~~PART III~~SPECIAL NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

~~ITEM 10. DIRECTORS, EXECUTIVE OFFICERS, AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE~~

This report on Form 10-K contains forward-looking statements made pursuant to the safe harbor provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 under Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. Forward-looking statements include statements with respect to our beliefs, plans, objectives, goals, expectations, anticipations, assumptions, estimates, intentions and future performance, and involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors, which may be beyond our control, and which may cause our actual results, performance or achievements to be materially different from future results, performance or achievements expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements. All statements other than statements of historical fact are statements that could be forward-looking statements. You can identify these forward-looking statements through our use of words such as “may,” “can,” “anticipate,” “assume,” “should,” “indicate,” “would,” “believe,” “contemplate,” “expect,” “seek,” “estimate,” “continue,” “plan,” “point to,” “project,” “predict,” “could,” “intend,” “target,” “potential” and other similar words and expressions of the future. The matters discussed in these forward-looking statements are subject to risks, uncertainties and other factors that could cause our actual results to differ materially from those projected, anticipated or implied in the forward-looking statements. As a result, you should not place undue reliance on any forward-looking statements. The most significant of these risks, uncertainties and other factors are described in “Item 1A — Risk Factors” of this Annual Report on Form 10-K. Except to the limited extent required by applicable law, we undertake no obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise.

PARTI

Item1. Business.

Overview

Protagenic Therapeutic, Inc. (together with its subsidiary, “Protagenic,” the “Company,” “we,” “our” or “us”) is a Delaware corporation specializing in the discovery and development of therapeutics to treat central nervous system (CNS) disorders. Our mission is to provide safe and effective treatments for mood, anxiety, depression and neurodegenerative disorders by using novel peptide-base, brain active therapeutics. Our strategy is to develop, test and obtain regulatory approval for various applications of these brain active therapeutics.

Our current business model is designed around the further development of these applications, and to obtain the required regulatory approvals to allow for the commercialization of our neuropeptide-based applications and products (see “Governmental Regulation” below). If approval is obtained, we expect to begin our sales efforts and anticipate generating revenue through both licensing and direct sales of our products. We believe that we can establish and subsequently strengthen our market position in the following ~~table sets forth~~ways: (i) working to obtain FDA approval of current and future neuropeptide applications; (ii) investigating foreign markets for the ~~name, age and position of each~~use of our current ~~directors as of April 30, 2011.~~

Name Age Director Since Position

Jerome Chazen 83 2005 Chairman of the Board
Raymond Musci 49 2007 Executive Vice President, Corporate Development, Director
Lawrence Burstein 68 2008 Director
Mark Dyne 48 2008 Director
Stuart Goldfarb 56 2010 Director

and future products; (iii) securing relationships with strong partners in our field; (iv) entering into license agreements, strategic partnerships and joint ventures for our various applications; and, (v) continuing our current research into improving our processes, reducing costs and developing new and innovative applications.

We intend to advance our lead drug candidate, PT00114 through Investigational New Drug (IND)-enabling studies, and enter PT00114 into clinical proof-of-concept studies in Treatment-Resistant Depression (TRD) and/or Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) (anticipated clinical start: 2017-2018).

~~Board of Directors~~Corporate History

~~Jerome A. Chazen.~~ ~~Mr. Chazen is~~

We are currently a Delaware corporation with one subsidiary named Protagenic Therapeutics Canada (2006) Inc., a corporation formed in 2006 under the Chairman of our Board of Directors, and has served as one of our directors since April 2005. Mr. Chazen is also Chairman of Chazen Capital Partners, a private investment company. Prior to Chazen Capital Partners, Mr. Chazen was onelaws of the ~~four founders~~Province of ~~Liz Claiborne~~Ontario, Canada.

Table of Contents

We were most recently known as Atrinsic, Inc., ~~where he is also Chairman Emeritus. Mr. Chazen is also~~a company that was once a reporting company under the ~~founder~~Securities Act, but that, in 2012 and ~~Benefactor~~2013, reorganized under Chapter 11 of the ~~Jerome A. Chazen Institute~~United States Bankruptcy Code and emerged from bankruptcy. On February 12, 2016, we acquired Protagenic Therapeutics, Inc. through a reverse merger (see “Corporate History – The Reverse Business Combination (Merger) Transaction”). On June 17, 2016, Protagenic Therapeutics, Inc. (the then wholly-owned subsidiary of ~~International Business,~~Atrinsic, Inc.) was merged with and into Atrinsic, Inc. Atrinsic, Inc. was the ~~focal point of all international programs at Columbia Business School. Mr. Chazen received his Bachelor Degree~~surviving corporation in this merger and changed its name from ~~the University of Wisconsin and his MBA from Columbia Business School. Mr. Chazen has been a director of Taubman Centers,~~Atrinsic, Inc.~~, since 1992. Mr. Chazen was chosen~~ to ~~be a director of the company because of his extensive knowledge and experience in executive management, finance, corporate governance matters, private investing and product marketing.~~

~~Raymond Musci.~~ ~~Mr. Musci serves as our Executive Vice President,~~ Protagenic Therapeutics, Inc. (see “Corporate ~~Development. Mr. Musci has also served~~History – The Subsidiary Merger”).

We were originally incorporated as a ~~director since May 2007. From August 2006 through February~~Delaware corporation under the name Millbrook Acquisition Corp. in 1994. In 2007, Millbrook Acquisition Corp. changed its name to New Motion, Inc. In 2008, ~~Mr. Musci served as President~~New Motion, Inc. merged with Traffix, Inc., pursuant to which Traffix, Inc. became wholly-owned subsidiary of New Motion, ~~Mobile,~~Inc. In 2009, New Motion, Inc. changed its name to Atrinsic, Inc. On June 15, 2012, we filed Chapter 11 in the United States Bankruptcy Court in Southern District of New York (Case No. 12-12553). As of that date, we terminated all remaining employees and ceased normal business operations.

Prior to March 30, 2012, the Company was a reporting company under the Exchange Act, and filed periodic reports with the SEC. On March 30, 2012, we filed a Form 15 with the SEC, terminating our obligation to file periodic reports under Sections 13 and 15(d) of the Exchange Act. Prior to the filing of our Plan of Reorganization under Chapter 11 of the United States Bankruptcy Code on June 15, 2012 (the “Plan of Reorganization”), we were a marketer of direct-to-consumer subscription products and an Internet search marketing agency. We sold entertainment and lifestyle subscription products directly to consumers, which we marketed through the Internet. We also sold Internet marketing services to our corporate and advertising clients.

We emerged from Chapter 11 on June 26, 2013, at which time the Plan of Reorganization was conditionally confirmed by the United States Bankruptcy Court, Southern District of New York. The confirmation was subject to the consummation of the Company’s acquisition of a 51% controlling interest in MomSpot LLC (“MomSpot”), which was subsequently completed on July 12, 2013 (“Emergence Date”). MomSpot’s goal is to be the premier specialty retail affiliate marketing company targeting women between the ages of 24 and 45 who are either mothers or expecting their first child. The Emergence Date was the date the Company adopted fresh start accounting in accordance with Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) Topic 852. The adoption of fresh-start accounting resulted in the Company becoming a new entity for financial reporting purposes. At that time, our principal activities were conducted through MomSpot.

On February 12, 2016, we acquired Protagenic Therapeutics, Inc. through a reverse merger, pursuant to which all the issued and outstanding shares of Protagenic common stock converted on a 1-for-1 basis into shares of the Company’s Series B Preferred Stock, par value $0.000001 per share. Concurrently with the reverse merger, we conducted the first closing of a private offering of our Series B Preferred Stock. (see “Corporate History – 2016 Private Placement”)

Since the fourth quarter of the 2015 fiscal year, MomSpot’s development plans have been suspended pending receipt of incremental funding. On February 12, 2016, the Company sold its 51% interest of MomSpot to the remaining 49% interest holder through a split off agreement. Additionally, on February 12, 2016, the Company sold its equity interests in 29 wholly-owned subsidiaries (see “Corporate History – Split-Off Agreements”).

The Reverse Business Combination (Merger) Transaction

On February 12, 2016, which we refer to as the Merger Closing Date, we (as Atrinsic, Inc.), Protagenic Therapeutics, Inc. and Protagenic Acquisition Corp., Atrinsic, Inc.’s wholly-owned subsidiary, entered into a merger agreement and completed the merger contemplated by the merger agreement. Pursuant to the merger agreement, on the Merger Closing Date, Protagenic Acquisition Corp. merged with and into Protagenic Therapeutics, Inc., ~~our~~with Protagenic Therapeutics, Inc. remaining as the surviving entity and wholly-owned subsidiary of Atrinsic, Inc. (the “Merger”)

Simultaneously with the Merger, on the Merger Closing Date all of the issued and ~~prior~~outstanding shares of Protagenic common stock converted, on a 1-for-1 basis into shares of the Company’s Series B Preferred Stock, par value $0.000001 per share (“Series B Preferred Stock”) (assuming no exercise of dissenters’ rights by any Protagenic stockholder). Also on the Merger Closing Date, all of the issued and outstanding options to ~~joining~~purchase shares of Protagenic common stock, and all of the issued and outstanding warrants to purchase shares of Protagenic common stock, converted, on a 1-for-1 basis, into options (the “New Options”) and new warrants (the “New Warrants”) respectively, to purchase shares of our ~~organization~~Series B Preferred Stock. The New Options will be administered under Protagenic’s 2006 Employee, Director and Consultant Stock Plan (the “2006 Plan”), which the Company assumed and adopted on the Merger Closing Date in connection with the Merger.

Table of Contents

On the Closing Date, (i) the former Protagenic common stock was exchanged for the right to receive 6,612,838 shares of Series B Preferred Stock; (ii) New Options to purchase 1,807,744 shares of Series B Preferred Stock granted under the 2006 Plan, having an average exercise price of approximately $0.87 per share, were issued to optionees pursuant to the assumption of the 2006 Plan; (iii) the holders of options to purchase the common stock of Atrinsic before the Merger (“Predecessor”) were issued options (“Predecessor Options”) to purchase 17,784 shares of Series B Preferred Stock at $1.25 per share; (iv) New Warrants to purchase 3,403,367 shares of Series B Preferred Stock at an average exercise price of approximately $1.05 per share were issued to holders of Protagenic warrants; and (v) 2,775,000 shares of Series B Preferred Stock were issued to investors at a purchase price of $1.25 per share in the Private Offering, as defined below. In addition, warrants (“Predecessor Warrants”) to purchase 295,945 shares of Series B Preferred Stock at $1.25 per share were issued to Strategic Bio Partners, LLC, the designee (the “Designee”) of the holders of Predecessor’s debt, in consideration of the cancellation of debt of $665,000 in principal and $35,000 in interest, and Placement Agent Warrants, as such term is defined below, to purchase 127,346 shares of Series B Preferred Stock were issued to the Placement Agent of the Private Offering. The common stockholders of Predecessor before the Merger retained 25,867 shares of our common stock, par value $0.000001 per share. In addition, upon the effectiveness of the Merger, the holders of the Predecessor’s Series A Preferred Stock exchanged all of the issued and outstanding Series A Preferred Stock for an ~~employee, Mr. Musci~~aggregate of 297,468 shares of Series B Preferred Stock. These shares were issued to the Designee.

The Merger was ~~a consultant to our operations from January through August of 2006. Mr. Musci brings over 25 years of high tech, media, entertainment and consumer product experience to us, and was selected to serve~~treated as a ~~director~~recapitalization of Protagenic for financial accounting purposes and the historical financial statements of Protagenic Therapeutics, Inc. are our financial statements as a result of the ~~company~~Merger. The parties to the merger agreement have agreed to take all actions necessary to ensure the Merger is treated as a “plan of reorganization” under Section 368(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”).

2016 Private Placement

Concurrently with the closing of the Merger, we conducted the first closing of an offering (the “Private Offering”) of our Series B Preferred Stock. At the first closing, we sold 2,775,000 shares of Series B Preferred Stock at a purchase price of $1.25 per share, for which we received total gross consideration of $3,468,750. Of this ~~reason. From 1999~~amount, $350,000 consisted of conversion of outstanding stockholder debt held by Garo H. Armen, our chairman and a member of our board of directors, and $150,000 of legal expenses incurred by Strategic Bio Partners LLC, stockholders of the Predecessor, in conjunction with and as allowed by the merger agreement. On March 2, 2016, we completed the second closing of the Private Offering, at which we issued an additional 913,200 shares of Series B Preferred Stock to ~~2006, Mr. Musci~~accredited investors, for total gross proceeds of $1,141,500. On April 15, 2016, we completed the final closing of the Private Offering, at which we issued an additional 420,260 shares of Series B Preferred Stock to accredited investors, for total gross proceeds of $525,325.

We paid Katalyst Securities LLC, our placement agent (the “Placement Agent”) and its selected dealers for the Private Offering a commission of 10% of the funds raised in the Private Offering from investors introduced by the Placement Agent and its selected dealers. In addition, the Placement Agent received $15,000 to reimburse it for its expenses in the private Offering, and the placement Agent and its selected dealers were issued warrants (the “Placement Agent Warrants”) to purchase a number of shares of Series B Preferred Stock equal to 10% of the shares of Series B Preferred Stock sold to investors in the Private Offering who were introduced by the Placement Agent and its selected dealers. The Placement Agent Warrants, which contain a “cashless exercise” provision, are exercisable for a period of five years from the initial closing of the Private Offering at a price of $1.25 per share.

Pursuant to a registration statement declared effective by the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) on February 8, 2017, we registered the shares of common stock underlying the Series B Preferred Stock and the Placement Agent Warrants issued in the 2016 Private Placement for public resale by the selling stockholders named therein and their assigns. The Company is required to update and maintain the effectiveness of this registration statement until February 8, 2018.

Table of Contents

Debt Exchange

Simultaneous with the Merger and the Private Offering, holders of $665,000 of Atrinsic’s debt accompanied with $35,000 in accrued interest exchanged such debt for five-year warrants of Predecessor (the “Predecessor Warrants”) to purchase 295,945 shares of Series B Preferred Stock (which became 295,945 shares of common stock as a result of the Reverse Split) at $1.25 per share.

Split-Off Agreements

At the closing of the Merger we had a 51% interest in MomSpot LLC, and the remaining 49% was held by B.E. Global LLC. Barry Eisenberg is the sole owner of B.E. Global LLC and is the Chief Executive Officer of ~~Bam! Entertainment,~~MomSpot LLC. Immediately after the closing of the Merger, we split off our 51% membership interests in MomSpot LLC. The split-off was accomplished through the transfer of all of our membership interests of MomSpot LLC to B.E. Global LLC.

Immediately after the closing of the Merger, we split off all of our equity interest in 29 wholly-owned subsidiaries. The split-off was accomplished through the sale of all equity interests in these wholly-owned subsidiaries to Quintel Holdings, Inc.

Reverse Stock Split

Our stockholders voted at a special meeting held on June 17, 2016 in favor of, and we effectuated, a 1-for-15,463.7183 reverse stock split of our common stock, or the Reverse Split. As a result of the Reverse Split, 400,000,000 shares of common stock were split into 25,867 shares of common stock. Additionally, as a result of the Reverse Split and in accordance with our certificate of designations for our Series B Preferred Stock, our Series B Preferred Stock immediately and automatically converted into our common stock on a 1-for-1 basis other than any Series B Preferred Stock (i) to the extent (but only to the extent) a Series B Preferred Stock holder would beneficially own greater than 9.99% of our common stock (the “Springing Blocker”) and (ii) such holder has notified the Company in writing that it wants the Springing Blocker to apply to such holder. On July 27, 2016, 10,146,000 of the Company’s 11,018,766 outstanding shares of Series B Preferred Stock were eligible to immediately convert into 10,146,000 shares of the Company’s common stock (accounting for the Reverse Split ratio) with 872,766 shares of Series B Preferred Stock remaining as a result of one holder exercising the Springing Blocker. As of December 31, 2016, 10,146,000 shares of the Series B Preferred Stock were converted into 10,146,000 shares of common stock on the records of the Company.

Any Series B Preferred Stock not converted as a result of this provision would automatically convert into common stock as soon as such conversion would not violate the Springing Blocker. Our Series B Preferred Stock will cease to be designated as a separate series of our preferred stock when all of such shares have converted into shares of our common stock.

The Subsidiary Merger

On June 17, 2016, we merged our wholly-owned subsidiary, Protagenic Therapeutics, Inc., with and into the Company and we changed our name from Atrinsic, Inc. to Protagenic Therapeutics, Inc. We are the parent company of Protagenic Therapeutics Canada (2006), Inc., a corporation incorporated in the Province of Ontario.

Mood and Anxiety Disorders

An estimated 340 million people worldwide and 40-60 million people in the United States alone suffer from mental disorders including Major Depressive Disorder, or MDD, including TRD, PTSD, Bipolar Disorder and various Anxiety Disorders. The global sales of anxiolytic and antidepressant drugs in the US were estimated to be $69 billion in 2013 and are projected to grow to nearly $77.1 billion by 2018. Yet, up to one-half of mood disorder patients are unresponsive to current treatments. Efficacy of therapy is challenged by non-compliance during the weeks to months required to achieve therapeutic benefit in combination with daily dosing requirements. Major targets in this space include TRD and PTSD, both indications which are highly resistant to available therapies.

Table of Contents

Approximately 37% of those suffering from a MDD that do not respond to the current antidepressant medications constitute a separate group of people suffering from TRD. Despite a large patient population and current treatments that leave much room for improvement, the developmental pipelines are sparse and few novel candidates are in development. The serendipitous discoveries of current drug classes, and lack of efficacy have led to shrinkage or extinction of many pharma or small biotech neuroscience research programs. It is in this TRD market that we intend to focus our PT00114 development efforts.

TRD is the type of MDD that does not respond to standard courses of antidepressant medication. Stress plays a significant role in this illness that affects as many as half of people diagnosed with depression. Patients suffering with TRD are at greater risk of hospitalization for their psychiatric illness and are more likely to abuse drugs and alcohol. These patients have a lower long-term quality of life and are at increased risk of attempting suicide. As a last resort, this disease is currently managed by invasive treatment, primarily electroconvulsive therapy (ECT). However, the ECT treatment’s side effects and high cost prevent millions of people from taking advantage of it.

According to an article titled “Global prevalence of anxiety disorders: a systemic review and meta-regression,” written by AJ Baxter et al., (published inPsychological Medicine in 2013),PTSD affects an estimated 7.7 million adults (3.5%) in the US, with a disproportionately high prevalence in war veterans. Therapeutic approaches include cognitive therapy in combination with antidepressants, such as selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs). In addition to the vulnerabilities noted above for antidepressant-related treatments, PTSD patients often present with co-morbidities such as addictions or dependencies, which make therapeutic case management difficult.

Protagenic Research

PT00114 is the first known example of a new class of brain-targeted therapies based on a newly-described and highly conserved family of neuropeptides that regulate stress-induced mood and addictive behaviors. PT00114 is believed to act via a novel mechanism of action and is therefore expected to provide an extremely attractive therapeutic and commercial profile, especially for those patients who are not fully responsive to or compliant with current interventions. Based on preclinical data, we believe that PT00114 is well differentiated from other drug candidates on the basis of having: Dual activity on stress- and addiction-related pathways (as present in TRD and PTSD); Blood-brain barrier permeability; Rapid onset of action and long duration of therapeutic effects; Restoration of normalcy in stress, anxiety and addiction disorders; No adverse effects with little to no accumulation; Good safety and tolerability profiles; Convenient dosing route and schedule; High potency/low dose; and, Ease of chemical synthesis.

We believe that optimal cellular energy metabolism is fundamental to the biology of the brain, and clinical manifestation of aberrant energy metabolism often manifests in debilitating neurological disorders. PT00114’s ability in preclinical models to enhance glucose mobilization and utilization in the brain, maintain energy homeostasis, inhibit stress-related pathways and protect cells from oxidative damage suggests potential therapeutic benefits in a range of indications involving both acute and chronic neurological injury. Potential applications include traumatic brain injury, stroke recovery, and neurodegenerative diseases such as Alzheimer’s disease, Parkinson’s disease and ALS, among others.

Technology

PT00114 is a synthetic form of the natural peptide sequence TCAP-1.

TCAP-1 was discovered in a genome-wide search for proteins related to corticotropin releasing factor (CRF), a key brain peptide hormone in stress response. While TCAP-1 counteracts stress, it does so by a non-CRF receptor pathway and unlike direct CRF antagonists it does not exhibit negative effects in animal models studied to date.

PT00114 inhibits stress and stress (CRF)-induced actions in clinically-relevant gold-standard animal models of anxiety, depression and addiction at concentrations several magnitudes below current front-line therapeutics. These beneficial effects are maintained for as long as three weeks after treatment. PT00114 promotes neuronal process development, spine density, axon fasciculation and branching in neurons.

Table of Contents

PT00114 crosses the blood brain barrier and concentrates in regions of the brain associated with the regulation of mood disorders. Preliminary toxicity assessment (non-GLP) indicates no clear or significant adverse effects, although further toxicity testing is required.

PT00114 is highly soluble and shows excellent stability in several storage conditions. The initial dosage form is intended as a subcutaneous injection but is also amenable to other routes of administration.

Business plan / Proposed next steps

The Company’s business plan calls for the following processes during 2017 and 2018:

Preclinical Efficacy Data

Historically, much of the preclinical efficacy data regarding specific therapeutic benefits of PT00114 had been generated in the lab of our Chief Technology Officer, Dr. David Lovejoy at the University of Toronto. The Company recognizes that to fully validate its business proposal, and persuade potential corporate partners of target-disease efficacy, additional preclinical efficacy data from unaffiliated research organizations would be valuable. Hence, the Company has engaged two contract research organizations (CROs) to conduct preclinical tests of PT00114 for anxiety and depression, as well as alleviation of drug addictive behavior.

Process Development and Manufacturing

In parallel with the Company’s external CRO research studies, the Company is pursuing good manufacturing practices (cGMP) synthesis of PT00114. The Company anticipates that it may obtain enough TCAP in July 2017 to supply its Phase I human clinical trials anticipated to begin in 2018. The Company intendes to secure at least two supplier relationships for sourcing synthesized human PT00114.

Preclinical Safety & Toxicology

A key part of the Company’s preclinical studies for IND readiness is the toxicology testing of PT00114 in two animal species. Because these toxicology tests will be carried out with a drug concentration that is a multiple of the intended concentration in the eventual marketable drug, the Company plans to commence its safety and toxicology testing only after receiving a confirmatory positive result from the latest external CRO efficacy tests. This means toxicology testing could begin as soon as the third quarter of 2017.

Pursue Strategic Partnership

The Company believes it would be to its advantage to secure a collaboration with a pharma/biopharma company ~~he founded~~with a presence in ~~1999~~neurological and psychiatric diseases and/or addiction. Therefore, it plans to use the preclinical efficacy data to be generated during 2017 as a point of instigation with potential pharma/biopharma corporate partners.

Compile and File IND

The most important corporate goal for which the Company is deploying the working capital it raised in 2016 is the compilation and submission of an investigational new drug (IND) application to the FDA. This is a prerequisite to begin Phase I human testing of PT00114 for any indication. The preclinical efficacy data currently being generated at two external CROs, as well as the toxicology test results that ~~published~~the company plans to obtain, and ~~distributed movie, sports~~a specific plan and ~~cartoon video games~~protocol for a Phase I trial, will be among the components of this key regulatory submission anticipated in early 2018.

Table of Contents

Initiate Phase 1 Clinical Studies

One the Company’s IND application has been filed, the next major milestone is anticipated to be an approval by the Company’s FDA review team that the Phase I trial protocol proposed in the IND application is acceptable to begin. The Company believes that this may be achieved in the second half of 2018.

Technology License Agreement

On July 31, 2005, the Company had entered into a Technology License Agreement (“License Agreement”) with the University of Toronto (the “University” or “UT”) pursuant to which the University agreed to license to the Company patent rights and other intellectual property, among other things (the “Technologies”). The Technology License Agreement was amended on February 18, 2015 and currently does not provide for an expiration date.

Pursuant to the License Agreement and its amendment, the Company obtained an exclusive worldwide license to make, have made, use, sell and import products based upon the Technologies, or to sublicense the Technologies in accordance with the terms of the License Agreement and amendment. In consideration, the Company agreed to pay to the University a royalty payment of 2.5% of net sales of any product based on the Technologies. If the Company elects to sublicense any rights under the License Agreement and amendment, the Company agrees to pay to the University 10% of any up-front sub-license fees for any sub-licenses that occurred on or after September 9, 2006, and, on behalf of the sub-licensee, 2.5% of net sales by the sub-licensee of all products based on the Technologies. The Company had no sales revenue for the year ended December 31, 2016 and therefore was not subject to paying any royalties.

In the event the Company fails to provide the University with semi-annual reports on the progress or fails to continue to make reasonable commercial efforts towards obtaining regulatory approval for products based on the Technologies, the University may convert our exclusive license into a non-exclusive arrangement. Interest on any amounts owed under the License Agreement and amendment will be at 3% per annum. All intellectual property rights resulting from the Technologies or improvements thereon will remain the property of the other inventors and/or Dr. David Lovejoy (“The Professor”) at the University, and/or the University, as the case may be. The Company has agreed to pay all out-of- pocket filing, prosecution and maintenance expenses in connection with any patents relating to the Technologies. In the case of infringement upon any patents relating to the Technologies, the Company may elect, at its own expense, to bring a cause of action asserting such infringement. In such a case, after deducting any legal expenses the Company may incur, any settlement proceeds will be subject to the 2.5% royalty payment owed to the University under the License Agreement and amendment.

The patent applications were made in the name of the Professor and other inventors, but the Company’s exclusive, worldwide rights to such patent applications are included in the License Agreement and its amendment with the University. The Company maintains exclusive licensing agreements and it currently controls the six intellectual patent properties.

Sales and Marketing

We currently have no sales, marketing or distribution capabilities. In order to commercially market PT00114 and any product candidates we develop in the future, we would either need to develop an internal sales team and marketing department or collaborate with third parties who have sales and marketing capabilities.

Manufacturing

We currently do not own any manufacturing facilities, nor have we entered into any agreements with contract manufacturer for the production of PT00114. Currently we synthesize all the PT00114 we use in our development activities.

Table of Contents

Competition

The pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries are highly competitive and characterized by rapidly evolving technology and intense research and development efforts. We expect to compete with companies, including major international pharmaceutical companies, and other institutions that have substantially greater financial, research and development, marketing and sales capabilities and have substantially greater experience in undertaking preclinical and clinical testing of products, obtaining regulatory approvals and marketing and selling biopharmaceutical products. We will face competition based on, among other things, product efficacy and safety, the timing and scope of regulatory approvals, product ease of use and price.

