued related to unrecognized tax benefits will be recorded in tax expense.  The adoption of FIN 48 had no impact on the Company’s financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2007.
F - 10

 CHEMBIO DIAGNOSTICS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2008 AND 2007

(o)(n)  Earnings Per Share
 
The following weighted average shares were used for the computation of basic and diluted earnings per share:
  For the years ended
   December 31, 2008December 31, 2007
Basic                61,266,954               14,608,478
     
Diluted                61,266,954               14,608,478
  December 31, 2009 December 31, 2008
Basic     61,946,435   61,266,594
        
Diluted  75,041,932   61,266,594

Basic loss per share is computed by dividing net loss attributable to common stockholders by the weighted-average number of common shares outstanding for the period. Diluted lossearnings per share for the year ended December 31, 2009 reflects the potential dilution from the exercise or conversion of other securities into common stock, but only if dilutive.stock. Diluted loss per share for the yearsyear ended December 31, 2008 and 2007 is the same as basic loss per share, since the effects of the calculation were anti-dilutive due to the fact that the Company incurred losses for all periods presented.that period. The following securities, presented on a common share equivalent basis, have been excluded from the per share computations:

  For the years ended
  December 31, 2009 December 31, 2008
         
1999 and 2008 Plan Stock Options  4,451,129   2,555,837 
Other Stock Options                           124,625   124,625 
Warrants                                               8,519,743   14,657,050 
   13,095,497   17,337,512 

  For the years ended
   December 31, 2008 December 31, 2007
     
1999 & 2008 Plan Stock Options                  2,555,837                 2,015,352
Other Stock Options                     124,625                    124,625
Warrants                14,657,050               25,972,223
Convertible Preferred Stock                                 -               25,872,315
                 17,337,512               53,984,515
F-9

CHEMBIO DIAGNOSTICS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARY
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2009 AND 2008
 
(p)(o)  Recent Accounting Pronouncements Affecting the Company:
 
Codification

In July 2009, the Financial Accounting Standards Board’s (FASB) Accounting Standards Codification (ASC) became the single official source of authoritative, nongovernmental generally accepted accounting principles (“US-GAAP” or “GAAP”) in the United States. This guidance is contained in ASC Topic 105 “Generally Accepted Accounting Principles.” The historical GAAP hierarchy was eliminated and the ASC became the only level of authoritative GAAP, other than guidance issued by the Securities and Exchange Commission. This guidance is effective for interim and annual periods ending after September 15, 2009. The Company adopted the provisions of this guidance as of September 30, 2009. The Company’s accounting policies were not affected by the conversion to the ASC. However, references to specific accounting standards have been changed to refer to the appropriate section of the ASC.
Fair Value Measurements

In September 2006, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”)FASB issued Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (“FAS”) No. 157, Fair Value Measurements, whichguidance that defines fair value, establishes a framework for measuring fair value in generally accepted accounting principles, and expands disclosures about fair value measurements. This statementguidance is contained in ASC Topic 820 “Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures.” This guidance does not require any new fair value measurements, but provides guidance on how to measureapplies under other accounting pronouncements that require or permit fair value by providing a fair value hierarchy used to classify the source of the information. FAS No. 157 is effective for fiscal years beginning after November 15, 2007, and all interim periods within those fiscal years. In February 2008, the FASB released FASB Staff Position (FSP FAS 157-2 – Effective Date of FASB Statement No. 157) which delays themeasurements. The effective date of FAS No. 157this guidance for all nonfinancialfinancial assets and nonfinancial liabilities except those that are recognized or disclosed at fair value in the financial statements on a recurring basis (at least annually), to fiscal years beginning after November 15,was January 1, 2008, and interim periods within those fiscal years. The implementationthe Company did adopt the provisions of FAS No. 157 forthis guidance at that time as it related to financial assets and liabilities effectiverecognized or disclosed at fair value on a recurring basis. Effective January 1, 2008, did2009, pursuant to this guidance, the Company adopted the provisions of this guidance as it relates to non financial assets and liabilities that are not have anrecognized or disclosed at fair value on a recurring basis. The adoption of this guidance had no impact on the Company’s financial positionstatements.
In April 2009, the FASB issued guidance that extends the disclosure requirements regarding the fair value of financial instruments to interim financial statements of publicly traded companies. This guidance is primarily contained in ASC Topic 825 “Financial Instruments” and results of operations.ASC Topic 270 “Interim Reporting.” This guidance is effective for interim periods ending after June 15, 2009. The Company is currently evaluating the impact of adoption of this statement on its nonfinancial assets and liabilities which is expected to be determined by the first quarter of fiscal 2009.
In February 2007, the FASB issued FAS No. 159, “The Fair Value Option for Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities” (“FAS No. 159”). FAS No. 159 permits entities to choose to measure, on an item-by-item basis, specified financial instruments and certain other items at fair value.  Unrealized gains and losses on items for which the fair value option has been elected are required to be reported in earnings at each reporting date.  FAS No. 159 is effective for fiscal years beginning after November 15, 2007, the provisions of which are required to be applied prospectively.  The Company adopted this statement as of January 1, 2008 and has elected not to apply the fair value option to any of its financial instruments. 
F - 11

 CHEMBIO DIAGNOSTICS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2008 AND 2007
In December 2007, the FASB issued FAS No. 141 (revised 2007), Business Combinations, which replaces FAS No 141. The statement retains the purchase method of accounting for acquisitions, but requires a number of changes, including changes in the way assets and liabilities are recognized in the purchase accounting. It also changes the recognition of assets acquired and liabilities assumed arising from contingencies, requires the capitalization of in-process research and development at fair value, and requires the expensing of acquisition-related costs as incurred. FAS No. 141R is effective for business combinations for which the acquisition date is on or after the beginning of the first annual reporting period beginning on or after December 15, 2008.  The adoption of FAS 141R is not expected to have anguidance had no impact on the Company’s financial statements.
 