Major depressive disorder patients that do not respond to the current antidepressant medications constitute a separate group of TRD. Despite a large patient population and current treatments that leave much room for improvement, the developmental pipelines are sparse and few novel candidates are in development. The serendipitous discoveries of current drug classes, side effects and lack of efficacy have led to shrinkage or extinction of many pharma or small biotech neuroscience research programs. According to a ~~wide range~~May 10, 2016 Zion Research report, the current global depression drug market was valued at approximately $14.5 billion in 2014, and is expected to generate $16.8 billion by the end of ~~retailers.~~2020. Slightly smaller but on the rise, according to Global Industry Analysts, Inc., the global market for anti-anxiety medications is expected to be $5.9 billion in 2017. It is in either or both of the TRD and anti-anxiety markets that we intend to launch PT00114.

Set forth below is a discussion of competitive factors for each of the current drug classes commercially available for TRD, and the competitive advantages that we believe PT00114 may offer. The basis for our beliefs regarding the competitive advantages that PT00114 may offer over its competitors is our own pre-clinical animal studies. We acknowledge that these beliefs and conclusions about competitive advantages must be regarded as theoretical until such time as we have human clinical data that supports and re-affirms the results seen in the pre-clinical animal studies.

Opioid receptor modulators

Opioid receptor modulators have the potential to be non-addictive therapeutic drugs for TRD. Competitors include ALKS 5461 (from Alkermes) is a fixed combination of buprenorphine and samidorphan being developed as a therapy for TRD. Buprenorphine is a mu opioid receptor partial agonist as well as an antagonist of the kappa-opioid receptor (KOR), while samidorphan is an antagonist of mu opioid receptors that essentially works to block the buprenorphine from binding to the mu-receptor. The combination of these mechanisms may result in attenuation of the mu agonist effects of buprenorphine, potentially making this a non-addictive therapy. ALKS 5461 is in phase 3 as a once-daily therapy administered as a sublingual tablet. It is well tolerated and treatment effects were evident after one week of dosing. We believe that our competitive advantage is that PT00114 targets different receptor system therefore it is not likely to have a clinical overlap with opioid receptor modulators.

Antipsychotics with antidepressant effects (dopamine receptor modulators)

Brexpiprazole (from Otsuka) is a dopamine (D2 receptor) partial stimulator (agonist) approved as an oral adjunctive TRD therapy. Its side effects include suicidal risk, weight gain and restlessness. Cariprazine (from Gedeon Richter) is an oral dopamine D2 and D3 receptor antagonist approved for schizophrenia and bipolar disorder in development for TRD. The most common side effects reported were extrapyramidal symptoms, the urge to move (akathisia), indigestion (dyspepsia), vomiting, drowsiness (somnolence) and restlessness. We believe that our competitive advantage is that PT00114, due to its low toxicity profile, will be clinically preferable to these antipsychotic drugs.

Ketamine-like TRD drugs

Drugs that act in a mechanism similar to Ketamine, such as Esketamine nasal spray (from Johnson and Johnson) is the S(+) enantiomer of the drug ketamine acts primarily as a non-competitive NMDA receptor antagonist, but is also a dopamine reuptake inhibitor. As of July 2014, it is in phase II clinical trials for treatment-resistant depression (TRD). This class of candidates is generating a lot of excitement but uncertainty due to their use history will be a compounding factor. We believe that our competitive advantage is that the toxicity profile is likely to be less favorable when compared with PT00114.

Table of Contents

NMDA receptor modulators

The N-methyl-D-aspartate (or “NMDA”) receptor is a molecule that appears on the surface of neurons. When “activated” by a drug that binds with it, the NMDA receptor is a potential natural way to counteract TRD. A drug called GLYX 13, an amidated tetrapeptide (with the amino acid sequence Thr-Pro-Pro-Thr-NH2) is a glycine-site functional partial agonist of the NMDA receptor discovered at Northwestern University, now being developed by Naurex/Allergan, in Phase 3 U.S. clinical trials. It will be administered by intravenous injection and has a rapid onset. Phase 2 results have shown that GLYX 13 treatment reduces depression scores in patients with TRD, with no psychotomimetic side effects common to other NMDA receptor modulators. The major peptide candidate in this group GLYX13 shows a better tolerance profile and even IV dosing once weekly is not a deterrent enough in the clinic so PT00114 peptide with possible subcutaneous delivery would be a much more preferable clinical option. The development of the tetrapeptide and entry into the trials demonstrated room and willingness to accept peptide based therapies in TRD. More candidates are expected to come from this therapeutic class that may present a competitive challenge for PT00114.

Another of Naurex’s small molecule candidates, NRX-1074, is an orally active therapy based on GLYX13, in preclinical stages. L-4-Chlorokynurenine, AV-101 (from VistaGen Therapeutics) is a fast acting, orally active small molecule glycine binding site NMDA receptor antagonist. A NIH-funded phase 2 trial in major depressive disorder has been initiated in the US. CERC-301 (Cerecor) is an orally-active, selective NMDA receptor subunit 2B (NR2B) antagonist which is in phase 2 an adjunctive therapy for TRD.

PT00114’s Competitive Advantages/Disadvantages

We believe PT00114 will be able to compete against each of these drugs based on its core advantages:

●

PT00114, once in a patient, had a rapid onset of action (efficacy in animal anxiety and depression models) compared with other TRD drugs which may take longer to take effect.

●

PT00114’s effects are long lasting and potent (single 1-10 nmole/kg dose lasts up to one week for glucose/insulin blood-based biomarkers)

●

PT00114 is rapidly cleared from the patient’s bloodstream (its “half life” is 5-10min if given intravenously (IV), 20-30 minutes if given subcutaneously (SC)

●

PT00114 naturally crosses the blood brain barrier, while certain other TRD drugs do not naturally do that and therefore must be given at higher doses so that any of them make it into the patient’s brain.

●

PT00114 is an L-isomer, a naturally modified peptide (by way of pyroGlu, amidation) therefore liver toxicity is not anticipated – resulting in a potentially superior toxicity profile

●

PT00114 is soluble, it can be easily formulated with clinical excipients, and it is stable when lyophilized, making it easy to package into a drug pill form.

●

PT00114 will be manufactured by standard solid phase chemistry, which is less expensive than manufacturing processes required by other TRD drugs.

●

It counteracts the stress effects associated with corticotropin releasing factor (CRF), a mechanism of action not yet known among today’s commercially-available TRD drugs.

●

It increases glucose import into brain cells, thus it is potentially effective against diabetes associated depression and anxiety disorders

●

It increases energy metabolism likely by mitochondrial activation in brain cells

Table of Contents

The main competitive disadvantage that PT00114 will have relative to other antidepressant drugs is that it will have fewer marketing resources behind it, assuming that the Company consummates a partnership with a large pharmaceutical company during its commercial marketing phase. Beyond this marketing resources disadvantage, the Company acknowledges that PT00114 may have efficacy disadvantages that we are not yet aware of since the drug has not yet been tested in humans. Extrapolating the early results obtained in rodent studies, PT00114 appears to be more effective and with few or no side effects, but this must be treated as an unknown since no human studies have yet been performed, and a new competitive disadvantage could be discovered during the clinical trial phase.

Although we believe PT00114’s advantages will allow it to compete effectively against other antidepressant drugs in the TRD market, many of our competitors and potential competitors have significantly greater financial resources and expertise in research and development, manufacturing, preclinical testing, clinical trials, obtaining regulatory approvals and marketing approved products than we do. Mergers and acquisitions in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries may result in even more resources being concentrated among a smaller number of our competitors. Smaller or early stage companies may also prove to be significant competitors, particularly through collaborative arrangements with large and established companies. These third parties compete with us in recruiting and retaining qualified scientific and management personnel, establishing clinical trial sites and patient registration for clinical trials, as well as in acquiring technologies complementary to our programs or advantageous to our business.

Intellectual Property

We believe that patents, trademarks, copyrights and other proprietary rights are important to our business. We also rely on trade secrets, know-how, continuing technological innovations and licensing opportunities to develop and maintain our competitive position. We seek to protect our intellectual property rights by a variety of means, including obtaining patents, maintaining trade secrets and proprietary know-how, and technological innovation to operate without infringing on the proprietary rights of others and to prevent others from infringing on our proprietary rights. Our policy is to seek to protect our proprietary position by, among other methods, actively seeking patent protection in the United States and foreign countries.

As of December 31, 2016, we have four patents issued by the Governments of the United States, Canada, European Union and Australia and two patent applications pending worldwide including US. The patent applications were made in the name of Dr. David A. Lovejoy and inventors, but the Company’s exclusive, worldwide rights to such patent applications are included in the License Agreement with UT.

Our success will depend in part on our ability to maintain our proprietary position through effective patent claims and their enforcement against our competitors. Although we believe our patent applications provide a competitive advantage, the patent positions of companies like ours are generally uncertain and involve complex legal and factual questions. We do not know whether any of our patent applications will result in the issuance of any patents. Those patents that may be issued in the future or those acquired by us may be challenged, invalidated or circumvented, and the rights granted under any issued patent may not provide us with proprietary protection or competitive advantages against competitors with similar technology. In particular, we do not know if competitors will be able to design variations on our treatment methods to circumvent our current and anticipated patent claims. Furthermore, competitors may independently develop similar technologies or duplicate any technology developed by us. Because of the extensive time required for the development, testing and regulatory review of a potential product, it is possible that, before any of our products can be commercialized or marketed, any related patent claim may expire or remain in force for only a short period following commercialization, thereby reducing the advantage of the patent.

We also rely upon trade secrets, confidentiality agreements, proprietary know-how and continuing technological innovation to remain competitive, especially where we do not believe patent protection is appropriate or obtainable. We continue to seek ways to protect our proprietary technology and trade secrets, including entering into confidentiality or license agreements with our employees and consultants, and controlling access to and distribution of our technologies and other proprietary information. While we use these and other reasonable security measures to protect our trade secrets, our employees or consultants may unintentionally or willfully disclose our proprietary information to competitors.

Table of Contents

Our commercial success will depend in part on our ability to operate without infringing upon the patents and proprietary rights of third parties. It is uncertain whether the issuance of any third party patents would require us to alter our products or technology, obtain licenses or cease certain activities. Our failure to obtain a license to technology that we may require to discover, develop or commercialize our future products may have a material adverse impact on us. One or more third-party patents or patent applications may conflict with patent applications to which we have rights. Any such conflict may substantially reduce the coverage of any rights that may issue from the patent applications to which we have rights. If third parties prepare and file patent applications in the United States that also claim technology to which we have rights, we may have to participate in interference proceedings in the USPTO to determine priority of invention.

We may collaborate in the future with other entities on research, development and commercialization activities. Disputes may arise about inventorship and corresponding rights in know-how and inventions resulting from the joint creation or use of intellectual property by us and our subsidiaries, collaborators, partners, licensors and consultants. As a result, we may not be able to maintain our proprietary position.

As of December 31, 2016, we controlled the following intellectual property:


Title	Country	Status	Issue Date
1. Teneurin C-Terminal Associated Peptides (TCAP) and Methods and uses thereof. Serial # 10/510,959	United States	Patent issued	01/03/2012

2. Teneurin C-Terminal Associated Peptides (TCAP) and Methods and uses thereof. Serial # 2003221575.	Australia	Patent issued	09/23/2011

3. Teneurin C-Terminal Associated Peptides (TCAP) and Methods and uses thereof. Serial # 2,482,810.	Canada	Patent issued	06/10/2014

4. Teneurin C-Terminal Associated Peptides (TCAP) and Methods and uses thereof. Serial # 03717086.7	European Union. Validated in France, Germany and Great Britain.	Patent issued	03/12/2014

5. A Method for Regulating Neurite Growth: Application. Serial # 60/783,821	United States	Pending	Filed: 03/21/2006

6. Method for Modulating Glucose Transport Using Teneurin C-Terminal Associated Peptide (TCAP). Serial # 62/026,346	United States	Pending	N/A

In the future we may file additional patent applications based on proprietary formulations and novel compounds.

Table of Contents

Governmental Regulation

Our technologies are subject to extensive government regulation, principally by FDA and state and local authorities in the United States and by comparable agencies in foreign countries. Governmental authorities in the United States extensively regulate the preclinical and clinical testing, safety, efficacy, research, development, manufacturing, labeling, storage, record-keeping, advertising, promotion, export, marketing and distribution, among other things, of pharmaceutical products under various federal laws including the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, or FFDCA, and under comparable laws by the states and in most foreign countries.

The Company has not commenced its FDA approval application process, and does not plan to launch the FDA application process until 2022 or 2023. We cannot commence the FDA application process until we have obtained clinical human data on PT00114 in three phases of trials, none of which have been initiated. Similarly, the Company will be required to obtain regulatory approval in every country or region outside the United States into which it plans to sell its drug products. We may seek approval from authorities outside the United States such as the European Union CE Mark and Japanese Ministry of Health. As of December 31, 2016, the Company has not launched the approval application process for any region in the world because of its lack of clinical human data on PT00114.

Domestic Regulation

In the United States, the FDA, under the FFDCA, the Public Health Service Act and other federal statutes and regulations, subject pharmaceutical and biologic products to rigorous review. If we do not comply with applicable requirements, we may be fined, the government may refuse to approve our marketing applications or allow us to manufacture or market our products or product candidates, and we may be criminally prosecuted. The FDA also has the authority to discontinue or suspend manufacture or distribution, require a product withdrawal or recall or revoke previously granted marketing authorizations, if we fail to comply with regulatory standards or if we encounter problems following initial marketing.

FDA Approval Process

To obtain approval of a new product from the FDA, we must, among other requirements, submit data demonstrating the product’s safety and efficacy as well as detailed information on the manufacture and composition of the product candidate. In most cases, this entails extensive laboratory tests and preclinical and clinical trials. This testing and the preparation of necessary applications and processing of those applications by the FDA are expensive and typically take many years to complete. The FDA may deny our applications or may not act quickly or favorably in reviewing these applications, and we may encounter significant difficulties or costs in our efforts to obtain FDA approvals that could delay or preclude us from marketing any products we may develop. The FDA also may require post-marketing testing and surveillance to monitor the effects of approved products or place conditions on any approvals that could restrict the commercial applications of these products. Regulatory authorities may withdraw product approvals if we fail to comply with regulatory standards or if we encounter problems following initial marketing. With respect to patented products or technologies, delays imposed by the governmental approval process may materially reduce the period during which we will have the exclusive right to exploit the products or technologies.

The process required by the FDA before a new drug or biologic may be marketed in the United States generally involves the following:

completion of preclinical laboratory tests or trials and formulation studies;

•

submission to the FDA of an IND for a new drug or biologic, which must be accepted by FDA before human clinical trials may begin;

performance of adequate and well-controlled human clinical trials to establish the safety and efficacy of the proposed drug or biologic for its intended use; and,

submission and approval of a New Drug Application, or NDA, for a drug, or a Biologic License Application, or BLA, for a biologic.

Table of Contents

Preclinical tests include laboratory evaluation of product chemistry formulation and stability, as well as studies to evaluate toxicity. The results of preclinical testing, together with manufacturing information and analytical data, are submitted to the FDA as part of an IND application. The FDA requires a 30-day waiting period after the filing of each IND application before clinical trials may begin, in order to ensure that human research subjects will not be exposed to unreasonable health risks. At any time during this 30-day period or at any time thereafter, the FDA may halt proposed or ongoing clinical trials, or may authorize trials only on specified terms. The IND application process may become extremely costly and substantially delay development of our products. Moreover, positive results of preclinical tests will not necessarily indicate positive results in clinical trials.

The sponsor typically conducts human clinical trials in three sequential phases, which may overlap. These phases generally include the following:

Phase I: The product is usually first introduced into healthy humans or, on occasion, into patients, and is tested for safety, dosage tolerance, absorption, distribution, excretion and metabolism.

Phase II: The product is introduced into a limited patient population to:

assess its efficacy in specific, targeted indications;

assess dosage tolerance and optimal dosage; and

identify possible adverse effects and safety risks.

Phase III: These are commonly referred to as pivotal studies. If a product is found to have an acceptable safety profile and to be potentially effective in Phase II clinical trials, new clinical trials will be initiated to further demonstrate clinical efficacy, optimal dosage and safety within an expanded and diverse patient population at geographically-dispersed clinical study sites.

If the FDA does ultimately approve the product, it may require post-marketing testing, including potentially expensive Phase IV studies, to monitor its safety and effectiveness.

Clinical trials must meet requirements for Institutional Review Board, or IRB, oversight, informed consent and the FDA’s Good Clinical Practices. Prior to ~~Bam!, from 1996~~commencement of each clinical trial, the sponsor must submit to ~~1999, Mr. Musci was president and chief executive officer~~the FDA a clinical plan, or protocol, accompanied by the approval of the ~~U.S. subsidiary of Infograms Entertainment, Inc., now better known as Atari, Inc. In that position, he oversaw all aspects~~committee responsible for overseeing clinical trials at one of the ~~company's North American unit, was responsible~~clinical trial sites. The FDA and the IRB at each institution at which a clinical trial is being performed may order the temporary or permanent discontinuation of a clinical trial at any time if it believes that the clinical trial is not being conducted in accordance with FDA requirements or presents an unacceptable risk to the clinical trial patients.

The sponsor must submit to the FDA the results of the preclinical and clinical trials, together with, among other things, detailed information on the manufacturing and composition of the product, in the form of an NDA, or, in the case of a biologic, a BLA. Once the submission has been accepted for ~~250 employees,~~filing, the FDA has 180 days to review the application and ~~grew global revenues~~respond to the applicant. The review process is often significantly extended by FDA requests for additional information or clarification. The FDA may refer the BLA to an advisory committee for review, evaluation and recommendation as to whether the application should be approved, but the FDA is not bound by the recommendation of an advisory committee.

It is possible that our product candidates will not successfully proceed through this approval process or that the FDA will not approve them in any specific period of time, or at all. The FDA may deny or delay approval of applications that do not meet applicable regulatory criteria, or if the FDA determines that the clinical data do not adequately establish the safety and efficacy of the product. Satisfaction of FDA pre-market approval requirements for a new biologic is a process that may take several years and the actual time required may vary substantially based upon the type, complexity and novelty of the product or disease. The FDA reviews these applications and, when and if it decides that adequate data are available to show that the product is both safe and effective and that other applicable requirements have been met, approves the drug or biologic for marketing. Government regulation may delay or prevent marketing of potential products for a considerable period of time and impose costly procedures upon our activities. Success in early stage clinical trials does not assure success in later stage clinical trials. Data obtained from ~~$60 million~~clinical activities is not always conclusive and may be susceptible to ~~$300 million,~~varying interpretations that could delay, limit or prevent regulatory approval. Upon approval, a product candidate may be marketed only for those indications approved in the BLA or NDA and ~~U.S. revenues~~may be subject to labeling and promotional requirements or limitations, including warnings, precautions, contraindications and use limitations, which could materially impact profitability. Once approved, the FDA may withdraw the product approval if compliance with pre- and post-market regulatory standards is not maintained or if safety, efficacy or other problems occur after the product reaches the marketplace.

Table of Contents

The FDA may, during its review of an NDA or BLA, ask for additional test data. If the FDA does ultimately approve the product, it may require post-marketing testing, including potentially expensive Phase IV studies, to monitor the safety and effectiveness of the product. In addition, the FDA may, in some circumstances, impose restrictions on the use of the product, which may be difficult and expensive to administer and may require prior approval of promotional materials.

We have not yet begun the preparation of our IND application to begin Phase I clinical trials. We anticipate doing so in 2018. We also have not begun to prepare our application for FDA approval which we anticipate will be in 2022 or 2023. The process of collecting the clinical data needed to complete our IND application is the focus of all of our working capital, and is expected to consume all of our available capital resources over the next eighteen months. The expenditures necessary to make progress along our IND program are expected to keep our operations in a cash flow negative state for the entire period from ~~$80 million~~now until and after our IND application in 2018. To maintain our liquidity, we will have to ~~$150 million.~~ receive an influx of cash from a non-revenue source in mid-2018, from either an up-front payment from a large pharmaceutical partner or an equity financing.

Ongoing FDA Requirements

Before ~~joining Infograms/Atari, Mr. Musci was founder, president~~approving an NDA or BLA, the FDA will inspect the facilities at which the product is manufactured and ~~chief executive officer~~will not approve the product unless the manufacturing facilities are in compliance with the FDA’s current Good Manufacturing Practices, or cGMP, requirements which govern the manufacture, holding and distribution of ~~Ocean Of America, Inc.,~~ a ~~publisher~~product. Manufacturers of biologics also must comply with the FDA’s general biological product standards. Following approval, the FDA periodically inspects drug and ~~distributor~~biologic manufacturing facilities to ensure continued compliance with the cGMP requirements. Manufacturers must continue to expend time, money and effort in the areas of ~~entertainment software. Founded~~production, quality control, record keeping and reporting to ensure full compliance with those requirements. Failure to comply with these requirements subjects the manufacturer to possible legal or regulatory action, such as suspension of manufacturing, seizure of product, voluntary recall of product, withdrawal of marketing approval or civil or criminal penalties. Adverse experiences with the product must be reported to the FDA and could result in ~~1990, Mr. Musci built~~the imposition of marketing restrictions through labeling changes or market removal. Product approvals may be withdrawn if compliance with regulatory requirements is not maintained or if problems concerning safety or efficacy of the product occur following approval.

The labeling, advertising, promotion, marketing and distribution of a drug or biologic product also must be in compliance with FDA and FTC requirements which include, among others, standards and regulations for direct-to-consumer advertising, industry-sponsored scientific and educational activities, and promotional activities involving the internet. The FDA and FTC have very broad enforcement authority, and failure to abide by these regulations can result in penalties, including the issuance of a Warning Letter directing the company to ~~annual revenues~~correct deviations from regulatory standards, a requirement that future advertising and promotional materials be pre-cleared by the FDA and enforcement actions that can include seizures, injunctions and criminal prosecution.

Manufacturers are also subject to various laws and regulations governing laboratory practices, the experimental use of ~~$50 million,~~animals and ~~sold it~~the use and disposal of hazardous or potentially hazardous substances in connection with their research. In each of the above areas, the FDA has broad regulatory and enforcement powers, including the ability to ~~Infograms/Atari~~levy fines and civil penalties, suspend or delay issuance of approvals, seize or recall products and deny or withdraw approvals.

Table of Contents

HIPAA Requirements

Other federal legislation may affect our ability to obtain certain health information in ~~1996. Mr. Musci holds a degree in criminal justice~~conjunction with ~~a minor in business administration from Western New Mexico University. Mr. Musci was a director~~our research activities. The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of ~~Talon International, Inc., a public reporting Company~~1996, or HIPAA, mandates, among other things, the adoption of standards designed to safeguard the privacy and ~~served~~security of individually identifiable health information. In relevant part, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, or HHS, has released two rules mandating the use of new standards with respect to such health information. The first rule imposes new standards relating to the privacy of individually identifiable health information. These standards restrict the manner and circumstances under which covered entities may use and disclose protected health information so as to protect the privacy of that information. The second rule released by HHS establishes minimum standards for the security of electronic health information. While we do not believe we are directly regulated as a ~~member~~covered entity under HIPAA, the HIPAA standards impose requirements on covered entities conducting research activities regarding the use and disclosure of individually identifiable health information collected in the course of conducting the research. As a result, unless they meet these HIPAA requirements, covered entities conducting clinical trials for us may not be able to share with us any results from clinical trials that include such health information.

In addition to the statutes and regulations described above, we are also subject to regulation under the Occupational Safety and Health Act, the Environmental Protection Act, the Toxic Substances Control Act, the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act and other present and potential future federal, state and local regulations.

Research and Development

Our research and development efforts with respect to the formulations of PT00114 as our first potential product are exclusively conducted under premises of UT, Ontario, Canada. Much of our scientific research and discovery work is performed by Dr. David A. Lovejoy, our Chief Science Advisor and Dr. Dalia Barsyte, our Chief Technology Officer. These activities are funded by us under our Sponsored Research agreements with UT. We intend in the future to raise capital in distinct phases, matched to relevant scientific developments. The Company has financed completion of its preclinical proof of principle studies and the solidification of its intellectual property position through private offerings of its securities. In addition, the proceeds of bridge loans from the Company’s Chairman were used to fund research, development and the general operating activities of the ~~board of directors of Brilliant Digital Entertainment, Inc. from October 1996 until April 2009, a former public reporting company.~~

~~Lawrence Burstein.~~ Mr. Burstein became a director upon the completion of our merger with Traffix, Inc. on February 4, 2008. Mr. Burstein has been a director of Traffix since April 1999. Since March 1996, Mr. Burstein has been Chairman of the BoardCompany. We anticipate that we will require additional financing through IND-enabling studies, and ~~a principal shareholder of Unity Venture Capital Associates, Ltd., a private venture capital firm. For approximately ten years prior thereto, Mr. Burstein was the President, a director~~to support entry into clinical proof-of-concept studies in Treatment-Resistant Depression (TRD) and/or Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). As we develop new product candidates, we may be required to conduct additional scientific, preclinical and principal stockholder of Trinity Capital Corporation, a private investment banking concern. Trinity ceased operations upon the formation of Unity Venture Capital Associates, Ltd. in 1996. Mr. Burstein is a director of several companies, being, respectively, THQ, Inc., engaged in the development and marketing of video games for Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo; CAS Medical Systems, Inc., engaged in the manufacture and marketing of blood pressure monitors and other disposable products, principally for the neonatal market; and I.D. Systems Inc., engaged in the design, development and production of a wireless monitoring and tracking system which uses radio frequency technology. In addition, Mr. Burstein was formerly a director of publicly traded American Telecom Systems, Inc., a company engaged in the development and marketing of convergent telecommunication services and Millennium India Acquisition Corp., a publicly trading holding company. Mr. Burstein was selected as a member of our Board of Directors because he adds substantial expertise from his venture capital finance background and his executive experience, as well as ~~his service as a board member on other public companies. His experience provides~~clinical studies. We currently have no commitments to provide us with any such additional funding.

We incurred approximately $533,693 and $456,274 for research and development activities for the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively.

The Company ~~with valuable insight with respect to financing~~derives income from scientific research and experimental development tax credits/and or refunds issued by the Canada Revenue Agency for qualified expenditures. The credits are recognized when the refund is issued. The amounts received are reinvested into the Company’s scientific research, experimental development and operational ~~strategies~~works conducted in Canada.