Collaborative Arrangements

In December 2007, the FASB issued FAS No. 160, “Noncontrolling Interests in Consolidated Financial Statements – an Amendment of ARB No. 51.”  FAS 160 establishes accounting and reporting standards pertaining to ownership interests in subsidiaries held by parties other than the parent, the amount of net income attributable to the parent and to the noncontrolling interest, changes in a parent’s ownership interest, and the valuation of any retained noncontrolling equity investment when a subsidiary is deconsolidated.  This statement also establishes disclosure requirements that clearly identify and distinguish between the interests of the parent and the interests of the noncontrolling owners.  FAS 160 is effective for fiscal years beginning on or after December 15, 2008.  The adoption of FAS 160 is not currently expected to have a material effect on the Company’s consolidated financial position, results of operations, or cash flows.
In March 2008, the FASB issued FAS No. 161, “Disclosures about Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities – an Amendment of FASB Statement No. 133.” The new standard is intended to improve financial reporting about derivative instruments and hedging activities by requiring enhanced disclosures to enable investors to better understand their effects on an entity’s financial position, financial performance, and cash flows. It is effective for financial statements issued for fiscal years and interim periods beginning after November 15, 2008, with early application encouraged. The Company is currently evaluating the impact of adopting FAS No. 161 on its financial statements.
In December 2007, the Emerging Issues Task Force (“EITF”) reached a consensus with respect to Issue No. 07-1 “Accounting for Collaborative Arrangements”. This EITF appliesguidance to participants in a collaborative arrangement.arrangement which is contained in ASC Topic 808.  A collaborative arrangement is a contractual arrangement that involves a joint operating activity. These arrangements involve two (or more) parties who are both (a) active participants in the activity and (b) exposed to significant risks and rewards dependent on the commercial success of the activity. Many collaborative arrangements involve licenses of intellectual property, and the participants may exchange consideration related to the license at the inception of the arrangement. Participants in a collaborative arrangement shall report costs incurred and revenue generated from transactions with third parties (that is, parties that do not participate in the arrangement) in each entity's respective income statement pursuant to the guidance in EITF No. 99-19.such guidance. An entity should not apply the equity method of accounting under APB 18 to activities of collaborative arrangements. This EITF, which can be applied retrospectively,guidance is effective for financial statements issued for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2008, and interim periods within those fiscal years. The adoption of this guidance in this EITF is not expected to have anhad no material impact on the Company’s financial statements.
 
In June 2007, EITF reached a consensus with respect to Issue No. 07-3 “Accounting for Nonrefundable Advance Payments for Goods or Services Received for Use in Future Research and Development Activities”.  EITF 07-3 confirms that nonrefundable advance payments for goods or services that will be used or rendered for future research and development activities should be deferred and capitalized.  Such amounts should be recognized as an expense as the related goods are delivered or the related services are performed.  If an entity does not expect the goods to be delivered or services to be rendered, the capitalized advance payment should be charged to expense.  This EITF is effective for financial statements issued for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2007.  The guidance in this EITF had no impact on the Company’s financial statements in 2008.
F - 12F-10

CHEMBIO DIAGNOSTICS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIESSUBSIDIARY
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 20082009 AND 20072008
 
(q)  Reclassifications
Business Combinations

On January 1, 2009, we adopted the accounting pronouncements relating to business combinations (primarily contained in ASC Topic 805 “Business Combinations”), including assets acquired and liabilities assumed arising from contingencies. These pronouncements established principles and requirements for how the acquirer of a business recognizes and measures in its financial statements the identifiable assets acquired, the liabilities assumed, and any non-controlling interest in the acquiree as well as provides guidance for recognizing and measuring the goodwill acquired in the business combination and determines what information to disclose to enable users of the financial statements to evaluate the nature and financial effects of the business combination.  In addition, these pronouncements eliminate the distinction between contractual and non-contractual contingencies, including the initial recognition and measurement criteria and require an acquirer to develop a systematic and rational basis for subsequently measuring and accounting for acquired contingencies depending on their nature.  Our adoption of these pronouncements will have an impact on the manner in which we account for any future acquisitions.
 
AsNon-Controlling Interests in Consolidated Financial Statements

On January 1, 2009, we adopted the accounting pronouncement on non-controlling interests in consolidated financial statements, which establishes accounting and reporting standards for the non-controlling interest in a subsidiary and for the deconsolidation of a subsidiary.  This guidance is primarily contained in ASC Topic 810 “Consolidation”.  It clarifies that a non-controlling interest in a subsidiary is an ownership interest in the consolidated entity that should be reported as equity in the consolidated financial statements.  The adoption of this standard has not had a material impact on our consolidated financial statements.
Subsequent Events

In May 2009, the FASB issued guidance that is intended to establish general standards of accounting for and disclosure of events that occur after the balance sheet date but before the financial statements are issued or are available to be issued. This guidance is contained in ASC Topic 855 “Subsequent Events.” It requires the disclosure of the year ended December 31, 2008date through which an entity has evaluated subsequent events and the basis for that date. This guidance is effective for interim and annual periods ending after June 15, 2009. The Company adopted the provisions of this guidance as of June 30, 2009.
In June 2009, an update was made to “Consolidation – Consolidation of Variable Interest Entities.” Among other things, the update replaces the calculation for determining which entities, if any, have a controlling financial interest in a variable interest entity (VIE) from a quantitative based risks and rewards calculation, to a qualitative approach that focuses on identifying which entities have the power to direct the activities that most significantly impact the VIE’s economic performance and the obligation to absorb losses of the VIE or the right to receive benefits from the VIE. The update also requires ongoing assessments as to whether an entity is the primary beneficiary of a VIE (previously, reconsideration was only required upon the occurrence of specific events), modifies the presentation of consolidated VIE assets and liabilities, and requires additional disclosures about a Company’s involvement in VIEs. This update will be effective for the Company reclassifiedbeginning January 1, 2010. The Company is evaluating the impact that this guidance will have on its royalty and license expenses to cost of goods sold, instead of selling, general and administrative expenses.financial statements, if any.

F-11

CHEMBIO DIAGNOSTICS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARY
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2009 AND 2008
NOTE  3 —    3—INVENTORIES:
 
Inventories consist of the following at December 31:
 

 December 31, 2009 December 31, 2008
Raw materials     $1,031,567  $836,446
Work in process  184,081   300,986
Finished goods     340,255   681,605
  $1,555,903  $1,819,037
  2008 2007
Raw materials  $                  836,446  $                705,873
Work in process                     300,986                    234,077
Finished goods                     681,605                    513,900
   $              1,819,037  $             1,453,850

NOTE  4—FIXED ASSETS:
NOTE 4 —    FIXED ASSETS:
Fixed assets consist of the following at December 31:
 
2008
 
2007
 
2009
  
2008
 
Machinery and equipment$  1,195,975 $982,440 $1,222,216  $1,195,975 
Furniture and fixtures195,611 156,313  212,106   195,611 
Computer and telephone equipment329,865 308,591  329,491   329,865 
Leasehold improvements400,589 306,676  400,589   400,589 
Automobiles
29,442
 
-
  29,228   29,442 
2,151,482 1,754,020  2,203,630   2,151,482 
Less accumulated depreciation and amortization
   (1,270,076)
 
(924,688)
  (1,623,417)  (1,270,076)
$  881,406
 
$829,332
 $580,213  $881,406 

Included in the above fixed assets is $70,500 and $121,000,$70,500, net of accumulated depreciation of $40,000$62,600 and $69,000$40,000 of assets held under capital leases as of December 31, 20082009 and 2007,2008, respectively.   Depreciation expense for the 20082009 and 20072008 years aggregated $362,338 and $345,388, respectively.
NOTE  5—ACCOUNTS PAYABLE AND ACCRUED LIABILITIES:
Accounts payable and $283,359, respectively.accrued liabilities at December 31:
  December 31, 2009 December 31, 2008
Accounts payable – suppliers $662,739  $634,083 
Accrued royalties / license fees  612,709   1,400,941 
Accrued payroll  114,234   95,135 
Accrued vacation  99,057   91,895 
Accrued bonuses  238,600   - 
Accrued expenses – other  178,824   160,967 
TOTAL $1,906,163  $2,383,021 
NOTE  6—DEFERRED RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT REVENUE:
In January 2009, the Company received a refundable license fee of $340,000 from Bio-Rad Laboratories, Inc., pursuant to an exclusive license of our DPP® technology for a specific field of use.  The license fee will become fully earned and non-refundable based upon certain future conditions being met and is currently classified as deferred revenue.  In addition, the Company recognizes income from R&D contracts and grants when earned.  Grants are invoiced after expenses are incurred. Any projects or grants funded in advance are deferred until earned. As of December 31, 2009, an aggregate of $360,833 of advanced revenues was unearned.
 