Subsidiary

Protagenic Therapeutics Canada (2006) Inc. (“PTI Canada”) was incorporated in 2006 in the Province on Ontario, Canada. PTI Canada is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Protagenic. It provides operational support and ~~corporate governance issues.~~

~~Mark Dyne~~. ~~Mr. Dyne has served as a director~~assistance for the implementation of the company since November 11, 2008. Mr. Dyne currently serves as the Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of Europlay Capital Advisors, LLC, a merchant banking and advisory firm, and has served in this capacity since 2002. In this capacity, he provides corporate and ~~advisory services. Mr. Dyne~~operational activities conducted in Canada. It also oversees and supports research and development activities conducted under auspices of UT. PTI Canada has three directors: Garo H. Armen (Chairman), Alexander K. Arrow and Vigen Nazarian. PTI Canada also has one part-time consultant, Robert Ziroyan. PTI Canada also benefits through tax incentive programs provided by the governments of Canada and the Province of Ontario. We derived income from Canadian research and development tax credits for the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015 of $56,085 and $8,181, respectively.

Employees

We currently ~~sits on the Board of Directors of Skype Global S.a.r.l., a leader in V.O.I.P communications~~have three part-time employees. We also engage consultants and temporary employees from time to time to provide services that relate to our research and development activities as well as ~~Talon International,~~for general administrative and accounting services. We believe that our current personnel are capable of meeting our operating requirements in the near term. We expect that as our business grows we may hire additional personnel to handle the increased demands on our operations, preclinical and clinical activities.

Table of Contents

Facilities

Our principal office is located at 149 Fifth Avenue, Suite 500, New York, New York 10010, in a conference room of Agenus, Inc. ~~Prior to joining Europlay, Mr. Dyne served as Chief~~We utilize our principal office for quarterly board meetings and our annual shareholder meeting. Our personnel and consultants all work remotely, the Company’s basic science laboratory work is conducted in the Lovejoy Lab at the University of Toronto, and its preclinical efficacy work is conducted at CROs. Hence the company does not have the need for a day-to-day physical office location other than a mailing address and conference room facility for meetings. For that reason, the Agenus conference room suits its purposes without imposing any inconveniences upon Agenus. Dr. Armen, our Executive ~~Officer of Sega Gaming Technology Inc. (USA), a gaming company,~~Chairman, is also the Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of ~~Virgin Interactive Entertainment Ltd., a distributor of computer software programs and video games based~~Agenus Inc.

Legal Matters

From time to time we may be named in London, England. Mr. Dyne was a founder and former director of Sega Ozisoft Pty Ltd., a leading distributor of entertainment software in both Australia and New Zealand. Mr. Dyne was chosen to be a member of our board because of his long history of developing digital properties and technology focused businesses around the world.

~~Stuart Goldfarb.~~ Mr. Goldfarb has served as a director of the Company since January 12, 2010. Since November 2009, Mr. Goldfarb has been a Partner in Unbound Partners LLC, a marketing and management consulting firm. From 2001 to 2009 Mr. Goldfarb was President and CEO of Direct Brands, Inc. Under his leadership, the company grew to be the world’s largest direct marketer of music, DVDs, and books, with household brands such as Columbia House, BMG Music, Doubleday Book Club, Book-of-the-Month-Club, cdnow.com and many more. Prior to that, Mr. Goldfarb was President and CEO of bol.com, Bertelsmann’s premier online retailer of books and music, doing business in 18 European and Asian countries. Before joining Bertelsmann, he was Vice Chairman of Value Vision International, a cable TV home shopping and e-commerce company. He was formerly Executive Vice President, Worldwide Business Development at NBC, where he held various executive level positions. Mr. Goldfarb was selected to be a member of our Board of Directors because of extensive history and success in operating direct marketing, entertainment and media related companies.

~~OTHER EXECUTIVE OFFICERS~~

~~Thomas Plotts.~~ Mr. Plotts, 40, was appointed as our Chief Financial Officer on June 30, 2010 after serving as Interim Chief Financial Officer since December 16, 2009. Prior to his appointment as CFO, Mr. Plotts was Atrinsic’s Vice President of Finance & SEC Reporting, a position he held since February 2007. From 2005 to 2007, Mr. Plotts was Chief Financial Officer of DBH Resources, a privately held risk management company, which was successfully sold to AON Corporation (NYSE: AOC) in 2007. From 2001 to 2005, Mr. Plotts was Director of Business Information Systems and Corporate Development at Cardiac Science Corporation (NASDAQ: CSCX). Mr. Plotts servedclaims arising in the ~~Australian Army Reserve, and was commissioned as a Lieutenant in 1988. Mr. Plotts has a Bachelor~~ordinary course of ~~Economics degree from the University of Western Australia and a Masters of Business Administration from the Marshall School of Business at the University of Southern California.~~

~~FURTHER INFORMATION CONCERNING THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS~~

~~Director Independence~~. Our board of directors consists of four “independent” members, as that term is defined in Section 5605 of the Marketplace Rules as required by the NASDAQ Stock Market: Jerome Chazen, Lawrence Burstein, Mark Dyne and Stuart Goldfarb. Our board also has a seat held by a non-independent executive director, Raymond Musci. Robert Ellin, who resigned from our Board of Directors on April 20, 2011, was also an “independent” director while serving on our Board in 2010.

Our Board considered the objective tests and the subjective tests for determining who is an “independent director” under the NASDAQ rules. The subjective test states that an independent director must be a person who lacks a relationshipbusiness. Currently, no legal proceedings, government actions, administrative actions, investigations or claims are pending against us or involve us that, in the opinion of ~~the Board, would interfere with the exercise of independent judgment in carrying out the responsibilities of~~our management, could reasonably be expected to have a ~~director. In assessing independence under the subjective test,~~material adverse effect on our ~~Board took into account the standards~~business and financial condition.

We anticipate that we will expend significant financial and managerial resources in the objective tests, and reviewed and discussed additional information provided by the directors and the Company with regard to each director’s business and personal activities as they may relate to Atrinsic and Atrinsic’s management. Based on alldefense of ~~the foregoing, as required by NASDAQ rules, the Board made a subjective determination as to each independent director that no relationships exists which,~~our intellectual property rights in the ~~opinion of the Board, would interfere with the exercise of independent judgment in carrying out the responsibilities of a director.~~

In making its independence determinations, the Board will consider transactions occurring since the beginning of the third fiscal year prior to the date of its determination between Atrinsic and entities associated with the independent directors or members of their immediate family. All identified transactions that appear to relate to Atrinsic and a person or entity with a known connection to a director will be presented to the Board for consideration. In each case, the Board will determine whether, because of the nature of the director’s relationship with the entity and/or the amount involved, the relationship impaired the director’s independence.

~~Meetings~~. The Board of Directors held ten meetings during fiscal 2010. All directors then serving attended 75% or more of all of the meetings of the Board of Directors and the committees on which they served in fiscal 2010. The Company has not established a specific policy with respect to members of the Board of Directors attending annual stockholder meetings. Three board members attended our 2010 Annual Meeting of Stockholders.

~~Board Committees~~. Our Board of Directors maintains an Audit Committee, Compensation Committee and Nominating and Governance Committee. Our Board may also establish special committees from time to time to perform specifically delegated functions. The Board of Directors has adopted a written charter that governs the conduct and responsibilities of each of the Audit Committee, Compensation Committee and Nominating and Governance Committee, copies of which may be found on our website located at http://www.atrinsic.com.

~~Audit Committee~~. Our Audit Committee currently is chaired by Lawrence Burstein and seated by Stuart Goldfarb and Jerome Chazen. Each of Mr. Burstein, Mr. Chazen and Mr. Goldfarb qualify as “independent” directors within the meaning of the applicable rules for companies traded on The NASDAQ Global Market (NASDAQ). We have determined that each member of our Audit Committee qualifies as an “audit committee financial expert” within the meaning of the rules and regulations of the SEC, with Mr. Burstein having acquired the requisite experience from having served on the audit committees of three other public companies for more than 10 years. Among other responsibilities, the Audit Committee reviews the scope and results of quarterly audit reviews and the year-end audit with management and the independent auditors, reviews and discusses the adequacy of our internal controls, and recommends to the Board of Directors the selection of independent auditors for the coming year. During 2010, our audit committee held five meetings.

~~Compensation Committee~~. Our Compensation Committee is currently chaired by Lawrence Burstein, and seated by Jerome Chazen, each who qualify as “independent” directors within the meaning of the applicable rules for companies traded on NASDAQ. Prior to his resignation from our Board of Directors on April 20, 2011, Robert Ellin also served on our Compensation Committee in 2010 and was “independent” under NASDAQ rules. The Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors is primarily responsible for determining the annual salaries and other compensation of directors and executive officers and administering our equity compensation plans. Our Compensation Committee determines the compensation to be paid to our officers and directors, with recommendations from our full Board of Directors and management as to the amount and/or form of such compensation. While our Board may utilize the services of consultants in determining or recommending the amount or form of executive and director compensation, we do not at this time employ consultants for this purpose. During 2010, our compensation committee held one meeting and matters relating to compensation were also discussed at full meetings of our Board of Directors.

~~Nominating and Governance Committee~~. Our Nominating and Governance Committee is currently chaired by Stuart Goldfarb and was seated by Robert Ellin prior to his resignation on April 20, 2011. Stuart Goldfarb qualifies as an “independent” director within the meaning of the applicable rules for companies traded NASDAQ and while serving, Robert Ellin was “independent” as well. During 2010, our nominating and governance committee did not meet, however, matters relating to nominations and governance were discussed at full meetings of our Board of Directors. The Company intends to fill the vacancy on this committee created by Mr. Ellin’s resignation in the near future.

Our Nominating and Governance Committee reviews and makes recommendations regarding the functioning of the Board of Directors as an entity, recommends corporate governance principles applicable to Atrinsic and assists the Board of Directors in its reviews of the performance of the Board and each of its committees. The Committee also reviews those Board members who are candidates for re-election to our Board of Directors, and makes the determination to nominate a candidate who is a current member of the Board of Directors for re-election for the next term. The Committee’s methods for identifying candidates for election to the Board of Directors (other than those proposed by our stockholders, as discussed below) include the solicitation of ideas for possible candidates from a number of sources—members of the Board of Directors; our executives; individuals personally known to the members of the Board of Directors; and other research. The Committee may also from time to time retain one or more third-party search firms to identify suitable candidates. The Committee members also nominate outside candidates for inclusion on the Board of Directors. The diversity of the background of an individual and their field of expertise is a consideration for membership on our Board. We consider diversity broadly to include differences of viewpoint, professional experience, individual characteristics, qualities and skills resulting in the ability for naturally varying perspectives among our Board of Directors while simultaneously providing skills that complement our full Board so that the Board, as a unit, possesses the appropriate skills and experience to oversee our business.

~~An Atrinsic stockholder may nominate one or more persons for election as a director at an annual meeting of stockholders~~future if the stockholder complies with the notice, information and consent provisions contained in our Bylaws. Stockholders who desire the Nominating and Governance Committee to consider a candidate for nomination as a director at the 2011 annual meeting must submit advance notice of the nomination to the Committee a reasonable time prior to the mailing date of the proxy statement for the 2011 annual meeting. The recommendation should be addressed to our Corporate Secretary.

~~A stockholder’s notice of a proposed nomination for director to be made at an annual meeting must include the following information:~~

~~the name and address of the stockholder proposing to make the nomination and of the person or persons to be nominated;~~

a representation that the holder is a stockholder entitled to vote his or her shares at the annual meeting and intends to vote his or her shares in person or by proxy for the person or persons nominated in the notice;

~~a description of all arrangements or understandings between the stockholder(s) supporting the nomination and each nominee;~~

~~any other information concerning the proposed nominee(s) that we would be required to include in the proxy statement if the Board of Directors made the nomination; and~~

~~the consent of the nominee(s) to serve as director if elected.~~

~~Board Leadership Structure.~~

The Company has elected to bifurcate the positions of Chairman (held by Mr. Chazen) and Chief Executive Officer (a position formerly held by Mr. Schwartz until his resignation on August 13, 2010). Although our Chief Executive Officer traditionally serves as a member of the Board, we believe that ~~Mr. Chazen’s status as Chairman provides for a meaningful division~~our rights have been violated. We also anticipate that we will expend significant financial and managerial resources to defend against claims that our products and services infringe upon the intellectual property rights of ~~leadership between management and the Board.~~ third parties.

Reports to Security Holders

Our principal offices are located at 149 Fifth Avenue, New York, New York 10010. Our web address iswww.protagenic.com.

We ~~believe this structure provides Atrinsic with sound corporate governance practices in the management~~make available, free of its business because it allows our Chief Executive Officer to focus on the day-to-day operation of the business, while allowing Mr. Chazen to focus on leadership of the Board of Directors. The benefits of Mr. Chazen’s leadership of the Board stem from Mr. Chazen’s extensive knowledge and experience in executive management, finance, corporate governance matters, private investing and product marketing. In addition, Mr. Chazen’s frequent direct contact with the Company’s senior management team enables Mr. Chazen to identify issues, proposals, strategies and other considerations for discussion among board members.

~~Board Oversight of Risk Management.~~

Our Board of Directors has responsibility for the oversight of risk management. A fundamental part of risk management is not only understanding the risks our Company faces and what steps management is taking to manage those risks, but also understanding what level of risk is appropriate for our Company. The involvement of our Board of Directors in setting our business strategy is a key part of its assessment of risk management and the determination of what constitutes an appropriate level of risk for our Company. Our Board regularly discusses with management the Company's major risk exposures, including risks relating to our liquidity and operations and the businesses in which we operate, their potential impact on our Company and the steps we take to manage them.

Although our Board of Directors has ultimate oversight responsibility for the risk management process, our Board committees fulfill an important role in our risk management. In particular, the Audit Committee focuses on assessing and mitigating financial risk, including the adequacy of internal controls and management's internal assessment of our internal control over financial reporting and our Compensation Committee is responsible for overseeing the management of risks relating to our executive compensation plans and arrangements.

~~Code of Ethics~~. Our Board of Directors has adopted a Code of Ethical Conduct (the “Code of Conduct”) which constitutes a “code of ethics” as defined by applicable SEC rules and a “code of conduct” as defined by applicable NASDAQ rules. We require all employees, directors and officers to adhere to the Code of Conduct in addressing legal and ethical issues encountered in conducting their work. The Code of Conduct requires that these individuals avoid conflicts of interest, comply with all laws and other legal requirements, conduct business in an honest and ethical manner and otherwise act with integrity and in our best interest. The Code of Conduct contains additional provisions that apply specifically to our Chief Financial Officer and other financial officers with respect to full and accurate reporting. The Code of Conduct is available oncharge through our website, ~~at www.atrinsic.com and has been filed as an exhibit to~~ our ~~Original Filing. You may also request a copy of the Code of Conduct by writing or calling us at:~~

~~Atrinsic, Inc.~~

~~Attn: Investor Relations~~

~~469 7th Ave, 10th Floor~~

~~New York, NY 10018~~

~~Any waiver of the Code of Conduct pertaining to a member of our Board or one of our executive officers will be disclosed in a report~~annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K and amendments to those reports filed ~~with the Securities and Exchange Commission.~~

or furnished pursuant to Section ~~16(A) Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance~~

~~Section 16(a)~~13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, ~~requires our directors and executive officers and the holders of more than 10% of our common stock~~as soon as reasonably practicable after we electronically file or furnish such materials to ~~file with~~ the Securities and Exchange Commission, ~~initial~~or SEC. In addition, you may read and copy any materials we file with the SEC at its Public Reference Room at 100 F Street, NE, Washington, DC 20549, on official business days during the hours of 10:00 am to 3:00 pm. You may obtain information on the operation of the Public Reference Room by calling the SEC at 1-800-SEC-0330. The SEC maintains an Internet site,www.sec.gov, that contains reports, proxy and information statements, and other information that we file electronically with the SEC.

Item1A. Risk Factors.

An investment in our common stock is speculative and illiquid and involves a high degree of ~~ownership~~risk including the risk of a loss of your entire investment. You should carefully consider the risks and ~~reports~~uncertainties described below and the other information contained in this report before purchasing shares of our common stock. The risks set forth below are not the only ones facing us. Additional risks and uncertainties may exist that could also adversely affect our business, operations and prospects. If any of the following risks actually materialize, our business, financial condition, prospects and/or operations could suffer. In such event, the value of our common stock could decline, and you could lose all or a substantial portion of the money that you pay for our common stock.

Table of Contents

Risk Related to our Company and our Business

Risks Related to our Discovery, Development and Commercialization of New Medicines

Our results to date provide no basis for predicting whether any of our product candidates will be safe or effective, or receive regulatory approval.

The Company’s proprietary portfolio of five new neuropeptide hormones are in various stages of research and preclinical evaluation and their risk of failure is high. It is impossible to predict when or if any of our neuropeptide hormones will prove effective or safe in humans or will receive regulatory approval. These compounds may not demonstrate in patients the chemical and pharmacological properties ascribed to them in laboratory studies, and they may interact with human biological systems or other drugs in unforeseen, ineffective or harmful ways. If we are unable to discover or successfully develop drugs that are effective and safe in humans, we will not have a viable business.

We may not be able to initiate and complete preclinical studies and clinical trials for our product candidates which could adversely affect our business.

We must successfully initiate and complete extensive preclinical studies and clinical trials for our product candidates before we can receive regulatory approval. Preclinical studies and clinical trials are expensive and will take several years to complete and may not yield results that support further clinical development or product approvals. Conducting clinical studies for any of our drug candidates for approval in the United States requires filing an IND and reaching agreement with the FDA on clinical protocols, finding appropriate clinical sites and clinical investigators, securing approvals for such studies from the independent review board at each such site, manufacturing clinical quantities of drug candidates, supplying drug product to clinical sites and enrolling sufficient numbers of participants. We cannot guarantee that we will be able to successfully accomplish all of the activities necessary to initiate and complete clinical trials.

As a result, our preclinical studies and clinical trials may be extended, delayed or terminated, and we may be unable to obtain regulatory approvals or successfully commercialize our products.

None of our product candidates has received regulatory approvals. If we are unable to obtain regulatory approvals to market one or more of our product candidates, our business may be adversely affected.

All of our product candidates are in early stages of development, and we do not expect our product candidates to be commercially available for several years, if at all. Our product candidates are subject to strict regulation by regulatory authorities in the United States and in other countries. We cannot market any product candidate until we have completed all necessary preclinical studies and clinical trials and have obtained the necessary regulatory approvals. We do not know whether regulatory agencies will grant approval for any of our product candidates. Even if we complete preclinical studies and clinical trials successfully, we may not be able to obtain regulatory approvals or we may not receive approvals to make claims about our products that we believe to be necessary to effectively market our products. Data obtained from preclinical studies and clinical trials are subject to varying interpretations that could delay, limit or prevent regulatory approval, and failure to comply with regulatory requirements or inadequate manufacturing processes are examples of other problems that could prevent approval. In addition, we may encounter delays or rejections due to additional government regulation from future legislation, administrative action or changes in ~~ownership~~the FDA policy. Even if the FDA approves a product, the approval will be limited to those indications covered in the approval.

Outside the United States, our ability to market any of our ~~equity securities. Executive officers, directors and greater-than-ten percent stockholders are required by SEC regulations to furnish us with~~potential products is dependent upon receiving marketing approvals from the appropriate regulatory authorities. These foreign regulatory approval processes include all ~~Section 16(a) forms they file. Based solely on our review~~ of the ~~copies~~risks associated with the FDA approval process described above. If we are unable to receive regulatory approvals, we will be unable to commercialize our product candidates, and our business may fail.

Table of Contents

We may not be able to gain market acceptance of our product candidates, which would prevent us from becoming profitable.

We cannot be certain that any of our product candidates will gain market acceptance among physicians, patients, healthcare payers, pharmaceutical companies or others. Demonstrating the ~~forms received~~safety and efficacy of our product candidates and obtaining regulatory approvals will not guarantee future revenue. Sales of medical products largely depend on the reimbursement of patients’ medical expenses by government healthcare programs and private health insurers. Governments and private insurers closely examine medical products to determine whether they should be covered by reimbursement and if so, the level of reimbursement that will apply. We cannot be certain that third party payers will sufficiently reimburse sales of our products, or enable us to sell our products at profitable prices. Similar concerns could also limit the reimbursement amounts that health insurers or government agencies in other countries are prepared to pay for our products. In many countries where we plan to market our products, including Europe and Canada, the pricing of prescription drugs is controlled by the government or regulatory agencies. Regulatory agencies in these countries could determine that the pricing for our products should be based on prices of other commercially available drugs for the same disease, rather than allowing us to market our products at a premium as new drugs. Sales of medical products also depend on physicians’ willingness to prescribe the treatment, which is likely to be based on a determination by these physicians that the products are safe, therapeutically effective and cost-effective. We cannot predict whether physicians, other healthcare providers, government agencies or private insurers will determine that our products are safe, therapeutically effective and cost effective relative to competing treatments.

We may not be able to manufacture our product candidates in clinical or commercial quantities, which would prevent us from commercializingour product candidates.

To date, our product candidates have been manufactured in small quantities by us and ~~written representations~~third party manufacturers for preclinical studies. If any of our product candidates is approved by the FDA or other regulatory agencies for commercial sale, we will need to manufacture it in larger quantities and we intend to use third party manufacturers for commercial quantities. Our third party manufacturers may not be able to successfully increase the manufacturing capacity for any of our product candidates in a timely or efficient manner, or at all. If we are unable to successfully increase the manufacturing capacity for a product candidate, the regulatory approval or commercial launch of that product candidate may be delayed or there may be a shortage in the supply of the product candidate. Our failure or the failure of our third party manufacturers to comply with the FDA’s good manufacturing practices and to pass inspections of the manufacturing facilities by the FDA or other regulatory agencies could seriously harm our business.

We may not be able to obtain and maintain the third party relationships that are necessary to develop, commercialize and manufacture some or all of our product candidates.

We expect to depend on collaborators, partners, licensees, clinical research organizations, manufacturers and other third parties to support our discovery efforts, to formulate product candidates, to conduct clinical trials for some or all of our product candidates, to manufacture clinical and commercial scale quantities of our product candidates and products and to market, sell, and distribute any products we successfully develop.

We cannot guarantee that we will be able to successfully negotiate agreements for or maintain relationships with collaborators, partners, licensees, clinical investigators, manufacturers and other third parties on favorable terms, if at all. If we are unable to obtain or maintain these agreements, we may not be able to clinically develop, formulate, manufacture, obtain regulatory approvals for or commercialize our product candidates, which will in turn adversely affect our business.

We expect to expend substantial management time and effort to enter into relationships with third parties and, if we successfully enter into such relationships, to manage these relationships. In addition, substantial amounts of our expenditures will be paid to third parties in these relationships. However, we cannot control the amount or timing of resources our contract partners will devote to our research and development programs, product candidates or potential product candidates, and we cannot guarantee that these parties will fulfill their obligations to us under these arrangements in a timely fashion, if at all.

We have no experience in sales, marketing and distribution and may have to enter into agreements with third parties to perform these functions, which could prevent us from ~~certain reporting persons~~successfully commercializing our product candidates.

We currently have no sales, marketing or distribution capabilities. To commercialize our product candidates, we must either develop our own sales, marketing and distribution capabilities, which will be expensive and time consuming, or make arrangements with third parties to perform these services for us. If we decide to market any of our products on our own, we will have to commit significant resources to developing a marketing and sales force and supporting distribution capabilities. If we decide to enter into arrangements with third parties for performance of these services, we may find that they are not available on terms acceptable to us, or at all. If we are not able to establish and maintain successful arrangements with third parties or build our own sales and marketing infrastructure, we may not be able to commercialize our product candidates which would adversely affect our business and financial condition.

Table of Contents

We may fail to select or capitalize on the most scientifically, clinically or commercially promising or profitable product candidates.

We have ~~complied~~limited technical, managerial and financial resources to determine which of our product candidates should proceed to initial clinical trials, later stage clinical development and potential commercialization. We may make incorrect determinations. Our decisions to allocate our research and development, management and financial resources toward particular product candidates or therapeutic areas may not lead to the development of viable commercial products and may divert resources from better opportunities. Similarly, our decisions to delay or terminate drug development programs may also be incorrect and could cause us to miss valuable opportunities.

We may not be able to maintain our exclusive worldwide license to use and develop PT00114 which could materially affect our businessplan.

On July 21, 2005, we entered into the License Agreement with UT pursuant to which UT agreed to license to us patent rights and other intellectual property related to PT00114, among other things. The Technology License Agreement was amended on February 18, 2015. There is no expiration date to this agreement as long as we continue to provide UT with progress reports every 6 months and make ongoing progress toward development of the drug.

Pursuant to the License Agreement, we obtained an exclusive worldwide license to make, have made, use, sell and import products based upon the Technologies, or to sublicense the Technologies in accordance with the ~~relevant filing requirements,~~terms of the License Agreement. In the event we ~~believe that, during~~fail to provide UT with semi-annual reports on our progress or fail to continue to make reasonable commercial efforts towards obtaining regulatory approval for products based on the ~~year ended December 31, 2010, all~~Technologies, UT may convert our exclusive license into a non-exclusive one. In such a case, we would lose our competitive advantage in the development of treatments based on PT00114.

If we are not able toretain our current senior management team and our scientific advisors or continue to attract and retain qualified scientific,technical and business personnel, our business will suffer.

We are dependent on the members of our management team and our scientific advisors for our business success. An important element of our strategy is to take advantage of the research and development expertise of our current management and to utilize the unique expertise of our scientific advisors. We do not have any employment agreements with our executive officers. The loss of any one of our executive officers ~~directors~~or key scientific consultants, including, in particular, Garo Armen, Ph.D., Chairman of the Board, and Dr. David A. Lovejoy, our Chief Scientific Advisor, could result in a significant loss in the knowledge and experience that we, as an organization, possess and could cause significant delays, or outright failure, in the development and further commercialization of our product candidates.

To grow, we will eventually need to hire a significant number of qualified commercial, scientific and administrative personnel. However, there is intense competition for human resources, including management in the technical fields in which we operate, and we may not be able to attract and retain qualified personnel necessary for the successful development and commercialization of our product candidates. Our inability to attract new employees or to retain existing employees could limit our growth and harm our business.

We have not entered into an employment agreement with Dr. David A. Lovejoy, our Chief Scientific Advisor.

Dr. David A. Lovejoy is a key contributor to our Company due to his role in the development of PT00114 and his continued role in the development of our products as our Chief Scientific Advisor. We have not entered into an employment agreement with Dr. Lovejoy. If Dr. Lovejoy elects to discontinue his service as our Chief Scientific Advisor, the development of our products and our overall business plan could be materially affected.

Table of Contents

Disputes under key agreements or conflicts of interest with our scientific advisors or clinical investigators could delay or prevent development or commercialization of our product candidates.