F - 13F-12

CHEMBIO DIAGNOSTICS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIESSUBSIDIARY
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 20082009 AND 20072008
 
NOTE  5 —    ACCOUNTS PAYABLE7—VEHICLE FINANCING AND ACCRUED LIABILITIES:LICENSE FEE PAYABLE:
 
Accounts payableIn June 2009, the Company purchased a vehicle for use by the CEO and accrued liabilitiesobtained financing in the amount of $29,228.  The financing is for a period of 3 years, is secured by the vehicle and is guaranteed by the CEO.  The financing agreement provides for monthly principal and interest payments of $849 and carries an interest rate of 2.9% per annum.  The balance due on this loan as of December 31:31, 2009 was $24,531.
Future minimum payments under this obligation, including interest as of December 31, 2009 were as follows:
Year ending December 31,
2010 $9,600 
2011  9,882 
2012  5,049 
   24,531 
Less: current maturities  (9,600)
  $14,931 

  2008 2007
Accounts payable – suppliers $                  634,083  $                726,174
Accrued commissions                       67,857                      14,251
Accrued royalties / license fees (see Note 8)                  1,400,941                    852,119
Accrued payroll                       95,135                    279,598
Accrued vacation                       91,895                    155,480
Accrued legal and accounting                       18,000                      10,000
Accrued expenses – other                       75,110                    138,169
TOTAL  $              2,383,021  $             2,175,791

NOTE 6 —    LICENSE FEE PAYABLE:
In February 2008, the Company entered into a sublicense agreement (the “Agreement”), with Bio-Rad Laboratories, Inc. and Bio-Rad Pasteur (collectively, “Bio-Rad”).  Bio-Rad is the exclusive licensee of the HIV-2 patent portfolio held by Institute Pasteur of Paris, France.  Pursuant to the terms of the Agreement, Bio-Rad sublicensed to the Company patents related to the manufacture, use or sale of HIV-2 in the Company’s HIV screening assays.assays that detect HIV-2.  In exchange for global non-exclusive rights to thethese patents, the Agreement providesinitially provided that the Company will pay Bio-Rad a $1,000,000 sublicense fee, $500,000 payable during 2008, of which $125,000 has beenwas paid and $375,000 was payable by December 31, 2008, with the additionalremaining $500,000 being payable by December 31, 2009.  On January 29, 2009, the Company and Bio-Rad agreed to amend the Agreement so as to defer the remaining $875,000 of payments due under the HIV-2 sub-license originally granted by Bio-Rad to Chembio in February 2008Agreement to one payment due in December 2010.  The Company will also pay Bio-Rad a royalty on net sales in the United States and Canada, if any, of rapid test immunoassay tests sold under the Company’s brands of Licensed Products as defined in the Agreement. The Agreement will continue until the expiration of the last-to-expire of the sublicensed patents, unless otherwise terminated at an earlier date by the Company or Bio-Rad (see Note 2(h)).Bio-Rad.
 
NOTE  7 —    8—OBLIGATIONS UNDER CAPITAL LEASES:
 
The Company is obligated under capitalized leases for certain manufacturing and computer equipment.
 
Future minimum lease payments under these capitalized lease obligations, including interest as of December 31, 20082009 were as follows:
 
Year ending December 31,
 
2009$28,572 
201028,572  $28,572 
201128,572   28,572 
2012
15,204
   15,204 
100,920   72,348 
Less: imputed interest
(21,332
)  (11,539)
Present value of future minimum lease payments 79,588   60,809 
Less: current maturities
(18,780
)  (21,536)
$ 60,808
  $39,273 
 
These leases have annual interest rates ranging from 13% - 15%.

F - 14F-13

CHEMBIO DIAGNOSTICS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIESSUBSIDIARY
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 20082009 AND 20072008
 
NOTE  8 —    9—RELATED PARTIES:
 
In September of 2006, the Company received an investment of $2,000,000 fromentered into distribution and licensing agreements with Inverness Medical Innovations, Inc. (“Inverness”).  As of December 31, 2009 Inverness markets the Company’s FDA-approved rapid HIV tests under Inverness’ Clearview® brand, Chembio received a nonexclusive license to Inverness’ lateral flow patents.  The distribution agreements with Inverness contain gross margin sharing formulae among Inverness, the Company and, in the caseowned 8.7% of the HIV barrel product, StatSure Diagnostic Systems, Inc.Company.  See Note 14 where Inverness is listed as customer 1.
 
During the quarter ended December 31, 2008, Inverness Medical Innovations, Inc. (“Inverness”) notified the Company that Inverness had entered into a contract with Bio-Rad Laboratories, Inc. (“Bio-Rad”) for royalties on Bio-Rad’s patent for the detection of HIV-2 antibodies.  The agreement also provided for Inverness to pay past royalties.  The agreements betweenOn June 25, 2009, the Company and Inverness provide that the Company is to share in these past royalties and Inverness requested it be reimbursed for the Company’s share of these past royalties.  The Company and Inverness have agreed that this liability, which isentered into a letter agreement whereby certain obligations aggregating approximately $500,000$1,010,000 as of December 31, 2008 (included in accounts payable and accrued expenses – see Note 5), is were agreed to be paid from future revenues over approximatelyrevenues.  The obligations include the next 18 months.Company’s royalties owed under its agreements with Inverness on lateral flow licenses . The approximate aggregate balance due is $242,000 as of December 31, 2009 and is included in accounts payable and accrued expenses – see Note 5.
 
NOTE  9 —    RESEARCH GRANTS AND DEVELOPMENT CONTRACTS:10—INCOME TAXES:
In 2008 and 2007, the Company earned $694,000 and $466,000, respectively from research grants, feasibility and development contracts.   The Company is now involved in additional feasibility and development contracts related to its DPP® technology.

NOTE 10 —     INCOME TAXES:
No provision for Federal or state income taxes was required for the years ended December 31, 20082009 or 2007,2008, due to the Company’s utilization of net operating losses.  loss carryfoward in 2009 and its operating loss in 2008.  State and local minimum taxes are included in selling, general and administrative expenses. 
At December 31, 2008 and 2007,2009, the Company has unused net operating loss carry-forwards of approximately $22,200,000 and $21,000,000$21,500,000 which expire at various dates through 2028.between 2012 and 2029.  Most of this amount ismay be subject to annual limitations under certain provisions of the Internal Revenue Code related to “changes in ownership”.  In addition the Company has a research and development credit carryforward of approximately $505,000 and $460,000$628,000 for the yearsyear ended December 31, 2008 and 2007, respectively2009 which expire at various dates through 2028.between 2012 and 2029.  
 
As of December 31, 20082009 and 2007,2008, the deferred tax assets related to the aforementioned net operating loss carry-forwards have been fully offset by a valuation allowances,allowance, since significant utilization of such amounts is not presently expected in the foreseeable future.
 
Deferred tax assets and valuation allowances consist of:
 
2008 2007  2009  2008 
Current assets      
Inventory $124,000  $169,000 
Less valuation allowance  (124,000)  (169,000)
Net current deferred asset $  $ 
        
Noncurrent assets        
Net operating loss carry-forwards$7,750,000 $7,300,000  $7,490,000  $7,750,000 
Research and development credit505,000 551,000   628,000   505,000 
Other
343,000
 
137,000
   176,000   174,000 
Gross deferred tax assets8,598,000 7,988,000   8,294,000   8,429,000 
Valuation allowances
(8,598,000
)
(7,988,000
)
Less valuation allowances  (8,294,000)  (8,429,000)
Net deferred tax assets
$            —
 
$            —
  $  $ 

We file
The change in the valuation allowances between 2009 and 2008 are mainly due to the utilization of net operating loss carryfowards.
F-14

CHEMBIO DIAGNOSTICS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARY
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2009 AND 2008
A reconciliation of the Federal statutory rate to the total effective rate applicable to income (loss) from continuing operations before income taxes is as follows:
  Year Ending December 31, 
  
2009
  
2008
 
Federal income tax (benefit) at statutory rates  34.0%  (34.0)%
State income taxes, net of federal benefit  %  %
Nondeductible expenses  17.8%  3.3%
Change in valuation allowance  (52.3) %  31.2%
Other  .5%  (.5) %
Income tax (benefit)  -%  -%
The Company adopted the provisions of ASC 740 in January 1, 2007. The cumulative effect of adopting ASC 740 did not have a material impact on the Company’s financial position or results of operations.
Interest and penalties, if any, related to income tax returnsliabilities are included in income tax expense.  As of December 31, 2009, the U.S. federalCompany does not have a liability for unrecognized tax benefits.
The Company files Federal and New York state jurisdictions.income tax returns.  Tax years for fiscal 20052006 through 20072008 are open and potentially subject to examination by the federal and New York state taxing authorities.
 
F - 15

CHEMBIO DIAGNOSTICS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2008 AND 2007
NOTE  11 —11—STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY:
 
(a)  Common Stock
 
During the December 31, 2009 quarter, options to purchase 35,000 shares of the Company’s common stock were exercised at an exercise price of $.13.

During the June 30, 2008 quarter, warrants to purchase 9,323,854 shares of the Company’s common stock were exercised on a cashless basis, resulting in the issuance of 1,407,367 shares of common stock. These warrants were exercised on a cashless basis in connection with the Company’s preferred stock and warrant amendments that were completed on December 19, 2007 (“Plan”), and the Company received no cash consideration for these issuances of common stock.

On December 19, 2007 the Company issued pursuant to the Plan:

i)99,086, 599,331, and 574,818 shares of common stock for the payment of dividends for the Series A, B and C preferred stock, respectively.  These shares were valued, in the aggregate at $558,000, using the respective conversion price at the time of the conversion of the preferred stock;
ii)10,134,954, 13,938,118, and 17,187,496 shares of common stock for the conversion of the Series A, B and C preferred stock, respectively. These shares were valued, in the aggregate at $16,504,000, using the market price on December 19, 2007;
iii)963,163 shares of common stock for the cashless exercise of 6,381,052 warrants, and
iv)2,723,403 shares of common stock for the cash exercise of warrants where the Company received $1,089,000 less $562,000 paid in fees.

During the year ended December 31, 2007, the Company issued 200,000 shares of its Common Stock upon the execution of an employment agreement, of which 100,000 shares vested immediately, 50,000 shares will vest on March 5, 2008 and 50,000 shares will vest on March 5, 2009.   These shares were valued at the market price on the date of grant and aggregated $119,800 and are being expensed over the vesting periods.

During year ended December 31, 2007 the Company issued 50,000 shares of its Common Stock upon the exercise of options and received cash of $31,000.

During the year ended December 31, 2007 Series A Preferred shareholders, other than in the Plan, converted 8.33092 shares of Series A Preferred Stock into 416,546 shares of Common Stock.

During the year ended December 31, 2007 Series B Preferred shareholders, other than in the Plan, converted 2.25 shares of Series B Preferred Stock into 184,426 shares of Common Stock.

In the year ended December 31, 2007, other than in the Plan, the Company issued 897,896, 835,577 and 435,759 shares of its Common Stock as payment of dividends on its Series C Preferred Stock, Series B Preferred Stock and Series A Preferred Stock, respectively. These shares were valued, in the aggregate at $1,182,000, using a volume weighted average price (VWAP) for the ten trading days immediately preceding the issue date.

(b)  Warrants
On December 19, 2007, in connection with the Plan certain holders of the Non-Employee Warrants did not consent to the Plan transactions.  Pursuant to the anti-dilution terms existing in certain of the Non-Employee Warrants held by these non-consenting holders, the number of warrants that these non-consenting holders are permitted to exercise has been increased by 2,395,466.  In addition, the exercise prices of certain of the Non-Employee Warrants held by non-consenting holders was reduced to $0.40 pursuant to the terms of these warrants, and these non-consenting holders are permitted to exercise their warrants for cash only at $0.40 per share until the expiration of the warrants.  The increased warrants expire as follows: a) 1,303,928 on January 29, 2010; b) 149,350 on June 29, 2011; and c) 942,188 on October 5, 2011.
F - 16

 CHEMBIO DIAGNOSTICS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2008 AND 2007
During the year ended December 31, 2007, the Company issued warrants to purchase 33,381 shares of Common Stock at an exercise price of $0.81 per share to a sales agent as payment for commissions accrued at year end 2006 (value $20,000).  These warrants have a five-year life.

The above warrants were valued using a Black-Scholes option pricing model based on assumptions for expected volatility of 104.8%, expected life of 5 years and expected risk-free interest rate of 4.54%.