Any agreements we have or may enter into with third parties, such as collaboration, license, formulation supplier, manufacturing, clinical research organization or clinical trial agreements, may give rise to disputes regarding the rights and obligations of the parties. Disagreements could develop over rights to ownership or use of intellectual property, the scope and direction of research and development, the approach for regulatory approvals or commercialization strategy. We intend to conduct research programs in a range of therapeutic areas, but our pursuit of these opportunities could result in conflicts with the other parties to these agreements who may be developing or selling pharmaceuticals or conducting other activities in these same therapeutic areas. Any disputes or commercial conflicts could lead to the termination of our agreements, delay progress of our product development programs, compromise our ability to renew agreements or obtain future agreements, lead to the loss of intellectual property rights or result in costly litigation.

We collaborate with outside scientific advisors and collaborators at academic and other institutions that assist us in our research and development efforts. Our scientific advisors are not our employees and may have other commitments that limit their availability to us. If a conflict of interest between their work for us and their work for another entity arises, we may lose their services.

We may encounter difficulties in managing our growth, which could adversely affect our operations.

Our ability to manage our operations and growth effectively depends upon the continual improvement of our procedures, reporting systems, and operational, financial, and management controls. We may not be able to implement improvements in an efficient or timely manner and may discover deficiencies in existing systems and controls. If we do not meet these challenges, we may be unable to take advantage of market opportunities, execute our business strategies or respond to competitive pressures which in turn may slow our growth or give rise to inefficiencies that would increase our losses.

We may acquire additional technology and complementary businesses in the future. Acquisitions involve many risks, any one of which could materially harm our business, including the diversion of management’s attention from core business concerns, failure to exploit acquired technologies, or the loss of key employees from either our business or the acquired business.

Company Risks

We have a history of losses and expect that losses may continue in the future.

We have generated net losses since we began operations, including $2,275,826 and $1,023,422 for the years ended December 31, 2016 and December 31, 2015, respectively. As of December 31, 2016, we had an accumulated deficit of $8,582,123. We have no approved products and have generated no product revenue. We expect that product development, preclinical and clinical programs will increase losses significantly over the next five years. In order to achieve profitability, we will need to generate significant revenue. We cannot be certain that we will generate sufficient revenue to achieve profitability. We anticipate that we will continue to generate operating losses and negative cash flow from operations and our current cash position is sufficient to fund our current business plan at least until the third quarter of 2018. We cannot be certain that we will ever achieve, or if achieved, maintain profitability. If our revenue grows at a slower rate than we anticipate or if our product development, marketing and operating expenses exceed our expectations or cannot be adjusted accordingly, our business, results of operation and financial condition will be materially adversely affected and we may be unable to continue operations.

We will not be able to generate product revenue unless and until one of our product candidates successfully completes clinical trials and receives regulatory approval. As our most advanced product candidates are at an early proof-of-concept stage, we do not expect to receive revenue from any product candidate for the foreseeable future. We may seek to obtain revenue from collaboration or licensing agreements with third parties. We currently have no such agreements which will provide us with material, ongoing future revenue and we may never enter into any such agreements. Even if we eventually generate revenues, we may never be profitable, and if we do achieve profitability, we may not be able to sustain or increase profitability on a quarterly or annual basis.

Table of Contents

We need to obtain financing in order to continue our operations.

On a prospective basis, we will require both short-term financing for operations and long-term capital to fund our expected growth. We have no existing bank lines of credit and have not established any definitive sources for additional financing. We believe that cash on hand provided by the investors in the Private Offering will be sufficient to meet our short-term financial requirements for approximately twelve months. However, we will require additional funds if we want to fully implement our business plan and proceed with submission of an IND/CTA application. Additional financing may not be available to us, or if available, then it may not be available upon terms and conditions acceptable to us. If adequate funds are not available, then we may be required to delay, reduce or eliminate product development or clinical programs. Our inability to take advantage of opportunities in the industry because of capital constraints may have a material adverse effect on our business and our prospects. If we fail to obtain the capital necessary to fund our operations, we will be unable to advance our development programs and complete our clinical trials.

In addition, our research and development expenses could exceed our current expectations. This could occur for many reasons, including:

some or all of our product candidates fail in clinical or preclinical studies and we are forced to seek additional product candidates;

our product candidates require more extensive clinical or preclinical testing than we currently expect;

•

we advance more of our product candidates than expected into costly later stage clinical trials;

•

we advance more preclinical product candidates than expected into early stage clinical trials;

we are required, or consider it advisable, to acquire or license rights from one or more third parties; or

•

we determine to acquire or license rights to additional product candidates or new technologies.

While we expect to seek additional funding through public or private financings, we may not be able to obtain financing on acceptable terms, or at all. In addition, the terms of our financings may be dilutive to, or otherwise adversely affect, holders of our common stock. We may also seek additional funds through arrangements with collaborators or other third parties. These arrangements would generally require us to relinquish rights to some of our technologies, product candidates or products, and we may not be able to enter into such agreements, on acceptable terms, if at all. If we are unable to obtain additional funding on a timely basis, we may be required to curtail or terminate some or all of our development programs, including some or all of our product candidates.

We currently do not have sufficient cash to fully implement our business plan.

We have experienced a lack of adequate capital resources causing us to be unable to fully implement our business plan. We believe that we need to raise or otherwise obtain additional financing beyond the Private Offering in order to satisfy our existing obligations and fully implement our business plan. We do not expect to have positive cash flow until the middle of 2018 or longer. If we are not successful in obtaining additional financing, we will not be able to fully implement our business plan and we may not be able to continue our operations.

Table of Contents

We have a limited operating history and a history of operating losses, and expect to incur significant additional operating losses.

We began our business in September 2004 and have a limited operating history. Though we have enlisted the assistance of pharmaceutical and academic experts, our lack of experience may cause us to encounter unforeseen problems that could have a material adverse effect on our business and financial condition. As well, there is limited historical financial information upon which to base an evaluation of our performance.

The Company’s financial statements have been prepared on a going concern basis, and do not include adjustments that might be necessary if the Company is unable to continue as a going concern.

The Company’s consolidated financial statements have been prepared on a going concern basis, which contemplates the realization of assets and the ~~holders~~satisfaction of ~~10%~~liabilities in the normal course of business. As of December 31, 2016, the Company had incurred significant operating losses since inception, and continues to generate losses from operations, and has an accumulated deficit of $8,582,123. These matters raise substantial doubt about the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern. The consolidated financial statements incorporated in this annual report do not include any adjustments relating to the recoverability and classification of asset amounts or ~~more~~the classification of liabilities that might be necessary should the Company be unable to continue as a going concern.

The drug development and approval process is uncertain, time-consuming and expensive.

The process of obtaining and maintaining regulatory approvals for new therapeutic products is lengthy, expensive and uncertain. It also can vary substantially based on the type, complexity, and novelty of the product. We must provide the FDA and foreign regulatory authorities with preclinical and clinical data demonstrating that our products are safe and effective before they can be approved for commercial sale. Clinical development, including preclinical testing, is a long, expensive and uncertain process. It may take us several years to complete our testing, and failure can occur at any stage of testing. Any preclinical or clinical test may fail to produce results satisfactory to the FDA. Preclinical and clinical data can be interpreted in different ways, which could delay, limit or prevent regulatory approval. Negative or inconclusive results from a preclinical study or clinical trial, adverse medical events during a clinical trial or safety issues resulting from products of the same class of drug could cause a preclinical study or clinical trial to be repeated or a program to be terminated, even if other studies or trials relating to the program are successful.

We have to sustain and further build our intellectual property rights.

If we fail to sustain and further build our intellectual property rights, competitors will be able to take advantage of our research and development efforts to develop competing products. If we are not able to protect our proprietary technology, trade secrets, and know-how, our competitors may use our inventions to develop competing products. Protagenic has obtained worldwide exclusive rights to PT00114 and related technology that was developed at the University of Toronto. The Company currently has four patents issued by the Governments of the United States, Canada, European Union and Australia. As of December 31, 2016, six patent applications are pending. However, our patents and patent applications, even if granted, may not protect us against our competitors. Our patent positions, and those of other pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, are generally uncertain and involve complex legal, scientific and factual questions. The standards which the United States Patent and Trademark Office uses to grant patents, and the standards which courts use to interpret patents, are not always applied predictably or uniformly and can change, particularly as new technologies develop. Consequently, the level of protection, if any, that will be provided by our patents if we attempt to enforce them, and they are challenged, is uncertain. In addition, the type and extent of patent claims that will be issued to us in the future is uncertain. Any patents that are issued may not contain claims that permit us to stop competitors from using similar technology.

In addition to our patentable technology, we also rely on unpatented technology, trade secrets, and confidential information. We may not be able to effectively protect our rights to this technology or information. Other parties may independently develop substantially equivalent information and techniques or otherwise gain access to or disclose our technology. We generally require each of our employees, consultants, collaborators, and certain contractors to execute a confidentiality agreement at the commencement of an employment, consulting, collaborative, or contractual relationship with us. However, these agreements may not provide effective protection of our technology or information or, in the event of unauthorized use or disclosure, they may not provide adequate remedies.

Table of Contents

Our patent position is generally uncertain and involves complex legal and factual questions. In addition, the laws of some foreign countries do not protect proprietary rights to the same extent as the laws of the United States, and other biotechnology companies have encountered significant problems in protecting and defending their proprietary rights in foreign jurisdictions. Whether filed in the United States or abroad, our patent applications may be challenged or may fail to result in issued patents. In addition, any future patents we obtain may not be sufficiently broad to prevent others from practicing our technologies or from developing or commercializing competing products. Furthermore, others may independently develop or commercialize similar or alternative technologies or drugs, or design around our patents. Our patents may be challenged, invalidated or fail to provide us with any competitive advantages. We may not have the funds available to protect our patents or other technology; such protection is costly and can result in further litigation expenses.

If we do not obtain or we are unable to maintain adequate patent or trade secret protection for our products in the United States, competitors could duplicate them without repeating the extensive testing that we will be required to undertake to obtain approval of the products by the FDA. Regardless of any patent protection, under the current statutory framework the FDA is prohibited by law from approving any generic version of any of our products for three years after it has approved our product. Upon the expiration of that period, or if that time period is altered, the FDA could approve a generic version of our product unless we have patent protection sufficient for us to block that generic version. Without sufficient patent protection, the applicant for a generic version of our product would be required only to conduct a relatively inexpensive study to show that its product is bioequivalent to our product and may not have to repeat the studies that we will need to conduct to demonstrate that the product is safe and effective. In the absence of adequate patent protection in other countries, competitors may similarly be able to obtain regulatory approval in those countries of products that duplicate our products.

We have to comply with our obligations in our intellectual property licenses with third parties.

If we fail to comply with our obligations in our intellectual property licenses with third parties, we could lose license rights that are important to our business.We are a party to the License Agreement with UT under which we receive the right to practice and use important third party patent rights. We may enter into additional licenses in the future. Our existing licenses impose, and we expect future licenses will impose, various diligences, milestone payment, royalty, insurance and other obligations on us. If we fail to comply with these obligations, the licensor may have the right to terminate the license, in which event we might not be able to market any product that is covered by the licensed patents.

We may need to resort to litigation to enforce or defend our intellectual property rights, including any patents issued to us. If a competitor or collaborator files a patent application claiming technology also invented by us, in order to protect our rights, we may have to participate in an expensive and time consuming interference proceeding before the United States Patent and Trademark Office. We cannot guarantee that our product candidates will be free of claims by third parties alleging that we have infringed their intellectual property rights. Third parties may assert that we are employing their proprietary technologies without authorization and they may resort to litigation to attempt to enforce their rights. Third parties may have or obtain patents in the future and claim that the use of our technology or any of our product candidates infringes their patents. We may not be able to develop or commercialize combination product candidates because of patent protection others have. Our business will be harmed if we cannot obtain a necessary or desirable license, can obtain such a license only on terms we consider to be unattractive or unacceptable, or if we are unable to redesign our product candidates or processes to avoid actual or potential patent or other intellectual property infringement. Obtaining, protecting and defending patent and other intellectual property rights can be expensive and may require us to incur substantial costs, including the diversion of management and technical personnel. An unfavorable ruling in patent or intellectual property litigation could subject us to significant liabilities to third parties, require us to cease developing, manufacturing or selling the affected products or using the affected processes, require us to license the disputed rights from third parties, or result in awards of substantial damages against us.

There can be no assurance that we would prevail in any intellectual property infringement action, will be able to obtain a license to any third party intellectual property on commercially reasonable terms, successfully develop non-infringing alternatives on a timely basis, or license non-infringing alternatives, if any exist, on commercially reasonable terms. Any significant intellectual property impediment to our ability to develop and commercialize our products could seriously harm our business and prospects.

Table of Contents

Patent litigation or other litigation in connection with our intellectual property rights may lead to publicity that may harm our reputation and the value of our common stock ~~complied~~may decline.

During the course of any patent litigation, there may be public announcements of the results of hearings, motions, and other interim proceedings or developments in the litigation. If securities analysts or investors regard these announcements as negative, the value of our common stock may decline. General proclamations or statements by key public figures may also have a negative impact on the perceived value of our intellectual property.

Protecting and defending against intellectual property claims may have a material adverse effect on our business.

From time to time, we may receive notice that others have infringed on our proprietary rights or that we have infringed on the intellectual property rights of others. There can be no assurance that infringement or invalidity claims will not materially adversely affect our business, financial condition or results of operations. Regardless of the validity or the success of the assertion of claims, we could incur significant costs and diversion of resources in protecting or defending against claims, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition or results of operations. We may not have the funds or resources available to protect our intellectual property.

Our competitors and potential competitors may develop products and technologies that make ours less attractive or obsolete.

Many companies, universities, and research organizations developing competing product candidates have greater resources and significantly greater experience in financial, research and development, manufacturing, marketing, sales, distribution, and technical regulatory matters than we have. In addition, many competitors have greater name recognition and more extensive collaborative relationships. Our competitors could commence and complete clinical testing of their product candidates, obtain regulatory approvals, and begin commercial-scale manufacturing of their products faster than we are able to for our products. They could develop products that would render our product candidates, and those of our collaborators, obsolete and noncompetitive. If we are unable to compete effectively against these companies, then we may not be able to commercialize our product candidates or achieve a competitive position in the market. This would adversely affect our ability to generate revenues.

Competition in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries may result in competing products, superior marketing of other products and lower revenues or profits for us.

There are many companies that are seeking to develop products and therapies for the treatment of mood, anxiety and neurodegenerative disorders. Many of our competitors have substantially greater financial, technical, human and other resources than we do and may be better equipped to develop, manufacture and market technologically superior products. In addition, many of these competitors have significantly greater experience than we do in undertaking preclinical testing and human clinical studies of new pharmaceutical products and in obtaining regulatory approvals of human therapeutic products. Accordingly, our competitors may succeed in obtaining FDA approval for superior products.

Other risks and uncertainties include:

our ability to successfully complete preclinical and clinical development of our products and services

our ability to manufacture sufficient amounts of products for development and commercialization activities

our ability to obtain, maintain and successfully enforce adequate patent and other proprietary rights protection of our products and services

•

the scope, validity and enforceability of patents and other proprietary rights held by third parties and their impact on our ability to commercialize our products and services

Table of Contents

•

the accuracy of our estimates of the size and characteristics of the markets to be addressed by our products and services, including growth projections

•

market acceptance of our products and services

our ability to identify new patients for our products and services

•

the accuracy of our information regarding the products and resources of our competitors and potential competitors

•

the content and timing of submissions to and decisions made by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and other regulatory agencies

•

our ability to obtain reimbursement for our products and services from third-party payors, and the extent of such coverage

•

our ability to establish and maintain strategic license, collaboration and distribution arrangements

•

the continued funding of our collaborations and joint ventures, if any are ultimately established

•

the possible disruption of our operations due to terrorist activities and armed conflict, including as a result of the disruption of operation of our subsidiaries and our customers, suppliers, distributors, couriers, collaborative partners, licensees and clinical trial sites.

Positive or timely results from preclinical studies and early clinical trials do not ensure positive or timely results in late stage clinical trials or product approval by the FDA or any other regulatory authority. Product candidates that show positive preclinical or early clinical results often fail in later stage clinical trials. Data obtained from preclinical and clinical activities is susceptible to varying interpretations, which could delay, limit, or prevent regulatory approvals.

We have limited experience in conducting the clinical trials required to obtain regulatory approval. We may not be able to conduct clinical trials at preferred sites, enlist clinical investigators, enroll sufficient numbers of participants, or begin or successfully complete clinical trials in a timely fashion, if at all. Any failure to perform may delay or terminate the trials. Our current clinical trials may be insufficient to demonstrate that our potential products will be active, safe, or effective. Additional clinical trials may be required if clinical trial results are negative or inconclusive, which will require us to incur additional costs and significant delays. If we do not receive the necessary regulatory approvals, we will not be able to generate product revenues and may not become profitable.

The regulatory approval process is costly and lengthy and we may not be able to successfully obtain all required regulatory approvals.

The preclinical development, clinical trials, manufacturing, marketing and labeling of pharmaceuticals are all subject to extensive regulation by numerous governmental authorities and agencies in the United States and other countries. We must obtain regulatory approval for each of our product candidates before marketing or selling any of them. It is not possible to predict how long the approval processes of the FDA or any other applicable federal or foreign regulatory authority or agency for any of our products will take or whether any such approvals ultimately will be granted. The FDA and foreign regulatory agencies have substantial discretion in the drug approval process, and positive results in preclinical testing or early phases of clinical studies offer no assurance of success in later phases of the approval process. Generally, preclinical and clinical testing of products can take many years and require the expenditure of substantial resources, and the data obtained from these tests and trials can be susceptible to varying interpretations that could delay, limit or prevent regulatory approval. If we encounter significant delays in the regulatory process that result in excessive costs, this may prevent us from continuing to develop our product candidates. Any delay in obtaining, or failure to obtain, approvals could adversely affect the marketing of our products and our ability to generate product revenue. The risks associated with the approval process include:

failure of our product candidates to meet a regulatory agency’s requirements for safety, efficacy and quality;

Table of Contents

•

limitation on the indicated uses for which a product may be marketed;

•

unforeseen safety issues or side effects; and

governmental or regulatory delays and changes in regulatory requirements and guidelines.

Even if we receive regulatory approvals for marketing our product candidates, if we fail to comply with continuing regulatory requirements, we could lose our regulatory approvals, and our business would be adversely affected.

The FDA continues to review products even after they receive initial approval. If we receive approval to commercialize any product candidates, the manufacturing, marketing and sale of these drugs will be subject to continuing regulation, including compliance with quality systems regulations, good manufacturing practices, adverse event requirements, and prohibitions on promoting a product for unapproved uses. Enforcement actions resulting from our failure to comply with government and regulatory requirements could result in fines, suspension of approvals, withdrawal of approvals, product recalls, product seizures, mandatory operating restrictions, criminal prosecution, civil penalties and other actions that could impair the manufacturing, marketing and sale of our potential products and our ability to conduct our business.

Even if we are able to obtain regulatory approvals for any of our product candidates, if they exhibit harmful side effects after approval, our regulatory approvals could be revoked or otherwise negatively impacted, and we could be subject to costly and damaging product liability claims.

Even if we receive regulatory approval for our product candidates, we will have tested them in only a small number of patients during our clinical trials. If our applications for marketing are approved and more patients begin to use our product, new risks and side effects associated with our products may be discovered. As a result, regulatory authorities may revoke their approvals; we may be required to conduct additional clinical trials, make changes in labeling of our product, reformulate our product or make changes and obtain new approvals for our and our suppliers’ manufacturing facilities. We might have to withdraw or recall our products from the marketplace. We may also experience a significant drop in the potential sales of our product if and when regulatory approvals for such product are obtained, experience harm to our reputation in the marketplace or become subject to lawsuits, including class actions. Any of these results could decrease or prevent any sales of our approved product or substantially increase the costs and expenses of commercializing and marketing our product.

Healthcare reform measures could adversely affect our business.

The efforts of governmental and third-party payers to contain or reduce the costs of healthcare may adversely affect the business and financial condition of pharmaceutical companies. In the United States and in foreign jurisdictions there have been, and we expect that there will continue to be, a number of legislative and regulatory proposals aimed at changing the healthcare system. For example, in some countries other than the United States, pricing of prescription drugs is subject to government control, and we expect proposals to implement similar controls in the United States to continue. The pendency or approval of such proposals could result in a decrease in our common stock value or limit our ability to raise capital or to enter into collaborations or license rights to our products.

New federal legislation may increase the pressure to reduce prices of pharmaceutical products paid for by Medicare, which could adversely affect our revenues, if any.

The Medicare Prescription Drug Improvement and Modernization Act of 2003, or MMA, expanded Medicare coverage for drug purchases by the elderly and disabled beginning in 2006. The new legislation uses formularies, preferred drug lists and similar mechanisms that may limit the number of drugs that will be covered in any therapeutic class or reduce the reimbursement for some of the drugs in a class. More recently, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 also contained certain provisions with the potential to affect pricing of pharmaceutical products.

Table of Contents

As a result of the expansion of legislation, including recent healthcare insurance legislation, and the expansion of federal coverage of drug products, we expect that there will be additional pressure to contain and reduce costs. These cost reduction initiatives could decrease the coverage and price that we receive for our products in the future and could seriously harm our business. While the MMA applies only to drug benefits for Medicare beneficiaries, private payers often follow Medicare coverage policy and payment limitations in setting their own reimbursement systems, and any limits on or reductions in reimbursement that occur in the Medicare program may result in similar limits on or reductions in payments from private payers.

New federal laws or regulations on drug importation could make lower cost versions of our future products available, which could adversely affect our revenues, if any.

The prices of some drugs are lower in other countries than in the United States because of government regulation and market conditions. Under current law, importation of drugs into the United States is generally not permitted unless the drugs are approved in the United States and the entity that holds that approval consents to the importation. Various proposals have been advanced to permit the importation of drugs from other countries to provide lower cost alternatives to the products available in the United States. In addition, the MMA requires the Secretary of Health and Human Services to promulgate regulations for drug re-importation from Canada into the United States under some circumstances, including when the drugs are sold at a lower price than in the United States.

If the laws or regulations are changed to permit the importation of drugs into the United States in circumstances that are currently not permitted, such a change could have an adverse effect on our business by making available lower priced alternatives to our future products.

Failure to obtain regulatory and pricing approvals in foreign jurisdictions could delay or prevent commercialization of our products abroad.

If we succeed in developing any products, we intend to market them in the European Union and other foreign jurisdictions. In order to do so, we must obtain separate regulatory approvals and comply with numerous and varying regulatory requirements. The approval procedure varies among countries and can involve additional testing. The time required to obtain approval abroad may differ from that required to obtain FDA approval. The foreign regulatory approval process may include all ~~Section 16(a) filing~~of the risks associated with obtaining FDA approval and additional risks associated with requirements ~~except~~particular to those foreign jurisdictions where we will seek regulatory approval of our products. We may not obtain foreign regulatory approvals on a timely basis, if at all. Approval by the FDA does not ensure approval by regulatory authorities in other countries, and approval by one ~~initial statement~~foreign regulatory authority does not ensure approval by regulatory authorities in other foreign countries or by the FDA. We and our collaborators may not be able to file for regulatory approvals and may not receive necessary approvals to commercialize our products in any market outside the United States. The failure to obtain these approvals could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of ~~beneficial ownership~~operations.

Risks Related to Our Common Stock and Liquidity Risks

Our common stock is a “Penny Stock” subject to specific rules governing its sale to investors that could impact its liquidity.

The SEC has adopted Rule 15g-9 which establishes the definition of a “penny stock,” for the purposes relevant to our common stock, as any equity security that has a market price of less than $5.00 per share or with an exercise price of less than $5.00 per share, subject to certain exceptions. For any transaction involving a penny stock, unless exempt, the rules require that a broker or dealer approve a person’s account for transactions in penny stocks; and the broker or dealer receive from the investor a written agreement to the transaction, setting forth the identity and quantity of the penny stock to be purchased.

In order to approve a person’s account for transactions in penny stocks, the broker or dealer must obtain financial information and investment experience objectives of the person; and make a reasonable determination that the transactions in penny stocks are suitable for that person and the person has sufficient knowledge and experience in financial matters to be capable of evaluating the risks of transactions in penny stocks.

Table of Contents

The broker or dealer must also deliver, prior to any transaction in a penny stock, a disclosure schedule prescribed by the SEC relating to the penny stock market, which, in highlight form sets forth the basis on which the broker or dealer made the suitability determination, and states that the broker or dealer received a signed, written agreement from the investor prior to the transaction.

Generally, brokers may be less willing to execute transactions in securities subject to the “penny stock” rules. This may make it more difficult for investors sell shares of our common stock.

Disclosure also has to be made about the risks of investing in penny stocks in both public offerings and in secondary trading and about the commissions payable to both the broker-dealer and the registered representative, current quotations for the securities and the rights and remedies available to an investor in cases of fraud in penny stock transactions. Finally, monthly statements have to be sent disclosing recent price information for the penny stock held in the account and information on the limited market in penny stocks.

There is no recent trading activity in our common stock and there is no assurance that an active market will develop in the future.

Although our common stock is currently quoted on the OTCQB (an interdealer electronic quotation system operated by OTC Markets Group, Inc.) under the symbol “PTIX”, trading of our common stock may be extremely sporadic. For example, several days may pass before any shares may be traded. As a result, an investor may find it difficult to dispose of, or to obtain accurate quotations of the price of our common stock. There can be no assurance that a more active market for our common stock will develop, or if one ~~statement~~should develop, there is no assurance that it will be sustained. This severely limits the liquidity of our common stock, and would likely have a material adverse effect on the market price of our common stock and on our ability to raise additional capital.

The market price of our common stock may be volatile, and you could lose all or part of your investment.

The market price of our common stock is likely to be highly volatile and could be subject to wide fluctuations in response to various factors, some of which are beyond our control.