(c)  Series A 8% Convertible Preferred Stock:
On December 19, 2007 (the “Closing Date”), amendments to the governing documents for the Company’s Series A, Series B and Series C Convertible Preferred Stock (collectively, the “Preferred Stock”) and for certain warrants and options (collectively, the “Non-Employee Warrants”), not including options or warrants issued to employees or directors in their capacity as such (these actions collectively, the “Plan”), were approved by the Company and the requisite percentages of the holders of the Preferred Stock and of the Non-Employee Warrants. 

On December 19, 2007, accordingSubsequent to the Plan,these amendments, among other matters, all of the Series A preferred stock was converted into common stock.  The common stock issued was valued at the market price on December 19, 2007 of $.40 per share.  This value was adjusted against the carrying value of the Series A Preferred Stock and certain of the differenceNon-Employee Warrants were converted to shares of $1,726,000 was charged to deemed dividends.the Company’s common stock.
(b)  Preferred  Stock

The Series A Preferred Stock was issued in 2004 atCompany has 10,000,000 shares of preferred stock authorized and none outstanding.  These shares can become issuable upon an approved resolution by the board of directors and the filing of a face valueCertificate of $30,000 per shareDesignation with detachable warrants. The recorded amountthe state of the preferred shares was calculated using a fair value allocation between the preferred shares and detachable warrants. Nevada.


(d)(c)  Series B 9% Convertible Preferred Stock:Warrants
 
On December 19, 2007, accordingDuring 2009 certain warrants to the Plan, allpurchase an aggregated 2,489,120 shares of the Series B preferred stock was converted into common stock.  The common stock issued was valuedexpired, at the marketan average exercise price on December 19, 2007 of $.40 per share.  This value was adjusted against the carrying value of the Series B Preferred Stock and the difference of $2,349,000 was charged to deemed dividends.$.764. 

The Series B Preferred Stock was issued inIn January, 20052010 certain warrants to purchase an aggregated 4,960,370 shares of common stock expired, at a face valuean average exercise price of $50,000 per share with detachable warrants. The recorded amount of the preferred shares was calculated using a fair value allocation between the preferred shares and detachable warrants. On March 30, 2006, the Company sold $1 million of additional Series B Preferred Stock to a Series B Preferred shareholder pursuant to provisions of the January 2005 Series B 9% Preferred Stock financing agreements.  Such provisions were exclusive to said shareholder.  Approximately $140,000 of these proceeds was used to pay cash dividends which were accrued as of December 31, 2005.  The recorded amount of the preferred shares was calculated using a fair value allocation between the preferred shares and detachable warrants.$.474

(e)  Series C 7% Convertible Preferred Stock:

On December 19, 2007, according to the Plan, all of the Series C preferred stock was converted into common stock.  The common stock issued was valued at the market price on December 19, 2007 of $.40 per share.  This value was adjusted against the carrying value of the Series C Preferred Stock and the difference of $185,102 was charged to deemed dividends.

On September 29, 2006 and October 5, 2006, the Company sold $8.25 million of Series C Preferred Stock (see Note 1) pursuant to provisions of the September 29, 2006 as amended on October 5, 2006 Series C 7% Preferred Stock financing agreements.  In addition the Company issued 2,578,125 warrants to the investors.     
F - 17F-15

CHEMBIO DIAGNOSTICS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIESSUBSIDIARY
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 20082009 AND 20072008
 
NOTE  12 —    12—EMPLOYEE STOCK OPTION PLAN:
 
The Company hadhas a 1999 Stock Option Plan (“SOP”) originally covering 1,500,000 shares of Common Stock. Under the terms of the SOP, the Compensation Committee of the Company’s board is authorized to grant incentive options to key employees and to grant non-qualified options to key employees and key individuals. The options become exercisable at such times and under such conditions as determined by the Compensation Committee.  The SOP was amended at the Company’s 2005 stockholders’ meeting.  The number of options under the SOP was increased to cover 3,000,000 shares of common stock.  It was also amended to allow independent directors to be eligible for grants under the portion of the SOP concerning non-qualified options.

Effective June 3, 2008, the Company’s stockholders voted to approve the 2008 Stock Incentive Plan (“SIP”).  Under the terms of the SIP, the Compensation Committee of the Company’s board shall have the discretion to select the persons to whom Awards are to be granted. Awards can be incentive stock options, restricted stock and/or restricted stock units. The Awards become vested at such times and under such conditions as determined by the Compensation Committee.
 
As a result of the adoption of FAS 123(R),ASC 718, the Company's results for the years ended December 31, 20082009 and 20072008 include share-based compensation expense totaling $263,000$198,000 and $252,000,$292,000, respectively.  Such amounts have been included in the Consolidated Statements of Operations within cost of goods sold ($19,00025,000 and none,$19,000, respectively), research and development ($56,00075,000 and $100,000,$56,000, respectively) and selling, general and administrative expenses ($188,00098,000 and $152,000,$217,000, respectively).  No income tax benefit has been recognized in the income statement for share-based compensation arrangements due to the history of operating losses.

Stock option compensation expense in the years ended December 31, 20082009 and 20072008 represent the estimated fair value of options outstanding which areis being amortized on a straight-line basis over the requisite vesting period of the entire award.

The weighted average estimated fair value of stock options granted in the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008 was $.13 and 2007 was $.37 and $.46 per share, respectively.  The fair value of options at the date of grant was estimated using the Black-Scholes option pricing model. The expected volatility is based upon historical volatility of our stock and other contributing factors. The expected term is determined using the simplified method as permitted by SAB 107, as the Company has no history of employee exercise of options to-date.to date.

The assumptions made in calculating the fair values of options are as follows:

 For the years ended
 December 31, 20082009 December 31, 20072008
Expected term (in years) 1 to 4  51 to 4
Expected volatility109.33-112.33% 102.84-104.80%123.81%109.33-112.33%
Expected dividend yieldn/a n/a
Risk-free interest rate.54% to 1.95%1.91 to 2.98%4.50-5.06%


The Company granted 967,6503,675,000 new options under the Plansplans during the year ended December 31, 20082009 at prices ranging froman exercise price of $.13 to $0.22 per share (534,000(750,000 were issued under the SOP and 433,6502,925,000 were issued under the SIP). As of February 15, 2008, the board of directors voted to re-price any SOP options in excess of $.48 to $.48, the estimated expense related to this re-price is $20,000.
 