The market price of our common stock may fluctuate substantially and will depend on a number of factors many of which are beyond our control and may not be related to our operating performance. These fluctuations could cause you to lose all or part of your investment in our common stock since you might be unable to sell your shares at or above the price you pay for the shares. Factors that could cause fluctuations in the market price of our common stock include, but are not necessarily limited to, the following:

•

price and volume fluctuations in the overall stock market from time to time;

•

volatility in the market prices and trading volumes of pharmaceutical and biotechnology stocks;

•

changes in operating performance and stock market valuations of other pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies generally, or those in our industry in particular;

•

sales of shares of our common stock by us or our stockholders;

•

failure of securities analysts to maintain coverage of us, changes in financial estimates by securities analysts who follow our company, or our failure to meet these estimates or the expectations of investors;

the financial projections we may provide to the public, any changes in ~~beneficial~~those projections or our failure to meet those projections;

•

announcements by us or our competitors of new products or services;

Table of Contents

•

the public’s reaction to our press releases, other public announcements and filings with the SEC;

•

rumors and market speculation involving us or other companies in our industry;

•

actual or anticipated changes in our operating results or fluctuations in our operating results;

•

actual or anticipated developments in our business, our competitors’ businesses or the competitive landscape generally;

litigation involving us, our industry or both, or investigations by regulators into our operations or those of our competitors;

•

developments or disputes concerning our intellectual property or other proprietary rights;

•

announced or completed acquisitions of businesses or technologies by us or our competitors;

•

new laws or regulations or new interpretations of existing laws or regulations applicable to our business;

•

changes in accounting standards, policies, guidelines, interpretations or principles;

•

any significant change in our management; and

general economic conditions and slow or negative growth of our markets.

In addition, in the past, following periods of volatility in the overall market and the market price of a particular company’s securities, securities class action litigation has often been instituted against these companies. This litigation, if instituted against us, could result in substantial costs and a diversion of our management’s attention and resources.

Because we became public by means of a reverse business combination (merger) we may not be able to attract the attention of brokerage firms.

Additional risks may exist since we became public through a “reverse business combination (merger).” Securities analysts of brokerage firms may not provide coverage of us since there is little incentive to brokerage firms to recommend the purchase of our common stock. No assurance can be given that brokerage firms will want to conduct any secondary offerings on our behalf in the future.

FINRA sales practice requirements may also limit your ability to buy and sell our common stock, which could depress the price of our shares.

FINRA rules require broker-dealers to have reasonable grounds for believing that an investment is suitable for a customer before recommending that investment to the customer. Prior to recommending speculative low-priced securities to their non-institutional customers, broker-dealers must make reasonable efforts to obtain information about the customer’s financial status, tax status and investment objectives, among other things. Under interpretations of these rules, FINRA believes that there is a high probability such speculative low-priced securities will not be suitable for at least some customers. Thus, FINRA requirements make it more difficult for broker-dealers to recommend that their customers buy our common stock, which may limit your ability to buy and sell our shares once publicly traded, have an adverse effect on the market for our shares, and thereby depress our share price.

Compliance with the reporting requirements of federal securities laws can be expensive.

We are a public reporting company in the United States, and accordingly, subject to the information and reporting requirements of the Exchange Act and other federal securities laws, and certain compliance obligations of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. The costs of preparing and filing annual and quarterly reports and other information with the SEC and furnishing audited reports to stockholders are substantial.

Table of Contents

Applicable regulatory requirements, including those contained in and issued under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, may make it difficult for us to retain or attract qualified officers and directors, which could adversely affect the management of its business and its ability to obtain or retain listing of our common stock.

We may be unable to attract and retain those qualified officers, directors and members of board committees required to provide for effective management because of the rules and regulations that govern publicly held companies, including, but not limited to, certifications by principal executive officers. The enactment of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act has resulted in the issuance of a series of related rules and regulations and the strengthening of existing rules and regulations by the SEC, as well as the adoption of new and more stringent rules by the stock exchanges. The perceived increased personal risk associated with these changes may deter qualified individuals from accepting roles as directors and executive officers.

Further, some of these changes heighten the requirements for board or committee membership, particularly with respect to an individual’s independence from the corporation and level of experience in finance and accounting matters. We may have difficulty attracting and retaining directors with the requisite qualifications. If we are unable to attract and retain qualified officers and directors, the management of our business and our ability to obtain or retain listing of our shares of common stock on any stock exchange (assuming we elect to seek and are successful in obtaining such listing) could be adversely affected.

We may have undisclosed liabilities and any such liabilities could harm our business, prospects, financial condition and results of operations.

Even though our pre-merger assets and liabilities were transferred in the split-off of MomSpot LLC (of which we owned a 51% interest) and 29 wholly-owned subsidiaries, we may be liable for any or all of such liabilities although we are unaware of any. Such liabilities that survived the Merger could harm our revenues, business, prospects, financial condition and results of operations upon our acceptance of responsibility for such liabilities.

The transfer of our membership interests in MomSpot LLC and 29 of our wholly-owned subsidiaries, as well as associated assets and liabilities, will result in taxable income to us in an amount equal to the difference between the fair market value of the assets transferred and the pre-merger tax basis of the assets. Any gain recognized, to the extent not offset by our net operating loss carryforward, if any, will be subject to federal income tax at regular corporate income tax rates.

If we fail to maintain an effective system of internal controls, we may not be able to accurately report our financial results or detect fraud. Consequently, investors could lose confidence in our financial reportingand this may decrease the trading price of our stock.

We must maintain effective internal controls to provide reliable financial reports and detect fraud. We have been assessing our internal controls to identify areas that need improvement and will continue to monitor internal controls to improve them. Failure to implement these changes to our internal controls or any others that it identifies as necessary to maintain an effective system of internal controls could harm our operating results and cause investors to lose confidence in our reported financial information. Any such loss of confidence would have a negative effect on the trading price of our stock.

As of December 31, 2016, management has not completed an effective assessment of the Company’s internal controls over financial reporting based on the 2013 Committee of Sponsoring Organizations (COSO) framework. Management has concluded that, during the period covered by this report, our internal controls and procedures were not effective to detect the inappropriate application of U.S. GAAP. Management identified the following material weaknesses set forth below in our internal control over financial reporting.

We lack the necessary corporate accounting resources to maintain adequate segregation of duties.

We did not perform an effective risk assessment or monitor internal controls over financial reporting.

Table of Contents

The price of our common stock may become volatile, which could lead to losses by investors and costly securities litigation.

The trading price of our common stock is likely to be highly volatile and could fluctuate in response to factors such as:

•

actual or anticipated variations in our operating results;

announcements of developments by us or our competitors;

•

the timing of IDE and/or NDA approval, the completion and/or results of our clinical trials;

•

regulatory actions regarding our products;

announcements by us or our competitors of significant acquisitions, strategic partnerships, joint ventures or capital commitments;

adoption of new accounting standards affecting our industry;

•

additions or departures of key personnel;

introduction of new products by us or our competitors;

•

sales of our common stock or other securities in the open market; and

•

other events or factors, many of which are beyond our control.

The stock market is subject to significant price and volume fluctuations. In the past, following periods of volatility in the market price of a company’s securities, securities class action litigation has often been initiated against such a company. Litigation initiated against us, whether or not successful, could result in substantial costs and diversion of our management’s attention and resources, which could harm our business and financial condition.

Investors may experience dilution of their ownership interests because of the future issuance of additional shares of our common stock.

In the future, we may issue additional authorized but previously unissued equity securities, resulting in the dilution of the ownership interests of our present stockholders. We may also issue additional shares of our common stock or other securities that are convertible into or exercisable for our common stock in connection with hiring or retaining employees, future acquisitions, future sales of our securities for capital raising purposes, or for other business purposes and some of these issuances may be at a price (or exercise prices) below the price at which shares of our common stock is currently quoted on ~~Form 4~~the OTCQB. The future issuance of any such additional shares of common stock may create downward pressure on the trading price of our common stock.

Ourcommon stock is controlled by insiders

Our officers and directors beneficially own approximately 30% of our outstanding shares of common stock. Such concentrated control of our common stock may adversely affect the price of our common stock. Investors who acquire our common stock may have no effective voice in the management of our operations. Sales by our insiders or affiliates, along with any other market transactions, could affect the market price of our common stock.

Table of Contents

We do not intend to pay dividends for the foreseeable future and may never pay dividends.

We have paid no dividends on our common stock to date and it is not anticipated that any dividends will be paid to holders of our common stock in the foreseeable future. While our future dividend policy will be based on the operating results and capital needs of our business, it is currently anticipated that any earnings will be retained to finance our future expansion and for the implementation of our business plan. As an investor, you should take note of the fact that a lack of a dividend can further affect the market value of our stock, and could significantly affect the value of any investment.

Our certificate of incorporation allows for our board to create new series of preferred stock without further approval by our stockholders, which could adversely affect the rights of the holders of our common stock.

Our board of directors has the authority to issue shares of our preferred stock, with such relative rights and preferences as the board of directors may determine, without further stockholder approval. As a result, our board of directors could authorize the issuance of a series of preferred stock that would grant to holders special and unique rights, including without limitation, a preferred right to our assets upon liquidation, a right to receive dividend payments before dividends are distributed to the holders of common stock and the right to convert into our common stock at a price more favorable then the price at which you acquired our common stock. The issuance of any preferred stock could decrease the value of your common stock and relative voting power of our common stock or result in dilution to our existing stockholders.

In addition, we are governed by the provisions of Section 203 of the Delaware General Corporation Law, or DGCL, which may, unless certain criteria are met, prohibit large stockholders, in particular those owning 15% or more of the voting rights on our common stock, from engaging in certain business combinations with us for a prescribed period of time.

Item1B. Unresolved Staff Comments.

Not applicable.

Item2. Properties.

Our principal offices are located at 149 Fifth Avenue, Suite 500, New York, New York 10010, in a conference room of Agenus, Inc. We utilize our principal office for quarterly board meetings and our annual shareholder meeting on a month to month basis at a nominal value. Our personnel and consultants all work remotely, the Company’s basic science laboratory work is conducted in the Lovejoy Lab at the University of Toronto, and its preclinical efficacy work is conducted at CROs. Hence the company does not have the need for a day-to-day physical office location other than a mailing address and conference room facility for meetings. For that reason, the Agenus conference room suits its purposes without imposing any inconveniences upon Agenus. Dr. Armen, our Executive Chairman, is also the Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Agenus Inc.

Item3. Legal Proceedings.

From time to time we may be named in claims arising in the ordinary course of business. As of December 31, 2016, no legal proceedings, government actions, administrative actions, investigations or claims are pending against us or involve us that, in the opinion of our management, could reasonably be expected to have a material adverse effect on our business and financial condition

We anticipate that we will expend significant financial and managerial resources in the defense of our intellectual property rights in the future if we believe that our rights have been violated. We also anticipate that we will expend significant financial and managerial resources to defend against claims that our products and services infringe upon the intellectual property rights of third parties.

Table of Contents

Item4. Mine Safety Disclosures.

Not applicable.

PARTII

Item5. Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities.

Market Information

Our common stock is currently available for trading in the over-the-counter market and is quoted on the OTCQB under the symbol “PTIX.” There has been very limited market for our common stock and trading volume has been negligible. There is no guarantee that an active trading market will develop in our common stock.

Trades in our common stock may be subject to Rule 15g-9 of the Exchange Act, which 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, broker/dealers must make a special suitability determination for purchasers of the securities and receive the purchaser’s written agreement to the transaction before the sale.

The SEC 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 listed on certain national exchanges, provided that the current price and volume information with respect to transactions in that security is provided by the applicable exchange or system). The penny stock rules require a broker/dealer, before effecting a transaction in a penny stock not otherwise exempt from the rules, to deliver a standardized risk disclosure document prepared by the SEC 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 before effecting the transaction, and must be given to the customer in writing before or with the customer’s confirmation. These disclosure requirements may have the effect of reducing the level of trading activity in the secondary market for shares of our common stock. As a result of these rules, investors may find it difficult to sell their shares.

Our common stock was ~~filed late by Thomas Plotts, reporting one late transaction; one statement of changes~~quoted on the OTC Pink under the symbol “ATRN” prior to July 27, 2016 and then under the symbol “PTIX” between July 27, 2016 and October 16, 2016. Commencing on October 17, 2016, our common stock is listed in beneficial ownership on Form 4 was filed late by Jerome Chazen, reporting one late transaction; and one statement of changes in beneficial ownership on Form 4 was filed late by Raymond Musci, reporting one late transaction.

~~ITEM 11. EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION~~

~~Summary Compensation Table~~

the OTCQB under the symbol “PTIX”. The following table ~~provides disclosure concerning all compensation earned~~sets forth, for ~~services to us in all capacities~~the periods indicated and as reported on the OTC Markets, the high and low bid prices for our ~~fiscal years ended December 31, 2010~~common stock. Such quotations reflect inter-dealer prices, without retail mark-up, markdown or commission and ~~2009 (i) as to each person serving as our Chief Executive Officer during our~~may not necessarily represent actual transactions.

	High		Low

2015 (1)
First Quarter	$	*	$	*
Second Quarter	$	*	$	*
Third Quarter	$	*	$	*
Fourth Quarter	$	*	$	*

2016(1)
First Quarter(1)	$	*	$	*
Second Quarter(1)	$	*	$	*
Third Quarter(2)	$	250.00	$	1.67
Fourth Quarter(3)	$	128.85	$	128.85

* Less than $0.01 per share

(1) The prices for the fiscal year ended December 31, ~~2010,~~2015 and ~~(ii) as~~the three month periods ended March 31, 2016 and June 30, 2016 are actual sale prices because the bid price information was not available.

(2) The high and low bid prices for this quarter were reported by the OTC Pink marketplace. There was negligible trading volume during this period.

(3) The high and low bid prices for this quarter were reported by the OTCQB marketplace. There was no trading volume during this period.

Table of Contents

Holders

As of March 27, 2017, there are approximately 433 record holders of our common stock and one holder of our Series B Preferred Stock.

Dividend Policy

We have never paid any cash dividends on our common stock. We anticipate that we will retain funds and future earnings to support operations and to finance the growth and development of our two most highly compensated executive officers other than our Chief Executive Officer who were serving as executive officers during our fiscal year ended December 31, 2010, whose compensation exceeded $100,000. The people listedbusiness. Therefore, we do not expect to pay cash dividends in the ~~table below are referred~~foreseeable future, if at all. Any future determination to pay dividends will be at the discretion of our board of directors and will depend on our financial condition, results of operations, capital requirements and other factors that our board of directors deems relevant. In addition, the terms of any future debt or credit financings may preclude us from paying dividends.

Recent Sales of Unregistered Securities

Original Issuances of Stock and Warrants

Sales by Our Predecessor, Atrinsic, Inc.

Between February 11, 2014 and December 9, 2015, Atrinsic, Inc. issued Secured Convertible Notes in the aggregate principal amount of $665,000 to two of its shareholders. The Secured Convertible Notes, as ~~our “named executive officers”~~revised and amended, had a maturity date of August 31, 2016 and bore interest at the rate of 5.0% per annum, payable at maturity. The outstanding principal and accrued interest of each Secured Convertible Note was convertible, subject to a 4.99% beneficial ownership cap, into shares of Atrinsic Inc.’s common stock at an initial conversion price of $5.00 per share (subject to adjustment), at the option of the respective holders. The Secured Convertible Notes were exchanged for 295,945 Predecessor Warrants simultaneously with the closing of the Merger and the instruments by which they were secured were simultaneously terminated.

2016 Private Placement

In February, March and April 2016, we sold an aggregate of 4,108,460 shares of Series B Preferred Stock, par value $0.000001 per share (“Series B Preferred Stock”), at a price of $1.25 per share, for total gross proceeds of $4,635,575 and total net proceeds of $4,261,797 (or total gross proceeds of $5,135,575 and total net proceeds of $4,761,797, including the conversion of the $500,000 of debt).

Name and
Principal Position
Year Salary Bonus
Stock
Awards (5)

Option
Awards

All Other
Compensation
Total

Raymond Musci (1)
2010 $ 360,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 20,919 $ 380,919
Executive Vice President, Corporate
Development and Director
2009 $ 360,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 18,618 $ 378,618

Thomas Plotts (2) 2010 $ 250,000 $ 25,000 $ 16,750 �� $ 126,250 (6) $ 5,835 $ 423,835
Chief Financial Officer 2009 $ 187,947 $ 13,732 $ - $ - $ 12,385 $ 214,064

Andrew Stollman (3) 2010 $ 425,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 36,687 $ 461,687
President 2009 $ 425,000 $ - $ 77,688 $ - $ 30,219 $ 532,907

Jeffrey Schwartz (4) 2010 $ 172,916 $ - $ - $ 422,128 (7) $ 12,023 $ 607,067
Chief Executive Officer 2009 $ 167,248 $ - $ 4,398 $ - $ 2,332 $ 173,978
37

Table of Contents

~~(1) Mr. Musci is currently performing~~

In connection with the ~~duties~~2016 Private Placement, the Placement Agent and its selected dealers were paid total cash commissions of ~~Chief Executive Officer following~~$159,183 and the ~~resignation~~Placement Agent was paid an expense allowance of ~~Jeffrey Schwartz, our former Chief Executive Officer, on August 13, 2010. Other compensation in 2010~~$15,000 and ~~2009 relates to health insurance premiums.~~

~~(2) Mr. Plotts~~ was appointed Chief Financial Officer on June 30, 2010 after serving as Interim Chief Financial Officer since December 6, 2009. Prior to his appointment as Interim Chief Financial Officer, Mr. Plotts was Atrinsic’s Vice President of Finance & SEC Reporting, a position he held since February 2007. In 2010, Mr. Plotts received 6,250 restricted stock units and optionsissued (together with its selected dealers) Placement Agent Warrants to purchase ~~62,500~~127,346 shares of Series B Preferred Stock at an exercise price of $1.25 per share.

Conversion of Debt to Equity

Garo H. Armen, our Chairman and principal stockholder, purchased shares of Series B Preferred Stock in the Private Offering in exchange for the cancellation of $350,000 of loans made by him, plus accrued and unpaid interest on these loans.

During 2013 and 2012, Dr. Armen made loans to us in the amount of $310,000. The proceeds of the loans were used to fund research, development and general operating activity of Protagenic. The loans accrued interest at the rate of 10% per annum. In February 2013, in connection with a capital raise by Protagenic, the loans and accrued interest thereon, totaling $317,789, were converted into Protagenic warrants to purchase 953,367 shares of Protagenic common stock at an exercise price of ~~$3.64.~~$1.00 per share. Other ~~compensation consists of $5,835 of health insurance premiums in 2010 and $5,185 of health insurance premiums and $7,200 of auto allowance in 2009.~~

~~(3) Andrew Stollman served as Atrinsic’s President from February 4, 2008 until February 28, 2011. Pursuant~~than with respect to the terms of his employment agreement with the Company, other compensation paid to Mr. Stollman consisted of payments of $12,000 and $10,000 in 2010 and 2009, respectively, related to an automobile allowance, life insurance premiums of $4,019 for eachpayment of the ~~years ended~~purchase price for the securities by the conversion of debt, Dr. Armen participated in this capital raise on the same terms as all other investors.

From April 15, 2015 through October 29, 2015, Dr. Armen made five loans to Protagenic. The proceeds of the loans were used to fund research, development and general operating activity of Protagenic. The loans accrued interest at the rate of 10% per annum. Principal and accrued interest on these loans, totaling approximately $350,000, were converted into shares of Series B Preferred Stock in the Private Offering at a price of $1.25 per share.

On December ~~31, 2010 and 2009, as well as $20,668 and $16,200 for 2010 and 2009, respectively, related to health insurance premiums.~~

(4) Jeffrey Schwartz served as Atrinsic’s Chief Executive Officer from January 27, 2010 until August 13, 2010 and prior to that as Atrinsic’s Interim Chief Executive Officer from October 6, 2009. In the year ended December 31, 2009, Mr. Schwartz received $4,398 of stock awards and $61,000 of cash compensation as a director in 2009, prior to becoming our Interim Chief Executive Officer and received $106,248 in cash compensation for his service as Interim Chief Executive Officer. In the year ended December 31, 2010, Mr. Schwartz received options to purchase 250,00021, 2015, Alexander K. Arrow purchased 60,000 shares of common stock of Protagenic from Mark Berg at a per share purchase price equal to $0.50 for an ~~exercise~~aggregate purchase price of ~~$3.00. Other compensation in 2010 and 2009 relates to health insurance premiums.~~

~~(5) The dollar amount is the aggregate grant date fair value~~$30,000. In addition, Dr. Arrow purchased 58,260 shares of ~~stock awards granted~~Series B Preferred Stock in the ~~fiscal year in accordance~~Private Offering, on the same terms as all other investors.

Effective December 23, 2015, Dr. Armen entered into an additional loan agreement with ~~Financial Accounting Standards Board Accounting Standards Codification Topic 718.~~Protagenic pursuant to which he agreed to loan Protagenic up to $150,000. The ~~fair value~~loans under this Agreement accrued interest at the rate of ~~restricted~~10% per year. The principal and interest on these loans is convertible into common stock ~~units issued was recorded~~ at ~~fair market value at date~~a price of ~~grant. For awards subject to performance conditions, the value reported is computed based upon the probable outcome~~$1.25 per share. On December 23, 2015, Protagenic borrowed $37,628 of the ~~performance condition as of~~$150,000 available Borrowings under the ~~grant date. For further information, refer to Note 12 - "Stock Based Compensation," in our Consolidated Financial Statements in our Original Filing filed with the SEC on April 7, 2011.~~

(6) The dollar amount is the aggregate grant date fair value of option awards granted in the fiscal year in accordance with Financial Accounting Standards Board Accounting Standards Codification Topic 718. The fair value of options was estimated on the date of grant using the Black-Scholes option pricing model with the following assumptions: (a) risk free rate of 2.2% (b) dividend yield of 0.0%, (c) expected option life of 5.6 years, and (d) expected volatility of 58%. For awards subject to performance conditions, the value reported is computed based upon the probable outcome of the performance condition as of the grant date. For further information, refer to Note 12 - "Stock Based Compensation," in our Consolidated Financial Statements in our Original Filing filed with the SEC on April 7, 2011.

(7) The dollar amount is the aggregate grant date fair value of option awards granted in the fiscal year in accordance with Financial Accounting Standards Board Accounting Standards Codification Topic 718. Mr. Schwartz received 125,000 options to purchase stock from each of the 2007 and 2009 plans. The fair value of options was estimated on the date of grant using the Black-Scholes option pricing model with the following assumptions relating to the awards from the 2007 plan: (a) risk free rate of 2.3% (b) dividend yield of 0.0%, (c) expected option life of 6.3 years, and (d) expected volatility of 59%. The assumptions related to the awards from the 2009 plan were the same as the 2007 plan except the expected option life was 5.8 years. For awards subject to performance conditions, the value reported is computed based upon the probable outcome of the performance condition as of the grant date. For further information, refer to Note 12 - "Stock Based Compensation," in our Consolidated Financial Statements in our Original Filing filed with the SEC on April 7, 2011.

~~Narrative Disclosure to Summary Compensation Table~~

~~Introduction~~

In this section, we describe our compensation objectives and policies as applied to our named executive officers during 2010. The following discussion and analysis is intended to provide a framework within which to understand the actual compensation awarded to, earned or held by each named executive officer during 2010, as reported in the summary compensation table set forth above.

~~Determination of Compensation~~

~~The Compensation Committee of~~agreement.

Effective June 17, 2016, the Board of Directors (the “Committee”) is responsible for determining the annual salaries and other compensation of directors and executive officers, administering our equity compensation plans and assisting the Board of Directors in fulfilling its oversight responsibilities with respect to management succession and other significant human resources matters.

Among other things, the Committee is required to determine and approve the compensation of the chief executive officer, review and approve the compensation of the Company’s other executive officers, review and approve any incentive compensation plan or equity-based plan for the benefit of executive officers, and review and approve any employment agreement, severance arrangement or change-in-control arrangement for the benefit of executive officers.

~~Throughout this report, the individuals who served as the Company’s chief executive officer as well as the other individuals included~~determined that it was in the ~~Summary Compensation Table above, are referred to as the “named executive officers.”~~

~~Philosophy~~

~~Our overall compensation program seeks to align executive compensation with the achievement~~best interest of ~~the Company’s business objectives and with individual performance towards these objectives. It also seeks to enable~~ the Company to ~~attract, retain, and reward executive officers and other key employees who contribute~~convert the last remaining portion of debt owed to ~~our success and to incentivize them to enhance long-term stockholder value.~~

~~In setting compensation levels, consideration was given to each executive’s overall responsibilities, professional qualifications, business experience, job performance and technical expertise, and~~Dr. Armen into equity, per the ~~combined value of these factors to the company’s long-term performance and growth. The Company’s recent performance was also considered in setting compensation levels.~~

~~Objectives of Executive Compensation~~

~~The main objectives of our compensation strategy include the following:~~

~~pay competitively within our industry to attract and retain key employees while taking into account our need to preserve capital;~~

~~pay for performance to motivate and align our executives interests with that of our stockholders; and~~

~~design compensation programs with a balance between short-term and long-term objectives, including encouraging management ownership of our common stock.~~

The Committee seeks to properly compensate executive officers for their services to the Company and to create incentives to focus on the specific goals identified as significant for the Company. The Committee identifies and considers a wide range of measures for individual performance, company performance, and, as appropriate, share price appreciation and develops performance goals based on these measures. In addition, the Committee endeavors to preserve the Company’s tax deduction for all compensation paid, which can be accomplished primarily by conditioning compensation on the achievement of certain performance goals, as discussed below.

~~Executive Compensation Components~~

~~The primary components~~terms of the ~~executive compensation program are:~~

~~base salary;~~

~~annual performance-based cash bonus;~~

~~long-term equity incentive awards in the form of stock options, restricted stock units and/or restricted stock; and~~

~~other benefits.~~

~~Annual Base Salary~~

loan agreements. The sum total of remaining debt and accumulated interest as of December 31, 2016 was $0.

Securities Act Exemptions

We ~~strive~~deemed the transactions described above were exempt from registration under the Securities Act in reliance on Section 4(a)(2) of the Securities Act, including Regulation D and Rule 506 promulgated thereunder, relative to ~~provide our executive officers~~transactions by an issuer not involving a public offering. All purchasers of securities in transactions exempt from registration pursuant to Regulation D represented to us that they were accredited investors and were acquiring the shares for investment purposes only and not with a level of assured cash compensation in the form of annual base salary that is competitive with companies in the digital entertainment and entertainment content business and similar enterprises and companies that are comparable in size and performance. We striveview to, set base salaries at levels which are designed to motivate and retain our executives. The annual base salary of Mr. Musci, our interim Chief Executive Officer, in 2010 was $360,000, which has not changed from the prior year. The annual base salary of Mr. Stollman, our President, in 2010 was $425,000 which was negotiatedor for sale in connection with, any distribution thereof and that they could bear the ~~closing~~risks of ~~our merger with Traffix, Inc.,~~the investment and ~~reflects in part~~could hold the ~~base compensation~~securities for an indefinite period of time. The purchasers received written disclosures that ~~Mr. Stollman was receiving at his company prior~~the securities had not been registered under the Securities Act and that any resale must be made pursuant to a registration statement or an available exemption from such registration.

All certificates representing the merger. The annual base salary of Mr. Plotts in 2010 was $250,000 and was established based on negotiations with the Company. The annual base salary of Mr. Schwartz in 2010 was $275,000 and was established based on negotiations with the Company.

When establishing the base salaries for our named executive officers, the Compensation Committee considered a number of factors including the individual’s duties and responsibilities, their potential for making significant contributions to the companysecurities issued in the ~~future, their backgrounds~~transactions described in this Item 15 included appropriate legends setting forth that the ~~digital entertainment~~securities had not been offered or sold pursuant to a registration statement and ~~entertainment content business and other general discretionary considerations as~~describing the ~~Compensation Committee deemed appropriate.~~

~~Annual Cash Bonuses~~

Annual cash incentive bonuses create a measurable and predictable connection between total executive compensation and our annual performance. Unlike base salaries, annual incentive bonuses are at risk basedapplicable restrictions on how well we perform and how our executive officers contribute to that performance. In 2010, except as noted in the following sentence, no annual cash bonuses were paid to the Company’s named executive officers as a resulttransfer of the ~~Company’s performance. Mr. Plotts, however, received a bonus of $25,000 in 2010~~securities. There were no underwriters employed in connection with any of the ~~Company~~’~~s timely filing~~transactions set forth above, under the heading “Recent Sales of ~~its annual report on Form 10-K.~~Unregistered Securities”.

Table of Contents

~~Long-Term Equity Incentive Awards~~

The Compensation Committee intends to use equity incentive awards to serve as the primary vehicle for providing long-term incentives to our senior executives and key employees. We also regard equity incentive awards as a key retention tool. During 2010, equity incentive awards were available for grant under our 2007 and 2009 Plans, which are described more fully below.

~~As described in the footnotes to the Summary Compensation Table, the Compensation Committee has granted long-term equity incentive compensation awards to named executive officers in the form~~

Use of non-qualified stock option awards as well as restricted stock units. The vesting provisions of our equity awards are established in order to encourage employee retention and focus management’s attention on sustaining financial performance and building stockholder value over an extended term.

~~The following are descriptions of our 2005, 2007 and 2009 Stock Incentive Plans:~~

~~2005 Plan~~

In 2005, New Motion Mobile, Inc., our wholly owned subsidiary, established the Stock Incentive Plan (the “2005 Plan”), for eligible employees and other directors and consultants. In connection with the closing of our exchange transaction with New Motion Mobile, Inc.Proceeds from Registered Securities

Our registration statement, SEC Registration No. 333-213671, effective on February 12, 2007, we assumed all of New Motion Mobile’s obligations under the plan. Under the 2005 Plan, officers, employees and non-employees could be granted options to purchase common stock at no less than 100%8, 2017, was filed on behalf of the ~~market price at the date the option is granted. Upon the approval~~selling stockholders named therein registering an aggregate of ~~the 2007 Stock Incentive Plan, our Board adopted a resolution to prevent further grants of awards under the 2005 Plan.~~

~~2007 Plan~~

On February 16, 2007, our Board of Directors approved the 2007 Stock Incentive Plan (the “2007 Plan”). The maximum number of shares available for grant under the plan is 350,000 shares of common stock. Under the 2007 Plan, officers, employees and non-employees may be granted options to purchase our common stock at no less than 100% of the market price at the date the option is granted. With the approval of our 2009 Stock Incentive Plan by our stockholders, no further awards will be granted under the 2007 Plan, except that any4,485,806 shares of common stock that have been forfeited or cancelled in accordance with the terms of the applicable award under the 2007 Plan may be subsequently again awarded in accordance with the terms of the 2007 Plan prior to its expiration in 2017.

~~2009 Plan~~

On June 25, 2009, the Company adopted the 2009 Stock Incentive Plan. Under the plan, the Company is authorized to grant equity-based awards in the form of stock options, restricted common stock, restricted stock units, stock appreciation rights, and other stock based awards to employees (including executive officers), directors and consultants of the Company ~~and its subsidiaries.~~for sale by the selling stockholders. The ~~maximum number of shares available for grant under the plan is 687,500~~ shares of common stock. The number of shares available for award under the plan is subject to adjustment for certain corporate changes and based on the types of awards provided, all in accordance with the provisions of the plan.

~~Outstanding Equity Awards at December 31, 2010~~

~~The following table presents information regarding outstanding option and~~ stock ~~awards held~~offered by the ~~company’s named executive officers as~~selling stockholders include 3,235,694 shares of ~~December 31, 2010. None~~common stock, 872,766 shares of ~~the named executive officers exercised options during the fiscal year ended December 31, 2010 and neither Mr. Musci nor Mr. Schwartz held any options or~~common stock ~~awards as of December 31, 2010.~~

Option Awards Stock Awards

Number of Securities Underlying
Unexercised Options (#)

Name Grant Date Exercisable Unexercisable
Option
Exercise Price
($)

Option Expiration
Date

Number of shares
or Units of Stock
That Have Not
Vested (#)

Market Value of
Shares or Units
of Stock That
Have Not Vested
($)

Thomas Plotts (1)
02/04/08 - - - - 424 $ 1123.60
05/31/10 13,888 48,612 $ 3.64 May 31, 2020 - -
- -
Andrew Stollman(2)
04/09/10 7,606 - $ 14.79 April 9, 2011 - -
04/09/10 7,606 - $ 13.67 April 9, 2011 - -
04/09/10 7,606 - $ 17.75 April 9, 2011 - -
01/12/01 17,747 - $ 33.72 December 1. 2011 - -
03/06/04 68,453 - $ 43.43 June 3, 2014 - -
06/25/09 - - - 68,750 $ 182,187.50
06/25/09 - - - - 25,000 $ 66,250
-

~~(1)~~

On February 4, 2008, Mr. Plotts was granted 7,500 shares of restricted stock, of which 33.3% vested on the February 4, 2009 with the remainder vesting monthly thereafter over the next 24 months. On May 31, 2010, Mr. Plotts was granted an option to purchase 62,500 shares of common stock at an exercise price of $3.64. The options vest in equal monthly installments over a period of 36 months commencing on May 31, 2010.

~~(2)~~

In connection with the merger of Atrinsic and Traffix, Inc., Mr. Stollman’s options to purchase shares of common stock of Traffix were converted into an aggregate of 125,918 options to purchase shares of common stock of Atrinsic at an average exercise price of $36.52 which options were fully vested at the time of the merger. As of December 31, 2010, 16,900 of these options expired unexercised leaving a balance of 109,018 options at an average exercise price of $35.98. On June 25, 2009, Mr. Stollman was granted 68,750 restricted stock units that were to vest after the closing of trading on the date that the average per share trading price of the Company’s common stock during any period of 10 consecutive trading days equals or exceeds $30.00. The fair value of these awards reflects a 25% probability of vesting. These RSUs were cancelled upon Mr. Stollman’s departure from the Company. Also on June 25, 2009, 75,000 of Mr. Stollman’s options were exchanged for 25,000 restricted stock units. Two thirds of these restricted stock units vested as of February 16, 2011 and the remaining RSUs were cancelled. Mr. Stollman’s role as President ended on February 28, 2011 with the end of his three year employment contract.

~~Other Benefits~~

~~Retirement Benefits~~

We maintain a 401(k) plan in which all full-time employees, including our named executive officers, who are at least 21 years of age and have one year of service are eligible to participate. We provide this plan to help our employees save some portion of their cash compensation for retirement in a tax efficient manner. We do not provide an option for our employees to invest in our stock in the 401(k) plan.

~~Health and Welfare Benefits~~

~~We provide health and welfare benefits for all~~issuable upon conversion of our ~~full-time employees, including our named executed officers. The health~~outstanding Series B Preferred Stock and ~~welfare benefits provided to our named executive officers are further described in their respective employment agreements, which are discussed below.~~

~~Employment Agreements, Severance Benefits and Change in Control Provisions~~

Consistent with the above compensation philosophy, we entered into Employment Agreements with each of Jeffrey Schwartz, our former Chief Executive Officer, Thomas Plotts, our Chief Financial Officer and Andrew Stollman, our former President, which include each of the primary compensation components outlined above. The following is a description of the employment agreements with each of the above mentioned named executive officers:

~~Thomas Plotts~~

On January 29, 2010, we entered into a letter agreement with Thomas Plotts in connection with his appointment as our Interim Chief Financial Officer on December 16, 2009. Pursuant to the agreement, Mr. Plotts served as our Interim Chief Financial Officer on an “at will” basis and received a salary of $250,000 per annum. Pursuant to the agreement, Mr. Plotts received a bonus of $25,000 upon our filing of our annual report on Form 10-K. Upon the execution of the agreement, Mr. Plotts was granted 25,000 restricted stock units (on a pre-reverse stock split basis) pursuant to our 2009 Stock Incentive Plan and a Restricted Stock Unit Agreement. The restricted stock units fully vested as of March 31, 2010.

On June 30, 2010, we entered into an employment agreement with Thomas Plotts pursuant to which Mr. Plotts became our Chief Financial Officer. Pursuant to the agreement, Mr. Plotts receives a base salary of $250,000 per annum. Mr. Plotts’ employment agreement has a term of three years, subject to earlier termination in accordance with its terms. The agreement provides that Mr. Plotts is eligible to receive a target annual bonus equal to 50% of his base salary for each calendar year during the term if our business operations meet or exceed certain financial performance standards to be determined by the compensation committee of our board of directors.

~~In accordance with the terms of his agreement, on June 30, 2010 Mr. Plotts was granted an option to purchase 62,500~~377,346 shares of our common stock ~~pursuant to our 2009 Stock Incentive Plan at~~underlying warrants with an exercise price of ~~$3.64~~$1.25 per share. We are not selling any securities under the prospectus and will not receive any of the proceeds from the sale of the shares by the selling stockholders. The ~~options will vest~~selling stockholders may sell their common stock on any stock exchange, market or trading facility on which the shares are traded or quoted, or in equal monthly installments over a period of thirty six months commencing on May 31, 2010 and on the last day of each month thereafter until fully vested. Any portion of Mr. Plotts’ option that remains unvestedprivate transactions. These sales may be at fixed prices, at prevailing market prices at the time of his termination will be extinguished and cancelled, provided, however, that if a change of control (as defined in the agreement) occurs while Mr. Plotts is employed with us, and Mr. Plotts’ employment is terminated by us other than for disability, death or cause within three (3) months before or six (6) months after the effective date of the change of control, all of the options granted to Mr. Plotts will automatically vest immediately priorsale, at prices related to the ~~termination of Mr. Plotts’ employment and will remain exercisable for a period of one (1) year after such termination.~~

If Mr. Plotts’ employment is terminated by us other than for disability, death or cause, we will pay to Mr. Plotts: (a) all base salary and benefits which have accrued through the termination date and (b) a one-time payment equal to six months of his base salary. If Mr. Plotts’ employment is terminated by Mr. Plotts voluntarily, or by us for cause, or as a result of Mr. Plotts’ disability or death, we will pay to Mr. Plotts all base salary and benefits which have accrued through the termination date.

~~Andrew Stollman~~

Prior to Mr. Stollman’s departure from the Company on February 28, 2011, Mr. Stollman was party to an Employment Agreement executed in connection with our closing of our merger with Traffix, Inc. on February 4, 2008. The employment agreement had a term of three years, and could be terminated by Atrinsic or Mr. Stollman any time and without any reason. A summary of the material terms of Mr. Stollman’s employment agreement follows:

~~Title and Salary.~~ ~~Mr. Stollman served as our President and received a base salary of $425,000 per annum during the term of his agreement.~~

~~Signing Bonus.~~ Upon the execution of his employment agreement, Mr. Stollman received a signing bonus of $250,000, and all options held by Mr. Stollman to purchase equity securities of Atrinsic (aside from the options discussed below) automatically vested.

~~Annual Bonus.~~ Mr. Stollman was eligible to receive an annual bonus for each calendar year during the term of his agreement if Atrinsic's business operations met or exceeded certain financial performance standards. For the fiscal year ending December 31, 2009 and 2010, none of our named executive officers received a bonus.

~~Benefits.~~ ~~Mr. Stollman and his family were provided with medical, hospitalization, dental, disability and life insurance during the term of the Agreement.~~

~~Stock Options.~~ ~~Upon the closing of our merger with Traffix, Inc., Mr. Stollman was granted an option to purchase 75,000 shares of Atrinsic's common stock. The option was exercisable~~prevailing market price, at an exercise price equal to $43.68 and was scheduled to expire on February 4, 2018. Except in the event Mr. Stollman was terminated without cause and except in the event of a termination of Mr. Stollman's employment for good reason, any portion of such executive's option that remained unvestedvarying prices determined at the time of termination was to be extinguished and cancelled. Mr. Stollman’s options were subject to accelerated vesting upon a change of control. On June 25, 2009, stockholders approved our 2009 Stock Incentive Plan and our one-time option exchange program. As a resultsale, or at negotiated prices.

We will not receive any of the ~~option exchange program,~~proceeds from the ~~options Mr. Stollman held to purchase 75,000 shares~~sale of ~~our~~the common stock ~~were cancelled, and Mr. Stollman received 25,000 restricted stock units in exchange for such options which were to vest on~~by the ~~basis~~selling stockholders. All proceeds from the sale of ~~certain performance metrics. On February 16, 2011,~~ the ~~Compensation Committee determined that 16,667 shares underlying the restricted stock units had vested and the remaining RSUs were cancelled.~~

~~Restricted Stock Units.~~ ~~Upon the closing of our merger with Traffix, Inc., Atrinsic agreed to issue Mr. Stollman restricted stock units (“RSUs”) having a term of ten years covering 68,750 shares of~~ common stock ~~conditioned~~will be paid directly to the selling stockholders. We would, however, receive proceeds upon the delivery by Mr. Stollman to the company of a Restricted Stock Unit Agreement. Pursuant to the terms of his employment agreement, once issued, Mr. Stollman’s RSUs were to first vest, with respect to 25,000 RSUs after the closing of trading on the date that the average per share trading price of our common stock during any period of 10 consecutive trading days equaled or exceeded $60. The remaining 43,750 RSUs were to vest after the closing of trading on the date that the average per share trading price of our common stock during any period of 10 consecutive trading days equaled or exceeded $80. Except in the event Mr. Stollman was terminated without cause and except in the event of a termination of Mr. Stollman 's employment for good reason, any portion of Mr. Stollman’s restricted stock units that remained unvested at the time of termination were to be forfeited, extinguished and cancelled. Mr. Stollman’s restricted stock units were subject to accelerated vesting upon a change of control. The vesting terms of Mr. Stollman’s restricted stock units were amended prior to their issuance on June 25, 2009 so that eachexercise of the ~~aforementioned RSUs~~warrants held by the selling stockholders which, if such warrants are exercised in full (and assuming no “cashless” exercise features are utilized), would ~~vest after the closing of trading on the date that the average per share trading price of our common stock during~~be $471,683. Proceeds, if any, ~~period of 10 consecutive trading days equaled or exceeded $30. These RSUs were cancelled upon Mr. Stollman’s departure~~received from the ~~Company.~~

~~Payments upon termination. Mr. Stollman’s employment agreement provided~~exercise of such warrants will be used for working capital and general corporate purposes. No assurances can be given that ~~if Mr. Stollman’s employment with us was terminated because~~any of ~~death~~such warrants will be exercised.

We intend to keep the prospectus effective until February 8, 2018 or disability or cause or if Mr. Stollman voluntarily terminated his employment with us other than for good reason, we would pay or provide to Mr. Stollman all base salary and benefits which have accrued through the termination date. In addition, if Mr. Stollman’s employment was terminated as a result of death or disability, Mr. Stollman would receive a sum equal to a prorated portion of the annual bonus to which Mr. Stollman would have been entitled if his employment had continued until the end of the employment years in which his death or disability occurred.

If Mr. Stollman’s employment was terminated by Mr. Stollman for good reason (which includes a material adverse change in the nature and scope of the duties, obligations, rights or powers of Mr. Stollman’s employment, including those resulting from a change in control of the company), or by us other than for cause, we were required to pay to Mr. Stollman: (a) all base salary and benefits which have accrued through the termination date, (b) a one time payment equal to the sum of (i) two times his base salary and (ii) two times an amount equal to the average of the annual bonus amounts received by Mr. Stollman under the employment agreement for the 2 years prior to such termination, and (c) coverage under the employee benefit plans described above until the earlier of (i) the ~~end of~~date on which the ~~second anniversary of such termination or Mr. Stollman’s eligibility to receive similar benefits from~~shares may be resold by a ~~new employer. In addition, if Mr. Stollman’s employment was terminated by Mr. Stollman for good reason, or by us other than for cause, all stock options~~selling stockholder without registration and ~~other equity awards granted to Mr. Stollman~~without restriction pursuant to ~~the employment agreement (other than options and awards that vest upon the achievement of performance objectives) were to automatically vest, and remain exercisable for a period of one year after~~Rule 144 or (ii) such ~~termination.~~

On February 28, 2011, Mr. Stollman’s employment agreement expired pursuant to its terms. Therefore, none of the payments described in this section were made to Mr. Stollman in connection with his departure from the Company.

~~Jeffrey Schwartz~~

~~Separation Agreement.~~

On August 13, 2010, we entered into a Separation and Mutual Release Agreement with Jeffrey Schwartz, which terminated Mr. Schwartz’s employment with the company. Pursuant to the agreement, all of Mr. Schwartz’s options to purchase shares of the Company’s common stock were extinguished and cancelled.

~~Employment Agreement.~~

~~Prior to his resignation, Mr. Schwartz was party to an Employment Agreement with us. The employment agreement had a term of three years, and could be terminated by Atrinsic or Mr. Schwartz at any~~ time ~~and without any reason. A summary of the material terms of Mr. Schwartz’s employment agreement follows:~~

~~Title and Salary.~~ ~~Mr. Schwartz's employment agreement provided that he would serve~~ as ~~our Chief Executive Officer and receive a base salary of $275,000 per annum during the term of his agreement.~~

~~Annual Bonus.~~ Mr. Schwartz was eligible to receive a target annual bonus equal to his base salary for each calendar year during the term of his employment, if the Company’s business operations met or exceeded financial performance standards to be determined by the Board. No annual bonus was paid to Mr. Schwartz during the term of his agreement.

~~Benefits.~~ Mr. Schwartz and his family were provided with medical, hospitalization, dental, disability and life insurance during the term of his agreement, with Atrinsic paying all premiums and other costs associated with such policies. Mr. Schwartz was also eligible to participate in any other compensation plan or other perquisites generally made available to executive officers of the company from time to time.

~~Stock Options.~~ Mr. Schwartz was granted an option to acquire 125,000 shares of the Company’s common stock, par value $0.01 per share pursuant to the Company’s 2009 Stock Incentive Plan and an option to purchase 125,000 shares of the Company’s common stock pursuant to the Company’s 2007 Stock Incentive Plan. The first option was scheduled to vest in equal monthly installments over a period of 36 months commencing on January 31, 2010 and on the last day of each calendar month thereafter until fully vested. The second option was scheduled to vest over a period of four years, with 25% of the second option vesting on the first anniversary of the date of the agreement and the remaining 75% vesting thereafter in equal monthly installments over a period of 36 months commencing on January 31, 2011. Any portion of Mr. Schwartz’s option that remained unvested at the time of his termination was to be extinguished and cancelled, provided, however, that if a change of control (as defined in the agreement) occurred while Mr. Schwartz was employed with us, and Mr. Schwartz’s employment was terminated by us other than for disability, death or cause or by Mr. Schwartz for good reason within three (3) months before or six (6) months after the effective date of the change of control, all of the options granted to Mr. Schwartz were to automatically vest immediately prior to the termination of Mr. Schwartz’s employment and remain exercisable for a period of one (1) year after such termination. In connection with his resignation on August 13, 2010, all options held by Mr. Schwartz to acquire shares ~~of the Company’s common stock were extinguished and cancelled.~~

~~Vacation.~~ ~~Mr. Schwartz was entitled to 4 weeks paid vacation during each year of his employment pursuant to the terms of his agreement.~~

~~Payments upon termination.~~ Mr. Schwartz’s employment agreement provided that if Mr. Schwartz’s employment was terminated by Mr. Schwartz for good reason, or by us other than for cause, we would pay to Mr. Schwartz: (a) all base salary and benefits which accrued through the termination date and (b) an amount equal to his base salary. The agreement further provided that if Mr. Schwartz’s employment was terminated by Mr. Schwartz other than for good reason, or by us for cause, we would pay to Mr. Schwartz all base salary and benefits which accrued through the termination date and if Mr. Schwartz’s employment was terminated as a result of his death or disability, we would pay or provide to Mr. Schwartz (i) all base salary and benefits which accrued through the termination date and (ii) a sum equal to a prorated portion of the annual bonus to which Mr. Schwartz would have been entitled if his employment had continued until the end of the employment year in which his death or disability occurred. No severance payments were made to Mr. Schwartz in connection with his resignation from the Company.sold.

Item

~~Change in Control Provisions~~

The prospect of a change in control of the Company can cause significant distraction and uncertainty for executive officers and, accordingly, the Committee believes that appropriate change in control provisions in the employment agreements and/or equity awards of our named executive officers are important tools for aligning executives’ interests in change in control scenarios with those of stockholders. Please see the above summaries of each executive’s employment agreement with us for a discussion of change of control provisions included within their respective agreements.

~~Tax and Accounting Implications~~

~~Deductibility of Executive Compensation~~

Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code limits to $1 million the annual tax deduction for compensation paid to each of the chief executive officer and any of the four highest paid other executive officers. However, compensation that qualifies as performance-based compensation is deductible even in excess of $1 million. The Board considers these requirements when designing the compensation program for the named executive officers. The Company believes that the compensation paid to the named executive officers generally is fully deductible for federal income tax purposes. However, in certain situations, the Compensation Committee may approve compensation that will not meet these requirements in order to ensure competitive levels of total compensation for its executive officers or for other reasons.

~~Nonqualified Deferred Compensation~~

6. Selected Financial Data.

Not applicable.

ItemOn October 22, 2004, the American Jobs Creation Act of 2004 was signed into law, adding section 409A to the Internal Revenue Code, which changed the tax rules applicable to nonqualified deferred compensation arrangements. A violation of these new rules could result in the imposition of a 20% federal penalty tax on the affected executives (in addition to possible state penalties as well). The Company believes it is operating in compliance with the statutory provisions and, through its legal counsel, monitors compliance with section 409A.

~~Director Compensation for the Fiscal Year Ended December 31, 2010~~

During our fiscal year ended December 31, 2010, our non-employee directors received cash compensation for their services on our board during 2010 and in September 2010, board members that served for the twelve months following our 2009 annual meeting, were issued restricted stock units valued at $42,500 for this service. These restricted stock units will vest in September, 2011. In 2010, we paid each of our non-employee directors a cash retainer of $50,000 for their service as board members. The Chairman of our Board of Director’s received an additional cash retainer of $50,000, and the chairs of each of our audit, compensation and nominating and governance committees received a cash retainer of $10,000, $5,000 and $2,500, respectively.

~~In addition, we reimburse directors for travel expenses associated with attendance at Board meetings; during our fiscal year ended December 31, 2010 such expenses were immaterial.~~

~~In light of our cash flow from operations, our Board elected to defer fourth quarter 2010 cash compensation.~~

~~The following table sets forth information concerning director compensation earned by non-employee directors for the 2010 fiscal year:~~

Fees Earned Restricted
or Stock Option All Other
Name Paid in Cash
Awards (1)
Awards Compensation Total

Jerome Chazen (2)
$ 100,625 $ 26,306 $ - $ - $ 126,931
Lawrence Burstein (3)
$ 65,000 $ 15,421 $ - $ - $ 80,421
Robert Ellin (4)
$ 50,000 $ 15,421 $ - $ - $ 65,421
Mark Dyne (5)
$ 50,000 $ 15,421 $ - $ - $ 65,421
Stuart Goldfarb $ 51,875 $ - $ - $ - $ 51,875

(1) On September 28, 2010, we issued 9,403 restricted stock units to each of our non-employee directors as compensation for their service on our Board, with the exceptions of Mr. Chazen, who received an additional 6,637 restricted stock units for his service as our Chairman, and Mr. Goldfarb who did not receive any restricted stock units. These restricted stock units vest on September 28, 2011. The compensation in the table reflects the grant date fair value computed in accordance with FASB ASC Topic 718.

~~(2) Mr. Chazen held an aggregate of 16,040 restricted stock units and 12,500 option awards to purchase shares of our common stock as of December 31, 2010.~~

~~(3) Mr. Burstein held an aggregate of 9,403 restricted stock units and 19,026 option awards to purchase shares of our common stock as of December 31, 2010.~~

(4) Mr. Ellin held an aggregate of 9,403 restricted stock units and no option awards to purchase shares of our common stock as of December 31, 2010. Mr. Ellin resigned as a member of our board of directors on April 20, 2011.

(5) Mr. Dyne held an aggregate of 9,403 restricted stock units and no option awards to purchase shares of our common stock as of December 31, 2010. Mr. Dyne currently serves as the Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of Europlay Capital Advisors, LLC, a merchant banking and advisory firm.

~~ITEM 12. SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT AND RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS~~

The following table presents information regarding the beneficial ownership of Atrinsic’s common stock as of April 15, 2011. The number of shares in the table represents the number of shares of common stock owned by:

~~each person who is known to us to be the beneficial owner of more than 5% of our outstanding common stock;~~

~~each of our directors;~~

~~each of our named executive officers; and~~

~~all of our directors and named executive officers as a group.~~

Beneficial ownership is determined in accordance with the rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission that deem shares to be beneficially owned by any person who has or shares voting or investment power with respect to such shares. Shares of common stock under warrants or options currently exercisable or exercisable within 60 days of April 15, 2011 are deemed outstanding for purposes of computing the percentage ownership of the person holding such warrants or options but are not deemed outstanding for computing the percentage ownership of any other person. As a result, the percentage of outstanding shares of any person as shown in this table does not necessarily reflect the person’s actual ownership or voting power with respect to the number of shares of common stock actually outstanding at April 15, 2011. Unless otherwise indicated, the persons named in this table have sole voting and sole investment power with respect to all shares shown as beneficially owned, subject to community property laws where applicable.

The information presented in this table is based on 6,297,236 shares of our common stock outstanding on April 15, 2011, which excludes 681,509 shares held in treasury. Unless otherwise indicated, the address of each of the executive officers and directors and 5% or more shareholders named below is c/o Atrinsic, Inc., 469 7th Avenue, 10th Floor, New York, NY 10018.