On May 7, 2009, the Compensation Committee of the Company reduced, to $0.13 per share, the exercise price of each outstanding employee option that was issued under the 1999 Equity Incentive Plan (the “1999 Plan”) for which the exercise price was greater than $0.44 per share of the Company’s common stock.  There was no other change made to the terms of the stock options other than the reduction in the exercise price. A total of 1,036,750 options were affected and the fair value difference of the options before and after the reduction was $31,660 and was expensed in the three months ended June 30, 2009. 
F - 18F-16

CHEMBIO DIAGNOSTICS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIESSUBSIDIARY
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 20082009 AND 20072008
 
In addition, on May 7, 2009 in accordance with the terms of the Company’s 2008 Stock Incentive Plan, the Company granted certain employees of the Company, options to purchase an aggregate of 2,925,000 shares of the Company’s common stock.  The exercise price for these options is equal to $0.13 per share.  The options become exercisable in thirds on the first, second and third anniversaries of the date of the grant.  Each option granted will expire and terminate, if not exercised sooner, upon the earlier to occur of (a) 30 days after termination of the employee’s employment with the Company or (b) the fifth anniversary of the date of grant.  The fair value of these options is being amortized over the vesting life of the options.
On May 7, 2009, the Board of Directors of the Company revised the compensation of non-employee directors to increase the number of options to purchase the Company’s common stock issued to directors once every five years from 180,000 to 375,000.  To accommodate the transition, on June 3, 2009 at the annual meeting, non-employee directors that were re-elected were issued their five-year allotment of options and those options previously granted but not exercisable as of June 3, 2009 were cancelled.  The number issued was 750,000 and the number cancelled was 216,000.   The 216,000 options were treated as a re-price for accounting purposes.  The fair value of these options granted is being amortized over the vesting life of the options.
The following table provides stock options activity for the years ended December 31, 20082009 and 2007:2008:

Stock OptionsNumber of SharesWeighted Average Exercise Price per ShareWeighted Average Remaining Contractual TermAggregate Intrinsic Value Number of Shares Weighted Average Exercise Price per ShareWeighted Average Remaining Contractual Term Aggregate Intrinsic Value 
Outstanding at January 1, 2007          1,529,750 $0.65    
Granted             960,000 $0.57    
Exercised              (50,000) $0.62    
Forfeited/expired /cancelled            (238,250) $0.67    
Outstanding at December 31, 2007        2,201,500 $0.64 3.52 years $                           -
       
Impact of re-price (for accounting purposes treated as a cancelation and re-issue):
Outstanding at January 1, 2008  2,201,500  $0.64 3.52 years $- 
Impact of re-price (for accounting purposes treated as a cancellation and re-issue):Impact of re-price (for accounting purposes treated as a cancellation and re-issue): 
effect as if cancelled         (1,846,500) $0.64      (1,846,500) $0.64      
effect as if re-issiued          1,846,500 $0.48      1,846,500  $0.48      
Granted             967,650 $0.18      967,650  $0.18      
Exercised                       -                         -      -   -      
Forfeited/expired            (752,500) $0.58    
Forfeited/expired /cancelled  (752,500) $0.58      
Outstanding at December 31, 2008        2,416,650 $0.36 3.23 years $                           -  2,416,650  $0.36 3.23 years $- 
                     
Exercisable at December 31, 2008        1,956,650 $0.36 3.11 years $                           -
Impact of re-price (for accounting purposes treated as a cancellation and re-issue):Impact of re-price (for accounting purposes treated as a cancellation and re-issue): 
effect as if cancelled  (1,252,750) $0.48      
effect as if re-issiued  1,252,750  $0.13      
Granted  3,459,000  $0.13      
Exercised  (35,000) $0.13      
Forfeited/expired/cancelled  (253,750) $0.17      
Outstanding at December 31, 2009  5,586,900  $0.15 3.59 years $756,990 
             
Exercisable at December 31, 2009  2,061,900  $0.19 2.27 years $234,240 

 
The following table summarizes information about stock options outstanding as ofat December 31, 2008:2009:
 
 
 Stock Options Outstanding 
  Stock Options Exercisable  Stock Options Outstanding Stock Options Exercisable
Range of Exercise PricesRange of Exercise Prices Shares Average Remaining Contract Life (Year)  Weighted Average Exercise Price Aggregate Intrinsic Value Shares Weighted Average Exercise Price Aggregate Intrinsic Value Range of Exercise Prices Shares Average Remaining Contract Life (Year) Weighted Average Exercise Price Aggregate Intrinsic Value Shares Weighted Average Exercise Price Aggregate Intrinsic Value
$0.13 - 0.21  442,650  4.42  0.130 $-  298,650  0.131 $- 0.13 - .13 4,930,400 3.72 $0.130 $739,560  1,405,400 $0.130 $210,810
$0.22 - 0.34  465,000  4.13  0.220  -  465,000  0.220  - 0.14 - .22 415,500 3.13 $0.220  24,930  415,500 $0.220  24,930
$0.35 - 0.45  65,000  1.77  0.427  -  15,000  0.350  - 0.23 - .45 15,000 0.96 $0.350  -  15,000 $0.350  -
$0.46 - 0.88  1,444,000  2.65   0.483  -  1,178,000  0.482  - 0.46 - .88 226,000 1.84 $0.498  -  226,000 $0.498  -
TotalTotal  2,416,650      0.366 $-  1,956,650  0.365 $- Total 5,586,900 3.59 $0.152 $764,490  2,061,900 $0.190 $235,740
 
As of December 31, 2008,2009, there was $74,000$208,000 of net unrecognized compensation cost related to stock options that are not vested, which is expected to be recognized over a weighted average period of approximately 1.251.58 years.  The total fair value of shares vested during the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008, was $60,000 and 2007, was $273,000, and $276,000, respectively.
F-17

CHEMBIO DIAGNOSTICS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARY
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2009 AND 2008
NOTE  13 —     13—GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION:
 
FAS No. 131,ASC 280, “Disclosures about Segments of an Enterprise and Related Information” establishes standards for the way that business enterprises report information about operating segments in financial statements and requires that those enterprises report selected information. It also establishes standards for related disclosures about product and services, geographic areas, and major customers.
F - 19

 CHEMBIO DIAGNOSTICS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2008 AND 2007
 
The Company produces only one group of similar products known collectively as “rapid medical tests”. As per the provisions of FAS 131,ASC 280, management believes that it operates in a single business segment. Net sales by geographic area are as follows:
 
  For the years ended  For the years ended
 December 31, 2008  December 31, 2007  December 31, 2009 December 31, 2008
Africa $4,740,858  $3,784,791  $3,351,115  $4,740,858
Asia  227,049   158,577   165,293   227,049
Europe  160,824   153,808   111,755   160,824
Middle East  308,053   239,838   185,700   308,053
North America  2,415,344   4,226,442   6,129,789   2,415,344
South America  2,503,640   201,421   2,428,841   2,503,640
 $10,355,768  $8,764,877  $12,372,493  $10,355,768

Sales to Africa in 20082009 were primarily to Ethiopia of approximately $1,700.000 and Nigeria of approximately $608,000.  Sales in 2009 to North America were primarily from Nigeriasales in the U.S of approximately $2.86 million.  We have been advised recently$5,200,000 and sales in 2009 to South America were primarily from sales in Brazil of approximately $2,300,000.
During the first quarter of 2008, the Nigerian Ministry of Health published a report indicating that our designation in Nigeria as one of the screening tests has changedin a parallel testing algorithm (wherein each patient is tested with two rapid tests from different manufacturers) to that of thea confirmatory and/or tie-breaker test in a serial algorithm in which only positive results are confirmed with a confirmatory test, as this country moves fromand only discrepant results between those are tested with a parallel to a serial testing algorithm, which we expect will significantly reduceconfirmatory test.  Consequently, our sales to Nigeria decreased significantly in 2009 In addition salesas compared to North America and South America in 2008 were primarily from sales into the U.S. and Brazil, respectively.2008.
 

NOTE  14 —     14—COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES:
 
Employment Contracts:
 
The Company has contracts with two key employees.  The contracts call for salaries presently aggregating $500,000$510,000 per year.  One contract expires in May of 20092012 and one contract expires in March of 2010.2013.  The following table is a schedule of future minimum salary commitments:

2009   $ 319,166
2010
39,167
 $508,300 
2011  518,300 
2012  373,750 
2013  44,200 
$ 358,333
 $1,444,550 

Pension Plan:

The Company has a 401(k) plan established for its employees.  The Company elected to match 20% of the first 5% (or 1% of salary) that an employee contributes to their 401(k) plan.  Expenses related to this matching contribution aggregated $23,850$1,534 and $20,500$23,850 for the years ended December 31, 20082009 and 2007,2008, respectively.

As of January 19, 2009, the Company suspended the matching contribution.

F-18

CHEMBIO DIAGNOSTICS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARY
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2009 AND 2008
Agreement with Adaltis
In October 2009, the Company entered into a letter agreement (“Agreement”) with the Trustee of Adaltis, Inc, a Canadian company that filed for bankruptcy in Canada in August 2009.  Pursuant to a License and Supply Agreement (“L&S Agreement”) dated August 30, 2002 by and between Chembio Diagnostic Systems Inc. and Adaltis Inc., Adaltis licensed and supplied certain HIV 1&2 peptides that the Company used in certain HIV tests manufactured and sold by the Company.  Under the terms of the Agreement, the Company purchased for a lump-sum amount a paid-up license to the patents through their expiration dates, thereby cancelling its obligation to pay any additional liabilities under the L&S Agreement.  The Company also acquired the right to purchase the peptides from any supplier chosen by Chembio, including but not limited to the current supplier that previously supplied the Company through Adaltis pursuant to the L&S Agreement with Adaltis. The Agreement further provides for a full mutual release of all claims, including any and all obligations under the L&S Agreement.
Obligations Under Operating Leases:
 
The Company leases approximately 23,400 square feet of industrial space used for office, R&D and manufacturing facilities, currently with a monthly rent of $11,987.$14,683.  The current lease expires on April 30, 2009.  The following is2014.  We entered into a schedule of future minimum rental commitments:
Year ending December 31,2009$ 47,948
F - 20

CHEMBIO DIAGNOSTICS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2008 AND 2007
As ofsecond lease effective February 1, 2010, the filing dateprincipal terms of this Annual Report,lease are the Company issame as the one entered into in discussion for a lease extension for its administrative offices2009 and research facilities.  The principle terms being discussed are as follows: (a) a lease term of five years;ending April 30, 2014; (b) an initial rent of $11,350 per month;month plus $3,333 for the second lease (March and April of 2010 are free and the month of April in 2011, 2012 and 2013 is also free) ; (c) the monthly rent for year two of the lease (does not apply to second lease) will increase by the lower of (i) the change in the consumer price index, or (ii) five percent; and (d) the monthly rent for years three through five of the lease (years two through four of the second lease) will increase each year by the lower of (i) the change in the consumer price index, or (ii) two and one half percent.  Although the Company believes that the extension will be entered into on terms that are substantially similar to the terms being discussed, thereThe following is no assurance that this will occur.  After this lease is executed the following would be thea schedule of future minimum rental commitments (assuming 5% increase the first year and 2.5% thereafter)no increases):

Year ending December 31,
 
2009 $138,748 
2010 140,740  $166,197 
2011 145,394   172,863 
2012 149,029   172,863 
2013 152,754   172,863 
2014  51,473   55,399 
 $778,138  $740,185 

Rent expense aggregatedwas $145,300 and $130,300 and $123,500 for the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008, and 2007, respectively.


F-19

CHEMBIO DIAGNOSTICS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARY
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2009 AND 2008

Economic Dependency:
 
The following table delineates sales the Company had to customers in excess of 10% of total sales for the periods indicated:

  For the years ended Accounts Receivable
  December 31, 2009 December 31, 2008 As of
  Sales % of Sales Sales % of Sales December 31, 2009
Customer 1 $5,240,996 42 $2,111,151 26 $609,605
Customer 2  1,292,640 10  * *  -
Customer 3  2,293,770 19  2,434,420 30  -
Customer 4  * *  3,732,615 46  *
  For the years ended Accounts Receivable 
  December 31, 2008 December 31, 2007 As of 
  Sales % of Sales Sales % of Sales Dec 31, 2008 Dec 31, 2007 
Customer 1 $2,434,420  24  *  * $265,276  * 
Customer 2 $3,502,737  34 $2,248,992  26  -  - 
Customer 3 $2,183,510  21 $2,456,071  28 $283,722 $222,396 
Customer 4  *  * $1,398,125  16  *  - 

In the table above the asterisk (*) indicates that sales to the customer did not exceed 10% for the period indicated.
 
The following table delineates purchases the Company had towith vendors in excess of 10% of total purchases for the periods indicated:
  For the years ended Accounts Payable 
  December 31, 2008 December 31, 2007 As of 
  Purchases % of Purc. Purchases % of Purc. Dec. 31, 2008 Dec. 31, 2007 
Vendor 1 $627,637  21 $356,136  15 $17,460 $19,469 
Vendor 2 $303,750  10  *  * $87,840  * 

  For the years ended Accounts Payable
  December 31, 2009 December 31, 2008 As of
  Purchases % of Purc. Purchases % of Purc. December 31, 2009
Vendor 1 $575,362 20 $627,637 21 $-
Vendor 2  * *  303,750 10  *

In the table above the asterisk (*) indicates that purchases from the vendor’s did not exceed 10% for the period indicated.
 
The Company currently buys materials which are purchased under intellectual property rights agreements and are important components in its products.  Management believes that other suppliers could provide similar materials on comparable terms.  A change in suppliers, however, could cause a delay in manufacturing and a possible loss of sales, which would affect operating results adversely.
F - 21

CHEMBIO DIAGNOSTICS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2008 AND 2007
Governmental Regulation:

All of the Company’s existing and proposed diagnostic products are regulated by the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA), United States Department of Agriculture, certain state and local agencies, and/or comparable regulatory bodies in other countries.  Most aspects of development, production, and marketing, including product testing, authorizations to market, labeling, promotion, manufacturing, and record keeping are subject to review.  After marketing approval has been granted, Chembio must continue to comply with governmental regulations.  Failure to comply with these regulations can result in significant penalties.
 