Number of Shares Percentage of
Beneficially Shares
Name of Beneficial Owner Owned Outstanding

Executive Officers and Directors:
Thomas Plotts (1)
29,730 *
Mark Dyne (2)
1,058,747 16.8 %
Robert Ellin (3)
448,174 7.1 %
Andrew Stollman (4)
214,448 3.4 %
Raymond Musci (5)
123,955 2.0 %
Lawrence Burstein (6)
22,534 *
Jerome Chazen (7)
25,809 *
Jeffrey Schwartz (8)
- *
Stuart Goldfarb - *

All Executive Officers and Directors as a Group (9 persons) (9)
1,923,397 30.5 %

5% Shareholders:
MPLC Holdings, LLC & Europlay (2)
871,182 13.8 %
Trinad Capital Master Fund, Ltd. (3)
448,174 7.1 %
Destar LLC & David Smith (10)
430,295 6.8 %
Mercury Fund IX Ltd (11)
450,000 7.1 %
Briliant Digital Entertainment, Inc. (12)
1,040,358 16.5 %
Outstanding shares 6,297,236

* Less than 1% of our outstanding shares

~~(1)~~

~~Includes 22,568 shares of common stock issuable upon the exercise of options, 7,162 shares of common stock.~~

~~(2)~~

Includes 973 shares of Common Stock held directly by Mr. Dyne, 684,590 shares of common stock held by MPLC Holdings, LLC of which Mr. Dyne is Manager, and 186,592 shares held by Europlay Capital Advisors, LLC, of which Mr. Dyne is the Chief Executive Officer and Chairman. Mr. Dyne disclaims beneficial ownership of the shares of common stock directly beneficially owned by MPLC Holdings, LLC and Europlay Capital Advisors, LLC except to the extent of his pecuniary interests therein. The address of each of Mr. Dyne, MPLC Holdings, LLC and Europlay Capital Advisors, LLC are 15260 Ventura Boulevard, 20th Floor, Sherman Oaks, CA 91403.

~~(3)~~

Trinad Capital Master Fund, Ltd. is the beneficial owner of 448,174 shares of Common Stock. Trinad Management, LLC (as the manager of the Trinad Capital Master Fund, Ltd. and Trinad Capital LP) and Robert S. Ellin, the managing director of and portfolio manager for Trinad Management, LLC and the managing director of Trinad Advisors II LLC are deemed the beneficial owners of 448,174 shares of the Common Stock held by Trinad Capital Master Fund, Ltd. Trinad Capital LP (as the owner of 84.53% of the shares of Trinad Capital Master Fund, Ltd. as of November 30, 2009) and Trinad Advisors II, LLC (as the general partner of Trinad Capital LP), are each deemed the beneficial owner of 378,841 (representing 84.53% of the shares of the 448,174 shares of the Common Stock held by Trinad Capital Master Fund, Ltd.). Each of Trinad Management, LLC and Trinad Advisors II, LLC disclaim beneficial ownership of the shares of Common Stock directly and beneficially owned by Trinad Capital Master Fund, Ltd. Robert S. Ellin disclaims beneficial ownership of the shares of Common Stock directly and beneficially owned by Trinad Capital Master Fund, Ltd. except to the extent of his pecuniary interests therein. Robert S. Ellin has the power to direct the vote and the power to direct the disposition of these shares of common stock. Mr. Ellin resigned as a member of our board of directors on April 20, 2011. The address of Trinad Management is 2121 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 2550, Los Angeles, CA 90067.

~~(4)~~

~~Includes 111,581 shares of common stock, 16,667 vested restricted stock units and 86,200 shares of common stock issuable upon the exercise of options held by Mr. Stollman.~~

~~(5)~~

~~Consists of 123,955 shares of common stock.~~

~~(6)~~

~~Includes 3,508 shares of common stock and 19,026 shares of common stock issuable upon the exercise of options held by Mr. Burstein.~~

~~(7)~~

~~Includes 13,309 shares of common stock and 12,500 shares of common stock issuable upon the exercise of options held by Mr. Chazen.~~

~~(8)~~

~~Mr. Schwartz resigned from his position as Chief Executive Officer on August 13, 2010.~~

~~(9)~~

Includes 1,579,844 shares of common stock, 16,667 restricted share units and 140,294 shares of common stock issuable upon the exercise of options held by our executive officers and directors. See footnotes (1) through (8) above.

~~(10)~~

Consists of 430,295 shares beneficially owned by David E. Smith and 309,279 shares beneficially owned by Destar, LLC. David E. Smith exercises sole voting and dispositive power with respect to 121,016 shares and shared voting and dispositive power with respect to 309,279 shares. Destar LLC does not have sole voting or dispositive power over any shares but shares voting and dispositive power with respect to 309,279 shares. The address of each of David E. Smith and Destar, LLC is 2450 Colorado Avenue, Suite 100, East Tower, Santa Monica, CA 90404.

~~(11)~~

Consists of 450,000 shares of Common Stock. Kevin C. Howe exercises voting and disposition power over such shares on behalf of Mercury Management, L.L.C., the General Partner of Mercury Ventures II, Ltd. ("Mercury Ventures II"), which is the General Partner of Mercury Fund IX, Ltd. ("Mercury IX"). The principal business office of Mercury IX, Mercury Ventures II, Mercury Management and Mr. Howe is 501 Park Lake Drive, McKinney, Texas 75070.

~~(12)~~

Kevin Bermeister, as Chief Executive Officer of Brilliant Digital Entertainment, Inc. may be deemed to exercise voting and dispositive power over these shares. The address of Brilliant Digital Entertainment, Inc. is 12711 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 210, Studio City, CA 91604.

~~Changes in Control~~

~~We do not have any arrangements which may at a subsequent date result in a change in control.~~

~~Securities Authorized for Issuance Under Equity Compensation Plans~~

~~The following table sets forth certain information regarding our equity compensation plans as of December 31, 2010:~~

Number of securities to Weighted-average Number of securities
be issued upon exercise exercise price of remaining available for
of outstanding options, outstanding options, future issuance under
warrants and rights warrants and rights equity compensation plans

Equity compensation plans approved by security holders(1)
546,200 $ 23.66 746,288
(1) Includes 1,011,268 options transferred from the acquisition of Traffix, Inc.

~~ITEM 13. CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS, AND DIRECTOR INDEPENDENCE~~

~~Certain Relationships and Related Transactions~~

~~Review and Approval of Related Party Transactions~~. We have adopted a policy that requires Board approval of transactions with related persons as defined by SEC regulations, including any sales or purchase transaction, asset exchange transaction, operating agreement, or advance or receivable transaction that could put our assets or operating performance at risk. All of our directors and executive officers are required at all times, but not less than annually, to disclose all relationships they have with companies or individuals that have conducted business with, or had an interest in, the Company. Our executive officers monitor our operations giving consideration to the disclosed relationships and refer potential transactions to the Board of Directors for approval. The Board of Directors considers a related party transaction for its potential economic benefit to the Company, to ensure the transaction is “arms length” and in accordance with our policies and that it is properly disclosed in our reports to stockholders.

~~Reportable Related Party Transactions~~. Other than the employment arrangements described elsewhere in this report and the transactions described below, since January 1, 2009, there has not been, nor is there currently proposed, any transaction or series of similar transactions to which we were or will be a party:

~~in which the amount involved exceeds $120,000; and~~

in which any director, executive officer, stockholder who beneficially owns 5% or more of our common stock or any member of their immediate family had or will have a direct or indirect material interest.

~~Transactions with Europlay capital Advisors, LLC~~

Mr. Dyne has served as a director of the company since November 11, 2008. Mr. Dyne currently serves as the Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of Europlay Capital Advisors, LLC, a merchant banking and advisory firm. We retained Europlay Capital Advisors on July 23, 2009 to provide consulting services in relation to our acquisition of assets from ShopIt, Inc.. The agreement expired on January 31, 2010. Pursuant to the terms of the agreement, we paid Europlay Capital Advisors an aggregate of $99,135 for its services and issued to Europlay Capital Advisors 10,000 shares of our common stock on a post-reverse stock split basis.

~~Transactions with Brilliant Digital Entertainment, Inc.~~

~~Please see the discussion under “Item 7-~~7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of ~~Operations—Kazaa Music Service”~~Operations.

The following discussion and analysis of our financial condition and results of operations should be read together with our consolidated financial statements and the related notes and other financial information included elsewhere in thisreport. Some of the information contained in this discussion and analysis or set forth elsewhere in thisreport, including information with respect to our plans and strategy for our business, includes forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties. See “Cautionary Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements.” You should review the “Risk Factors” section of thisreport for a ~~description~~discussion of important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from the results described in or implied by the forward-looking statements contained in the following discussion and analysis.

As the result of the Merger transactions ~~between Brilliant Digital Entertainment, Inc.~~ and ~~Atrinsic.~~

the change in our business to a biotechnology company, a discussion of the past financial results of Predecessor is not pertinent, and the financial results of Protagenic, the accounting acquirer, are considered our financial results on a historical and going-forward basis.

The discussion and analysis of our financial condition and results of operations are based on Protagenic’s financial statements, which Protagenic has prepared in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles. The preparation of these financial statements requires Protagenic to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and the disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements, as well as the reported revenues and expenses during the reporting periods. On an ongoing basis, Protagenic evaluates such estimates and judgments, including those described in greater detail below. Protagenic bases its estimates on historical experience and on various other factors that Protagenic believes are reasonable under the circumstances, the results of which form the basis for making judgments about the carrying value of assets and liabilities that are not readily apparent from other sources. Actual results may differ from these estimates under different assumptions or conditions.

~~Transactions with Promoters and Control Persons~~39

Table of Contents

~~Prior~~

Historical Background

The Company was originally incorporated in Delaware on February 3, 1994 under the name Millbrook Acquisition Corp. The Company was the successor to The Millbrook Press Inc., which was a wholly-owned subsidiary of Antia Publishing Company, a Delaware corporation, which in turn was a wholly-owned subsidiary of Groupe de la Cite International, a Societe Anonyme organized under French law. In February ~~12, 2007, MPLC (now called Atrinsic, Inc.) existed as~~1994, the founders of the Company effected a ~~“shell company” with nominal assets whose sole business was to identify, evaluate and investigate various companies to acquire or with~~management buyout by forming the Company which ~~to merge. On February 12, 2007, we consummated an exchange transaction in which we acquired~~purchased substantially all of the ~~outstanding ownership interests~~assets of The Millbrook Press Inc.

For the next 10 years, the Company was involved in a variety of attempts at creating a profitable, sustainable business model in the publishing and retail sectors, none of which succeeded. On February 6, 2004, the Company filed a voluntary petition for relief under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code with the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Connecticut and changed its name to MPLC, Inc.

Also in 2004, a biotechnology company called Protagenic Therapeutics, Inc. (referred to herein as “Protagenic”) was organized under the name Protagenic Therapeutics, Inc., with the goal of commercializing novel peptide drugs that had been discovered in the laboratory of Dr. David Lovejoy (“The Professor”) at the University of Toronto (UofT). The Company specializes in the discovery and development of therapeutics to treat central nervous system (CNS) disorders. PTI’s mission is to provide safe and effective treatments for mood, anxiety, depression and neurodegenerative disorders by using novel peptide-base, brain active therapeutics. The Company’s strategy is to develop, test and obtain regulatory approval for various applications of these brain active therapeutics.

On January 31, 2007, MPLC, Inc. entered into an exchange agreement with New Motion, ~~Mobile,~~ Inc. ~~(formerly called New Motion, Inc.)~~, a Delaware corporation formed in March 2005 (“New Motion”), the stockholders of New Motion (the "Stockholders"), and Trinad Capital Master Fund. On May 2, 2007, the Company changed its corporate name to New Motion, Inc.

As part of a corporate re-branding strategy, on June 25, 2009, New Motion, Inc. changed its name to Atrinsic, Inc. Its new corporate image was as a provider of “digital advertising and marketing services,” primarily digital music, casual games, interactive contests, and communities/lifestyles.

Meanwhile, from 2006 through 2014, Prior Protagenic sponsored fundamental research & development work in the Professor’s lab at the UofT aimed at demonstrating the efficacy of Prior Protagenic’s lead drug candidate, known as Teneurin C-Terminus Associated Peptide, or TCAP-1, and elucidating its ~~stockholders~~mechanism of action. This research resulted in ~~exchange~~a detailed understanding of the peptide and its actions on neurons. Prior Protagenic’s worldwide exclusive technology license agreement with the UofT gave it sole rights to commercialize and eventually sell drugs related to the TCAP family of proteins.

By early 2015, it became clear that Prior Protagenic needed an influx of working capital in order to meet its goal of completing the process of applying for an ~~aggregate~~Investigational New Drug (IND) application with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to sell a commercial version of ~~500,000 shares~~TCAP-1. To secure this capital, management of Prior Protagenic chose to pursue a reverse merger and financing strategy, with the help of a placement agent. This resulted in the introduction of Prior Protagenic to the former Atrinsic, Inc., and the consummation of a memorandum of understanding (MOU) in mid-2015 that the two companies would merge and conduct an equity financing, with the former Prior Protagenic shareholders owning approximately 80% of the pre-financing entity, and the former Atrinsic, Inc. shareholders owning the other 20%.

On February 12, 2016, Protagenic Therapeutics, Inc. merged into Protagenic Acquisition Corp., a wholly-owned subsidiary of Atrinsic, Inc., and raised gross proceeds of approximately $4.6 million in the 2016 Private Placement. All previous lines of business of Atrinsic, Inc. where theretofore dropped in favor of the field of neurologic drug development. On June 17, 2016, Protagenic Therapeutics, Inc. was merged with and into Atrinsic. Atrinsic was the surviving corporation in this merger and changed its name from Atrinsic to Protagenic Therapeutics, Inc.

Table of Contents

Results of Operations

We are a development stage company currently performing clinical trials to obtain FDA approval. We have minimal revenue.

During the year ended December 31, 2016, we incurred a loss from operations of $2,233,501 as compared to $1,025,038 for the year ended December 31, 2015. The increase in the loss is due to an increase in research and development expense of $77,419 from $456,274 for the year ended December 31, 2015 to $533,693 for the year ended December 31, 2016 due to IND-preparatory preclinical experimentation conducted during 2016 that did not have precedent during 2015, and an increase in general and administrative expenses of $726,875 from $568,764 for the year ended December 31, 2015 to $1,295,639 for the year ended December 31, 2016, which included expenses relating to the equity stock offering that occurred in February through April 2016 and the new professional fee expenses associated with being a post-merger public company. In addition, during the year ended December 31, 2016, we incurred an impairment of goodwill of $404,169 with no such impairment in the prior year. The impairment was the result of the current operating focus being shifted to the operations of Protagenic rather than the pre-merger Atrinsic, Inc.

Liquidity

We continually project anticipated cash requirements, predominantly from the ongoing funding requirements of our neuropeptide drug development program. The majority of these expenses relate to paying external vendors such as Contract Research Organizations (CROs) and peptide synthesizer companies. They could also include business combinations, capital expenditures, and new drug development working capital requirements. As of December 31, 2016, we had cash of $3,100,398 and working capital of $2,475,958. We anticipate further losses in the development of our business. Based on our current forecast and budget, Management believes that our cash resources will be sufficient to fund our operations, anticipated capital expenditures and working capital for nearly two years from the date of this quarterly report. Absent generation of sufficient revenue from the execution of the Company’s business plan, we will need to obtain debt or equity financing by the third quarter of 2018.

Operating activities used $1,140,319 and $381,341 in cash for the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively. The use of cash in operating activities during the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015, was primarily used to fund our net loss.

Our financing activities provided cash of $4,283,938 for the year ended December 31, 2016. On February 12, March 2, 2016, and April 15, 2016 we raised gross proceeds of $5,135,575 in the three closings of our Series CB financing equity capital raising transaction, of which $1,850,000 was from our two principal institutional stockholders, Iroquois Capital and Hudson Bay Capital. With these proceeds, we converted $350,000 of stockholder debt to Series B preferred stock. We paid $332,000 in closing costs, including $125,000 paid on accrued liabilities, and an additional $150,000 in legal expenses netted against the $2,000,000 invested on behalf of Iroquois Capital and Hudson Bay Capital per requirements of the Merger agreement.

Within the next two years, we are likely to seek additional financing in two ways:

(1) by approaching large pharmaceutical companies who may be interested in licensing the commercial rights to our lead drug candidate, PT00114, for a non-core indication or in a non-core geographic region (such as an indication other than anxiety, depression, or addictive behavior therapy, or a region of the world other than North America or Europe). If we are successful in striking a partnership with a large pharmaceutical company in this way, we may receive an up-front licensing fee that could be significant.

(2) In the absence of a licensing opportunity with a large pharmaceutical partner, we may undertake an equity financing in mid-2018, in order to raise $10 million or more in working capital to fund our first two phases of clinical trials. In this event, Management would aim to complete our IND application process prior to or coincident with this possible equity financing, because the IND submission would represent a developmental milestone that could increase the value of the Company’s equity in the view of future investors.

Table of Contents

The anticipated impact on our cash position of either of these financing options would be to provide enough working capital to fund Phase I and Phase IIa clinical trials. The anticipated impact on the Company’s liquidity and operations is that the Company would be able to continue operating beyond 2018 that its current cash position provides for.

Recent Developments

On February 12, 2016, we merged Protagenic Acquisition Corp (a wholly-owned subsidiary of Atrinsic, Inc.) with and into Protagenic Therapeutics, Inc. with Protagenic Therapeutics, Inc. remaining as the surviving corporation and a wholly-owned subsidiary of Atrinisic, Inc. As a result of the merger, we acquired the business of Protagenic Therapeutics, Inc. and will continue its existing business operations. On June 17, 2016, we merged Protagenic Therapeutics, Inc. with and into Atrinsic, Inc. and changed our name to Protagenic Therapeutics, Inc.

Simultaneously with the Merger, on February 12, 2016, we converted all of the issued and outstanding shares of the Company’s common stock, on a 1-for-1 basis, into shares of the Atrinsic’s Series B Preferred Stock, par value $0.000001 per share (“Series B Preferred Stock”). All of the issued and outstanding options to purchase shares of the Company’s common stock, and all of the issued and outstanding warrants to purchase shares of the Company’s common stock, converted, on a 1-for-1 basis, into options and new warrants, respectively, to purchase shares of Series B Preferred Stock. The new options will be administered under the Company’s 2006 Employee, Director and Consultant Stock Plan, which we assumed and adopted on February 12, 2016, in connection with the Merger.

Concurrently with the closing of the Merger, we conducted the first closing of our 2016 Private Placement of Series B Preferred Stock. At the first closing, we sold 2,775,000 shares of Series B Preferred Stock at a purchase price of $1.25 per share, for which we received total gross consideration of $3,468,750. Of this amount, $350,000 consisted of conversion of outstanding stockholder debt held by Garo H. Armen, our chairmen and a member of our board of directors, and $150,000 of legal expenses incurred by Strategic Bio Partners LLC, stockholders of the Predecessor, in conjunction with and as allowed by the merger agreement. On March 2, 2016, we completed the second closing of the 2016 Private Placement, at which we issued an additional 913,200 shares of Series B Preferred Stock to accredited investors, for total gross proceeds of $1,141,500. On April 15, 2016, we completed the final closing of the 2016 Private Placement, at which we issued an additional 420,260 shares of Series B Preferred Stock to accredited investors, for total gross proceeds of $525,325.

For all three closings, we raised total gross proceeds of $4,635,575 and total net proceeds of $4,261,797 (or total gross proceeds of $5,135,575 and total net proceeds of $4,783,438, including the conversion of the $350,000 in stockholder debt and $150,000 in legal expenses referred to above). We issued 4,108,460 shares of Series B Preferred Stock to investors in the 2016 Private Placement. The Placement Agent and its selected dealers were paid total cash commissions of $159,183 and the Placement Agent was paid an expense allowance of $15,000 and was issued (together with its selected dealers) Placement Agent Warrants to purchase 127,346 shares of Series B Preferred Stock at an exercise price of $1.25 per share.

Following the final closing of the 2016 Private Placement, we registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission for resale the shares of common stock underlying the Series B Preferred Stock sold in the 2016 Private Placement and the Placement Agent Warrants.

Plan of Operations

Business Overview

The Company is in its developmental stage, with encouraging but not conclusive evidence that its lead drug candidate, PT00014, may be effective as an anti-anxiety and/or anti-depression drug. It is focused on confirming the efficacy of this drug candidate, along with performing the other preclinical steps needed to progress along the pathway to bring this drug candidate into human clinical trials and eventually, to the global market to provide a new pharmaceutical for patients suffering from anxiety or treatment-resistant depression.

Table of Contents

Our anticipated timeline for reaching the significant milestones in our plan of operations and the costs associated with our plan are set forth in the table below:

	Estimated Cost
3Q 2017
Begin in Vitro Pharmacology	$	125,000
Begin Pharmacokinetics	$	120,000
Complete preclinical efficacy studies	$	112,000

4Q 2017
Complete in Vitro Pharmacology	$	68,000
Complete Pharmacokinetics	$	120,000
Create custom tagged antibodies	$	104,000
Complete antibody purification	$	24,000

1Q 2018
Completion of ELISA tests	$	45,000
Complete Custom antibodies as an alternative to ELISA	$	21,000
Complete toxicology studies in two species	$	850,000

2Q 2018
Complete Stability and Formulation	$	85,000
Write our first IND application	$	80,000

3Q 2018
Submit our first IND application	$	60,000

4Q 2018
Begin dosing healthy volunteers in Phase I trial	$	175,000

If we are able to successfully develop our drug, PT00114, and obtain FDA approval, we could then begin marketing and selling it in the United States and generate revenue. FDA approval to begin commercial sales is the singular gating item that will allow us to begin generating sales revenue in the U.S., so it will have an enormous impact on our business plan and our financial condition. It is anticipated that the sale of our drug will allow the Company to generate enough sales revenue to support all of our operations and to generate a profit. However, given the stage of development, even if FDA Approval is obtained, it is not anticipated prior to 2023.

Development Milestones (upcoming developmental milestones)

Upcoming development milestones include confirming efficacy of our lead drug candidate in an animal model in a clinical research organization (CRO), conducting toxicology testing in two animal species, and filing an Investigational New Drug (IND) application to begin human clinical trials.

Human Resources (current state of employees and future plans towards employees

The Company has three part-time employees: David Hogg, PhD, a Research Technician, Garo H. Armen, PhD, the Executive Chairman, and Alexander K. Arrow, the Chief Financial Officer. The Company also has three paid consultants: Dalia Barsyte, PhD, Chief Technology Officer, David Lovejoy, PhD, Chief Scientific Officer, and Christina Fam Faragalla, Director of Project Management.

Table of Contents

Financing – Capital Needs

The Company anticipates that it will need to raise additional capital in the next two years to support its R&D activities as it prepares to commence human clinical trials.

Over the next two years, we anticipate conducting the following research and development activities at the following estimated costs and expense:

Basic Science of TCAP-1	$	110,000
Efficacy Studies	$	320,000
Toxicology Studies	$	200,000
Stability and Formulation	$	85,000
Custom antibodies as an alternative to ELISA	$	37,000
Tagged antibodies	$	104,000
Antibody purification	$	24,000
Clinical consultants	$	20,000
Medical Writing and IND application compilation	$	79,000
Technical Infrastructure	$	11,000
Total R&D not including personnel	$	980,000

Off Balance Sheet Arrangements

We have no material off-balance sheet arrangements that are likely to have a current or future effect on our financial condition, changes in financial condition, revenues or expenses, results of operations, liquidity, capital resources, or capital expenditures.

Critical accounting policies and estimates

Our discussion and analysis of 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 of America (“GAAP”). The notes to the consolidated financial statements contained in this Annual Report describe our significant accounting policies used in the preparation of the consolidated financial statements. The preparation of these financial statements requires us to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting periods. Actual results could differ from those estimates. We continually evaluate our critical accounting policies and estimates.

We believe the critical accounting policies listed below reflect significant judgments, estimates and assumptions used in the preparation of our consolidated financial statements.

Principles of consolidation

The consolidated financial statements include the accounts of Atrinsic, Inc., and its wholly owned subsidiary, Protagenic Acquisition Corp, and Protagenic Therapeutics, Inc., which merged with and into Protagenic Acquisition Corp, on February 12, 2016, as well as Protagenic Therapeutics’ wholly-owned Canadian subsidiary, PTI Canada. All significant intercompany balances and transactions have been eliminated in consolidation.

Foreign Currency Translation and Transactions.The assets and liabilities of our foreign subsidiary PTI Canada are translated into U.S. dollars from the functional currency using the exchange rate in effect at the balance sheets date. Additionally, the accounts on the statements of operations are translated using exchange rates approximating average rates prevailing during the years. Equity accounts are translated at historical exchange rates. Translation adjustments that arise from translating its financial statements from the local currency to the U.S. dollar are accumulated and reflected as a separate component of stockholders’ equity (deficit). The current year effects of the transaction adjustments are included on the statement of operations as a realized gain (loss) on foreign transaction exchange.

Table of Contents

Use of Estimates. The preparation of financial statements in conformity with U.S. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (“GAAP”) requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, revenue and expenses as well as the disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities. Management continually evaluates its estimates and judgments including those related to accruals, contingencies, valuation allowance for deferred tax assets, and valuation of stock options and warrants. Management bases its estimates and judgments on historical experience and other factors that are believed to be reasonable in the circumstances. Actual results may differ from those estimates. Macroeconomic conditions may directly, or indirectly through our business partners and vendors, impact our financial performance and available resources. Such conditions may, in turn, impact the aforementioned estimates and assumptions.

Fair Value Measurements.Accounting Standards Codification ASC 820, “Fair Value Measurements and Disclosure,” defines fair value as the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date, not adjusted for transaction costs. ASC 820 also establishes a fair value hierarchy that prioritizes the inputs to valuation techniques used to measure fair value into three broad levels giving the highest priority to quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities (Level 1) and the lowest priority to unobservable inputs (Level 3).

The three levels are described below:

Level 1 Inputs – Unadjusted quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities that is accessible by the Company;

Level 2 Inputs – Quoted prices in markets that are not active or financial instruments for which all significant inputs are observable, either directly or indirectly;

Level 3 Inputs – Unobservable inputs for the asset or liability including significant assumptions of the Company and other market participants.

Derivative Liability. The Company evaluates its options, warrants or other contracts, if any, to determine if those contracts or embedded components of those contracts qualify as derivatives to be separately accounted for in accordance with ASC 815-10-05-4 and 815-40-25. The result of this accounting treatment is that the fair value of the embedded derivative is marked-to-market each balance sheet date and recorded as either an asset or a liability. In the event that the fair value is recorded as a liability, the change in fair value is recorded in the consolidated statement of operations as other income or expense. Upon conversion, exercise or cancellation of a derivative instrument, the instrument is marked to fair value at the date of conversion, exercise or cancellation and then the related fair value is reclassified to equity.