Voluntary Component Recall:

In April 2008, we initiated a voluntary recall of two lots of Control kits used with our HIV 1-2 Stat Pak® Assay distributed by Inverness under its Clearview® brand. Control kits are to be used in order to verify the operator’s ability to properly perform the test and to interpret the results. These kits are supplied directly to Inverness by our vendor in accordance with our specifications and instructions.  In the case of these two lots of Control kits, although they met our specifications, they were at the lower limit of such specifications, and this produced some issues with the interpretation of the Control kit results by certain customers. Chembio has provided the kit supplier with a more clearly defined specification and has reviewed copies of revised manufacturing and testing procedures to ensure implementation of the new specification. Based upon this new specification, packaged HIV Rapid Test Control Packs containing the new HIV Controls have been in distribution since May 2008. The FDA has classified this voluntary recall as a Class II recall, “a situation in which the use of, or exposure to, a violative product may cause temporary or medically reversible adverse health consequences or where the probability of serious adverse health consequences are remote”.  Approximately $22,000 in costs were incurred in 2008. We have completed all of our recall activity in 2008, including monitoring and final product disposition and in 2008 the FDA has issued a letter to the Company confirming that this investigation is officially closed.
Nigeria:
F-20

CHEMBIO DIAGNOSTICS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARY
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2009 AND 2008
 
During the first quarter of 2008, the Nigerian Ministry of Health published a report indicating that our designation in Nigeria as one of the screening tests would be changed to that of a confirmatory and/or tie-breaker test (Many countries use a serial algorithm with tests from different manufacturers.  A serial algorithm uses a screening test from one manufacturer, a second confirmatory test, from another manufacturer, if there is a positive result from the screening test, meaning that the number of confirmatory tests used is equal to the positivity rate in the testing venue. A tie-breaker test, from a third manufacturer, resolves discrepancies between the screen and the confirmatory test) which change has become effective in the first quarter of 2009.  Consequently we expect our sales to Nigeria to decrease significantly in 2009 as compared to 2008.
 
Equipment Purchase Commitment:
 
In January of 2009, the Company entered into an agreement with an equipment manufacturer to design and build equipment that will be used to automate the assembling of our tests and lower our production costs.  The estimated cost of $323,500 is being paid in installments overinstallments. In addition in June and November of 2009, the Company entered into an agreement with a five month period.
F - 22

CHEMBIO DIAGNOSTICS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBERtooling manufacturer to design and build a tool for cassettes that house, its DPP® tests.  The estimated cost of $113,800 is being paid in installments. As of December 31, 2008 AND 20072009, an aggregate of $338,375 has been paid for these two items and is included in deposits and other assets on the Company’s balance sheet.
 
R&D contracts & grants:
In 2009 and 2008, the Company earned $1,340,000 and $694,000, respectively from research grants, feasibility and development contracts.   The Company is now involved in additional feasibility and development contracts related to its DPP® Agreements:technology.  The total expended on R&D in 2009 and 2008, not including regulatory, was approximately $2,400,000 and $2,100,000, respectively.
 
a.  NIH Grant:
In June 2009, the Company received a $3 million, three-year grant from the United States National Institutes of Health to complete development of a test for Leptospirosis.  Grants are invoiced after expenses are incurred.  In addition the Company has several development contracts with third parties related to its DPP® technology.  These development projects are funded in advance and are presented as deferred revenue until earned.
b.  Brazil:
 
On January 29, 2008 we signed three new technology transfer, supply and license agreements with the Bio-Manguinhos unit of the Oswaldo Cruz Foundation of Brazil (“FIOCRUZ”) for products we have developed or are have nearly completed development of.
 
On October 2, 2008 the Company announcedsigned a fourth  technology transfer supply and license agreement with FIOCRUZ for it’s DPP® HIV 1/2 rapid test (for use with oral fluid or whole blood samples).    Based upon the four agreements we signed with FIOCRUZ in 2008, together with revenues that are anticipated under the original agreement we signed with FIOCRUZ in 2004 for our STAT PAK® rapid test, and subject to required regulatory approval and Ministry of Health funding of the screening programs these tests are designated for.  
 
b.c.  Bio-Rad:
 
On April 16, 2008 we announced a new development agreement with Bio-Rad Laboratories, N.A. (“Bio-Rad”).  The agreement with Bio-Rad is for the development of a new multiplex product that would be developed on DPP® and which would be marketed exclusively by Bio-Rad under an exclusive limited DPP® license from Chembio to Bio-Rad limited to the field of application of this product.  Our agreement with Bio-Rad contemplatescontemplated that we willwere to enter into a license agreement no later than December 2008 subject to the satisfaction of certain development and other conditions.  On January 19, 2009 Chembio granted, effective December 31, 2008, a limited exclusive license within a defined field of application for Chembio’s Dual Path Platform technology to Bio-Rad Laboratories, Inc. (“Bio-Rad”).  The license was granted following development milestones as set forth in the agreement mentioned above. As part of this agreement, in 2009, subsequent to the balance sheet date, Chembio received $340,000 from Bio-Rad as a license fee.
F-21

CHEMBIO DIAGNOSTICS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARY
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2009 AND 2008
d.  
Battelle/CDC DPP® Influenza Immunity Test:
In December 2009, Chembio entered into a milestone-based development agreement for up to approximately $900,000 in connection with the development and initial supply of a multiplex, rapid point-of-care ("POC") influenza immunity test. The agreement contemplates a period of approximately nine months in which the development activity is to be completed. Chembio entered this agreement with Battelle Memorial Institute which has a master contract with the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention ("CDC") to enter into, implement and provide technical oversight of agreements relating to pandemic preparedness on behalf of CDC.

NOTE  15—SUBSEQUENT EVENTS:

In January 2010, after the balance sheet date, certain warrants to purchase an aggregated 4,960,370 shares of common stock expired, at an average exercise price of $.474.  These warrants were related to the initial 2005 Series B Preferred stock Offering (see Form 8-K filed on January 31, 2005 with the SEC for further details on this offering).

Subsequent to the balance sheet date the Company entered into a lease effective February 2010 for additional warehouse space, see Item 2 of our 2009 10-K for more information.

In February 2010, after the balance sheet date, the Company took possession of the automated assembly equipment (mentioned in MD&A under Equipment Purchase Commitment and Note 15).  This equipment is expected to provide for faster throughput and thereby increasing capacity of our manufacturing facility, in addition to reducing labor costs.  The machine will need to go through a validation process and is expected to be in serviced during the second quarter of 2010.

Subsequent to the balance sheet date the Company entered into an employment agreement dated March 4, 2010, and to be effective March 5, 2010 (the "Employment Agreement"), with Mr. Esfandiari to continue as the Company's Senior Vice President of Research and Development for an additional term of three years.  Please see Item 11 of this Form 10-K for further details.
 
 
F - 23 

F-22