The classification of derivative instruments, including whether such instruments should be recorded as liabilities or as equity, is re-assessed at the end of each reporting period. Equity instruments that are initially classified as equity that become subject to reclassification are reclassified to liability at the fair value of the instrument on the reclassification date. Derivative instrument liabilities will be classified in the balance sheet as current or non-current based on whether or not net-cash settlement of the derivative instrument is expected within 12 months of the balance sheet date.

Table of Contents

Basic and Diluted Net (Loss) per Common Share.Basic (loss) per common share is computed by dividing the net (loss) by the weighted-average number of shares of common stock outstanding for each period. Diluted (loss) per share is computed by dividing the net (loss) by the weighted-average number of shares of common stock outstanding plus the dilutive effect of shares issuable through the common stock equivalents. Potentially dilutive securities consisting of options and warrants aggregating 7,183,869as of December 31, 2016, including common shares issuable under the conversion feature of the preferred shares, options and warrants issued in the Private Offering closing and merger transactions were not included in the calculation of weighted-average shares of common stock outstanding as they were determined to be anti-dilutive.

Recently Issued Accounting Pronouncements

In November 2015, the FASB issued ASU No 2015-17, Income Taxes (Topic 740). The amendments in ASU 2015-17 change the requirements for the classification of deferred taxes on the balance sheet. Currently, GAAP requires an entity to separate deferred income tax liabilities and assets into current and noncurrent amounts in a classified statement of financial position. To simplify the presentation of deferred income taxes, the amendments in this ASU require that deferred tax liabilities and assets be classified as noncurrent in a classified statement of financial position. The pronouncement is effective for fiscal years and interim periods within those fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2016. Earlier application is permitted for all entities as of the beginning of an interim or annual reporting period. The Company has not yet selected a transition method nor has it determined the effect of the standard on its ongoing financial reporting.

On March 30, 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-09, "Compensation - Stock Compensation" which simplifies several aspects of the accounting for employee share-based payment transactions for both public and nonpublic entities, including the accounting for income taxes, forfeitures, and statutory tax withholding requirements, as well as classification in the statement of cash flows. For public business entities, the ASU is effective for annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2016, including interim periods within those annual reporting periods. Early adoption will be permitted in any interim or annual period for which financial statements have not yet been issued or have not been made available for issuance. If early adoption is elected, all amendments in the ASU that apply must be adopted in the same period. In addition, if early adoption is elected in an interim period, any adjustments should be reflected as of the beginning of the annual period that includes that interim period. The Company is in the process of evaluating the impact of the standard on its consolidated financial statements.

In February 2016, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) No. 2016-02, Leases. The main provisions of ASU No. 2016-02 require management to recognize lease assets and lease liabilities for all leases. ASU 2016-02 retains a distinction between finance leases and operating leases. The classification criteria for distinguishing between finance leases and operating leases are substantially similar to the classification criteria for distinguishing between capital leases and operating leases in the previous leases guidance. The result of retaining a distinction between finance leases and operating leases is that under the lessee accounting model, the effect of leases in the statement of comprehensive income and the statement of cash flows is largely unchanged from previous GAAP. The amendments in this ASU are effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018, including interim periods within those fiscal years. The Company is currently assessing the impact of this ASU on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.

In August 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-15,“Statement of Cash Flows (Topic 230): Classification of Certain Cash Receipts and Cash Payments” (“ASU 2016-15”). ASU 2016-15 will make eight targeted changes to how cash receipts and cash payments are presented and classified in the statement of cash flows. ASU 2016-15 is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017. The new standard will require adoption on a retrospective basis unless it is impracticable to apply, in which case it would be required to apply the amendments prospectively as of the earliest date practicable. The Company is currently in the process of evaluating the impact of ASU 2016-15 on its condensed consolidated financial statements.

Table of Contents

In October 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-16, “Income Taxes (Topic 740): Intra-Entity Transfers of Assets Other than Inventory”, which eliminates the exception that prohibits the recognition of current and deferred income tax effects for intra-entity transfers of assets other than inventory until the asset has been sold to an outside party. The updated guidance is effective for annual periods beginning after December 15, 2019, including interim periods within those fiscal years. Early adoption of the update is permitted. The Company is currently evaluating the impact of the new standard.

In November 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-18, “Statement of Cash Flows (Topic 230)”, requiring that the statement of cash flows explain the change in the total cash, cash equivalents, and amounts generally described as restricted cash or restricted cash equivalents. This guidance is effective for fiscal years, and interim reporting periods therein, beginning after December 15, 2017 with early adoption permitted. The provisions of this guidance are to be applied using a retrospective approach which requires application of the guidance for all periods presented. The Company is currently evaluating the impact of the new standard. Management does not believe that any other recently issued, but not yet effective accounting pronouncements, if adopted, would have a material effect on the consolidated financial statements filed with this annual report.

In December 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-20, “Technical Corrections and Improvements to Topic 606, Revenue from Contracts with Customers”.The amendments in this Update affect the guidance in Update 2014-09, which is not yet effective. The effective date and transition requirements for the amendments are the same as the effective date and transition requirements for Topic 606 (and any other Topic amended by Update 2014-09). Accounting Standards Update No. 2015-14, Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606): Deferral of the Effective Date, defers the effective date of Update 2014-09 by one year.

Item7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk.

Not applicable.

Item8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data.

See pages F-1 through F-21 following the Exhibit Index of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Item9. Changes in and Disagreements With Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure.

None.

Item9A. Controls and Procedures.

Evaluations of Our Disclosure Controls

We maintain our disclosure controls and procedures that are designed to provide reasonable assurance that material information required to be disclosed in our periodic reports filed under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), is recorded, processed, summarized, and reported within the time periods specified in the SEC’s rules and forms and to provide reasonable assurance that such information is accumulated and communicated to our management, our Executive Chairman and our Chief Financial Officer, to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure. Our Executive Chairman and our Chief Financial Officer carried out an evaluation of the effectiveness of the design and operation of our disclosure controls and procedures, as defined in Rule 13(a)-15(e) under the Exchange Act. Based on this evaluation, our Executive Chairman and our Chief Financial Officer concluded that, as of December 31, 2016, our disclosure controls and procedures were not effective to ensure that information required to be disclosed by the Company in the reports that the Company files or submits under the Exchange Act, is recorded, processed, summarized and reported, within the time periods specified in the SEC's rules and forms, and that such information is accumulated and communicated to the Company's management to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure.

Table of Contents

Management’s Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting

Our management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting as required under applicable United States securities regulatory requirements. Internal control over financial reporting is defined in Rule 13a–15(f) or 15d–15(f) promulgated under the Exchange Act as a process designed by, or under the supervision of, the company’s chief executive and chief financial officers and effected by the company’s board of directors, management and other personnel, 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 and includes those policies and procedures that:

●

pertain to the maintenance of records that in reasonable detail accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the company;

●

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

●

provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use of 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. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risks that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.

Our management assessed the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2016. In making this assessment, our management used the criteria set forth by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (“COSO”) in 2013 in Internal Control Integrated Framework. Based on that evaluation under this framework, our management concluded that our internal control over financial reporting was not effective because of the following significant deficiencies in our internal control over financial reporting:

●

Due to our small number of employees and resources, we have limited segregation of duties, as a result of which there is insufficient independent review of duties performed;

●

As a result of the limited number of accounting personnel, we rely on outside consultants for the preparation of our financial reports, including financial statements and management discussion and analysis, which could lead to overlooking items requiring disclosure.

This annual report does not include an attestation report by our independent registered public accounting firm regarding internal control over financial reporting. As we are neither a large accelerated filer nor an accelerated filer, our management’s report was not subject to attestation by our registered public accounting firm pursuant to rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission that permit us to provide only management’s report in this annual report.

Changes in Internal Controls over Financial Reporting

In 2016, we hired a CFO in our finance department to enhance and strengthen our internal controls over financial reporting.

Other than the enhancement reported above, during the year ended December 31, 2016, there have been no changes in our internal control over financial reporting that have materially affected or are reasonably likely to materially affect our internal controls over financial reporting. From time to time, we make changes to our internal control over financial reporting that are intended to enhance its effectiveness and which do not have a material effect on our overall internal control over financial reporting.

Table of Contents

Item9B. Other Information.

None.

PARTIII

Item10. Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance.

Executive Officers and Directors

The following sets forth certain information with respect to our executive officers and directors.

Name	Age	Position(s)
Garo H. Armen	64	Executive Chairman of the Board of Directors
Alexander K. Arrow	46	Chief Financial Officer
Robert B. Stein	66	Director
Khalil Barrage	52	Director
Gregory H. Ekizian	53	Director
Josh Silverman	47	Director

Garo H. Armen, PhD, Executive Chairman, is one of our founders and joined us in September 2004. Garo H. Armen is Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Agenus Inc., a biotechnology company he co-founded in 1994. From mid-2002 through 2004, he also served as Chairman of the Board of directors of the biopharmaceutical company Elan Corporation, plc, which he successfully restructured. Prior to Agenus Inc., Dr. Armen established Armen Partners, a money management firm specializing in biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies, and was the architect of the widely publicized creation of the Immunex Lederle oncology business in 1993. Earlier, he was a senior vice president of research at Dean Witter Reynolds, having begun his career on Wall Street as an analyst and investment banker at EF Hutton. In 2002, Dr. Armen founded the Children of Armenia Fund, a nonprofit organization dedicated to significantly rebuilding and revitalizing impoverished rural Armenian towns to provide immediate and sustainable benefits to children and youth. He received the Ellis Island Medal of Honor in 2004 for his humanitarian efforts, and received the Sabin Humanitarian Award from the Sabin Vaccine Institute in 2006 for his achievements in biotechnology and progressing medical research. Dr. Armen was also the Ernst & Young 2002 New ~~Motion Mobile~~York City Biotechnology Entrepreneur of the Year, and received a Wings of Hope Award in 2005 from The Melanoma Research Foundation for his ongoing commitment to the melanoma community. Dr. Armen received a PhD in physical chemistry from the Graduate Center, City University of New York, after which he worked as a research fellow at Brookhaven National Laboratories in Long Island, NY.

Alexander K. Arrow, M.D., CFA –Chief Financial Officer. Dr. Arrow became our ~~wholly owned subsidiary. The exchange transaction was accounted for~~Chief Financial Officer in February 2016. Dr. Arrow is also the Chief Executive officer of Zelegent, Inc., a clinical-stage start-up medical device company preparing to launch a minimally invasive snoring alleviation tool. From January 2015 through December 2015, Dr. Arrow also served as a ~~reverse merger (recapitalization)~~director and acting Chief Operating Officer of Neumedicines, Inc., a clinical-stage private biotechnology company developing protein therapeutics that address unmet clinical and societal needs in Oncology, Hematology and Immunology. Dr. Arrow serves as a director of Gel-e, Inc., a wound-care company with ~~New Motion Mobile deemed~~an FDA-cleared hemostatic patch product, BioLx, Inc., a start-up developing an advanced surgical mask, and Rindex Medical, Inc., a developmental-stage company, 30% owned by the Cleveland Clinic, which is developing a diagnostic technology for use in cardiovascular intensive care units. Previously, Dr. Arrow served on the board and was the Chairman of both the Audit Committee and Compensation Committee of Biolase, Inc. (NASDAQ: BIOL) from July 2010 through February 2014, and served as the President and Chief Operating Officer of Biolase, Inc. from June 2013 through December 2014. Biolase, Inc. is a medical device manufacturer and the leading provider of lasers to be the ~~accounting acquirer,~~global dentistry industry. From July 2012 to June 2013 Dr. Arrow was the Chief Medical and ~~MPLC~~Strategic Officer of Circuit Therapeutics, Inc., a company seeking to realize commercial potential in the ~~legal acquirer.~~

field of optogenetics. From December 2007 through June 2012, Dr. Arrow was the Chief Financial Officer of Arstasis, Inc., a cardiology device manufacturer. From 2002 to 2007, Dr. Arrow headed medical technology equity research at the global investment bank Lazard Capital markets, LLC. Dr. Arrow spent two years 1999-2001 as Chief Financial Officer of the Patent & License Exchange, later renamed PLX Systems, Inc., and three years as the publishing life sciences research analyst at Wedbush Morgan Securities. In 1996, Dr. Arrow was a surgical resident at the UCLA Medical Center. Dr. Arrow received his CFA in 1999. He was awarded an M.D. from Harvard Medical School in 1996 and a B.A. in Biophysics,magna cum laude, from Cornell University in 1992.

Table of Contents

Khalil Barrage, Director, joined us in July, 2007. Mr. Khalil Barrage has served as a Managing Director of The Invus Group, LLC since 2003, in charge of the Public Equities Group that he set up in September 2003. Invus manages over $3B of capital, with a primary focus is on private equity investments, biotechnology and health care. In addition, Invus manages a fund-of-funds liquid alternative investment and, most recently, the newly established public equities portfolio activity. Mr. Barrage is a value investor. He started his career in 1988 with The Olayan Group, a multibillion private group. He was in charge of the group’s US public equities portfolio, overseeing more than $2 billion of assets. Mr. Barrage holds a BA from American University of Beirut.

Robert B. Stein, PhD. MD, Director, joined us effective the closing of the Merger in February, 2016. Dr. Robert B. Stein is Chief Scientific Officer of Agenus Inc. Dr. Robert B. Stein leads Agenus’ Research, Preclinical Development and Translational Medicine functions. He helps shape clinical development strategy for vaccines and adjuvants. Additionally, he’s leading integration of the 4-Antibody acquisition, which includes the company’s fully human antibody drug discovery and optimization technology platform, and portfolio of immune checkpoint antibody programs. Over his 30 years of experience in the biopharmaceutical industry he played a pivotal role in bringing to the market Sustiva^®, Fablyn^®, Viviant^®, PanRetin^®, TargRetin^®, Promacta^® and Eliquis^®. Prior to joining Agenus, he held executive management positions at Ligand Pharmaceuticals, DuPont Merck, Incyte Pharmaceuticals, Roche Palo Alto and KineMed. Dr. Stein began his career at Merck, Sharp and Dohme. He holds an MD and a PhD in Physiology & Pharmacology from Duke University. Dr. Stein filed a personal voluntary bankruptcy petition under Chapter 7 in August of 2012 and the bankruptcy was discharged in May 2013.

Gregory H. Ekizian, CFA, Director, joined us effective the closing of the Merger in February, 2016. Mr. Ekizian is presently a private investor. From 2012 to 2014 Mr. Ekizian was associated with Victory Capital Management, serving as the Chief Investment Officer and Lead Portfolio Manager for the Victory Dividend Growth Fund, a strategy which was managed for conservative growth and income across mutual fund and separate accounts. Prior to Victory, he was a private investor from 2009 through 2012. From 1997 through 2009 Mr. Ekizian was the co-leader of the Growth team at Goldman Sachs Asset Management where he served as a Chief Investment Officer and Senior Portfolio Manager. Over his tenure at GSAM, the Growth team grew assets from $2.2 billion to a peak of $29 billion across multiple Growth products. Prior to his service with GSAM, Mr. Ekizian was a principal member in the start-up of Liberty Investment Management in 1994, and as a Senior Portfolio Manager, remained with the firm through its acquisition by Goldman Sachs in 1997. Mr. Ekizian started his investment management career in 1990 at Eagle Asset Management as an analyst covering health care, media, staples and consumer discretionary industries. Mr. Ekizian received a Bachelor of Science in Finance from Lehigh University and MBA from the University of Chicago Graduate School of Business and is a CFA Charterholder.

Joshua Silverman, Director, joined us effective the closing of the Merger in February 2016. Mr. Silverman is the Co–founder and Managing Member of Parkfield Funding LLC, and is a former Principal and Managing Partner of Iroquois Capital Management, LLC. Mr. Silverman served as Co–Chief Investment Officer of Iroquois from 2003 until July 2016. From 2000 to 2003, Mr. Silverman served as Co–Chief Investment Officer of Vertical Ventures, LLC, a merchant bank. He also serves as the Chairman of the Board of Neurotrope, Inc. (Nasdaq: NTRP). Prior to forming Iroquois, Mr. Silverman was a Director of Joele Frank, a boutique consulting firm specializing in mergers and acquisitions. Previously, Mr. Silverman served as Assistant Press Secretary to The President of The United States. Mr. Silverman received his B.A. from Lehigh University in 1992. In the past five years, Mr. Silverman has served as a director of MGT Capital Investments, Inc. and National Holdings Corporation, and in 2016, became a director of WPCS International, Inc.

Table of Contents

Consultants and Advisors

Dalia Barsyte PhD, Chief Technology Advisor. Dr. Dalia Barsyte received her PhD in molecular and cellular biology from the University of Manchester, UK. She did the postdoctoral training at the University of Manchester and Ontario Cancer Institute, and currently is a scientist at the University of Toronto, Structural Genomics Consortium, where she has been employed since 2009. Dr. Barsyte is an inventor on one of the key Protagenic patents and author of over 50 scientific publications in oncology and neuroscience. Dr. Barsyte’s scientific interests include exploring chemical biology in therapeutic target validation through peptide or small molecule chemical probe compounds as well as novel in vitro models of disease based on patient derived cell culture.

David A. Lovejoy, PhD, Chief Scientific Advisor, is one of our founders and joined us in September 2004. He holds a PhD in Neuroendocrinology from the University of Victoria (Victoria, BC) and spent three years at the Clayton Foundation Laboratories for Peptide Biology at the Salk Institute (San Diego, CA) as a postdoctoral fellow. Dr. Lovejoy took his first academic appointment at the University of Manchester (Manchester, UK), one of the United Kingdom’s top-ranking research universities. He joined the University of Toronto (Toronto, Ontario) in 2000 and is currently Professor of Neuroendocrinology in the Department of Cell and Systems Biology at the University of Toronto. He is the author of more than 210 scientific publications including 3 books in the field and an Associate Editor for a scientific journal and is inventor or co-inventor on all of our intellectual property.

Andrew Slee, Development Advisor. Andy Slee joined us in April 2016. During his 37-year pharmaceutical career, he has taken several drugs from inception through all their pre-clinical and early clinical testing. During the past five years he has worked for Preclinical CROs, immune-oncology companies and natural product companies focusing on anti-infectives, cancer, CNS, diabetes and inflammatory diseases. Spreading his influence beyond a single company, he created and ran his own Contract Research Organization (CRO), VivoSource Laboratories, which for ten years from 2003 to 2013 provided preclinical proof of concept catering to biopharmaceutical companies. For the 18 years before that, Mr. Slee shepherded multiple pharma targets in several therapeutic areas from inception onward at DuPont Pharmaceuticals. He is a graduate of Syracuse University and Leeds University

Christina Faragalla, Director of Project Management, joined us in June 2016. Ms. Faragalla is responsible for managing communication and timelines in the Company’s development projects, as well as being the Company’s primary interface with its Contract Research Organizations (CROs). Prior to working with the Company, Ms. Faragalla served in roles both on the sponsor and CRO side. From 2010-2014 she worked with large Pharma clients overseeing late phase CNS programs at PAREXEL. From 2014-2016, she transitioned to exclusively serving emerging biotech clients in early development while at at Novella Clinical, a division of Quintiles CRO, running several first-in-man clinical trials. She is an expert in Global Clinical Operations, SOP Development and Harmonization, Translational medicine, POC to Early and Late phase drug development, IND to NDA to large registries and post marketing trials. She holds a MS Clinical Research Administration from George Washington University, and a BS in Biology from Rutgers College.

Family Relationships

There are no family relationships between or among the directors, executive officers or persons nominated or chosen by our stockholders or us to become directors or executive officers.

Voting Agreement

On ~~October 24, 2006, MPLC~~February 12, 2016, the Company and certain of its stockholders (currently representing approximately 43% of the Company’s issued and outstanding common stock), including Messrs. Armen, Arrow and Ekizian and Strategic Bio Partners, LLC, entered into a voting agreement whereby these stockholders agreed to vote in favor of setting and maintaining the size of the Board at five directors (unless increased by the Board), the election of one director designated by Strategic Bio Partners, LLC and the election of four directors designated by Mr. Garo (so long as Mr. Garo is an officer or director of the Company). The term of the voting agreement runs until February 12, 2019 unless terminated earlier by a vote of at least 90% of the stockholders party to the agreement or the consummation of a firm commitment underwritten public offering of the Company’s common stock ~~Purchase~~resulting in proceeds to the Company of at least $20 million.

Involvement in Certain Legal Proceedings

To our knowledge, during the past ten years, none of our directors, executive officers, promoters, control persons, or nominees has:

been convicted in a criminal proceeding or been subject to a pending criminal proceeding (excluding traffic violations and other minor offenses);

Except as set forth above with respect to Dr. Stein, had any bankruptcy petition filed by or against the business or property of the person, or of any partnership, corporation or business association of which he was a general partner or executive officer, either at the time of the bankruptcy filing or within two years prior to that time;

been subject to any order, judgment, or decree, not subsequently reversed, suspended or vacated, of any court of competent jurisdiction or federal or state authority, permanently or temporarily enjoining, barring, suspending or otherwise limiting, his involvement in any type of business, securities, futures, commodities, investment, banking, savings and loan, or insurance activities, or to be associated with persons engaged in any such activity;

Table of Contents

been found by a court of competent jurisdiction in a civil action or by the SEC or the Commodity Futures Trading Commission to have violated a federal or state securities or commodities law, and the judgment has not been reversed, suspended, or vacated;

been the subject of, or a party to, any federal or state judicial or administrative order, judgment, decree, or finding, not subsequently reversed, suspended or vacated (not including any settlement of a civil proceeding among private litigants), relating to an alleged violation of any federal or state securities or commodities law or regulation, any law or regulation respecting financial institutions or insurance companies including, but not limited to, a temporary or permanent injunction, order of disgorgement or restitution, civil money penalty or temporary or permanent cease-and-desist order, or removal or prohibition order, or any law or regulation prohibiting mail or wire fraud or fraud in connection with any business entity; or

been the subject of, or a party to, any sanction or order, not subsequently reversed, suspended or vacated, of any self-regulatory organization (as defined in Section 3(a)(26) of the Exchange Act), any registered entity (as defined in Section 1(a)(29) of the Commodity Exchange Act), or any equivalent exchange, association, entity or organization that has disciplinary authority over its members or persons associated with a member.

Code of Business Conduct and Ethics

On February 24, 2017, we adopted a written Code of Business Conduct and Ethics, Guidelines on Significant Governance Issues, and Process for Security Holder Communications with Directors, each of which is attached as an exhibit hereto.

Board Committees

Our board of directors has established three standing committees: an Audit Committee, a Compensation Committee and a Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee. Each of these committees will operate under a charter that has been approved by our board of directors.

Audit Committee. The Audit Committee will oversee and monitor our financial reporting process and internal control system, review and evaluate the audit performed by our registered independent public accountants and reports to the Board any substantive issues found during the audit. The Audit Committee will be directly responsible for the appointment, compensation and oversight of the work of our registered independent public accountants. The Audit Committee will review and approve all transactions with affiliated parties. The Audit Committee shall be comprised on two or more independent directors who shall be appointed annually and subject to removal by the Board at any time. Each member of the Audit Committee shall meet the independence requirements of The NASDAQ Stock Market, LLC, and SEC regulations, as well as any other applicable requirements. On March 25, 2016, our Board appointed Messrs. Ekizian (Committee Chairperson) and Barrage to the Audit Committee, each of whom meets the independence requirements. In addition, the Board also designated Gregory Ekizian as an "audit committee financial expert," as that term is defined by the NSADAQ Listing Rules and SEC regulations.

Compensation Committee. The Compensation Committee will provide advice and make recommendations to the board in the areas of employee salaries, benefit programs and director compensation. The Compensation Committee will also review the compensation of our President, Chief Executive Officer, and other officers and make recommendations in that regard to the board as a whole. The Compensation Committee shall be comprised on three or more directors who shall be appointed annually and subject to removal by the Board at any time. The Compensation Committee must have at least two members, and must consist solely of independent directors. On March 25, 2016, our Board appointed Messrs. Barrage (Committee Chairperson) and Ekizian, and Dr. Stein to the Compensation Committee, all of whom are independent.

Table of Contents

Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee. The Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee will nominate individuals to be elected to the full board by our stockholders. The Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee will determine the slate of director nominees for election to the Board, to identify and recommend candidates to fill vacancies occurring between annual stockholder meetings, to review the Company's policies and programs that relate to matters of corporate responsibility, including public issues of significance to the Company and its stockholders. The Compensation Committee shall be comprised on three or more directors who shall be appointed annually and subject to removal by the Board at any time. Each member of the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee may or may not meet the independence requirements of The NASDAQ Stock Market, LLC and SEC regulations. On March 25, 2016, our Board appointed Messrs. Silverman (Committee Chairperson), and Drs. Armen and Stein to the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee.

Limitation of Directors Liability and Indemnification

The Delaware General Corporation Law authorizes corporations to limit or eliminate, subject to certain conditions, the personal liability of directors to corporations and their stockholders for monetary damages for breach of their fiduciary duties. Our certificate of incorporation limits the liability of our directors to the fullest extent permitted by Delaware law.

We have director and officer liability insurance to cover liabilities our directors and officers may incur in connection with their services to us, including matters arising under the Securities Act. Our certificate of incorporation and bylaws also provide that we will indemnify our directors and officers who, by reason of the fact that he or she is one of our officers or directors of our company, is involved in any action, suit or proceeding, whether civil, criminal, administrative or investigative related to their board role with the company.

We have entered into indemnification agreements with each of our directors and executive officers. It is anticipated that future directors and officers will enter into an Indemnification Agreement with ~~Trinad Capital Master Fund, Ltd (“Trinad”~~us in substantially similar form. The Indemnification Agreement provides, among other things, that we will indemnify and hold harmless each person subject to an Indemnification Agreement (each, an “Indemnified Party”), to the fullest extent permitted by applicable law from and against all losses, costs, liabilities, judgments, penalties, fines, expenses and other matters that may result or arise in connection with such Indemnified Party serving in his or her capacity as a director of ours or serving at our direction as a director, officer, employee, fiduciary or agent of another entity. The Indemnification Agreement further provides that, upon an Indemnified Party’s request, we will advance expenses to the Indemnified Party to the fullest extent permitted by applicable law. Pursuant to the Indemnification Agreement, an Indemnified Party is presumed to be entitled to indemnification and we have the burden of proving otherwise. The Indemnification Agreement also requires us to maintain in full force and effect directors’ liability insurance on the terms described in the Indemnification Agreement. If indemnification under the Indemnification Agreement is unavailable to an Indemnified Party for any reason, we, in lieu of indemnifying the Indemnified Party, will contribute to any amounts incurred by the Indemnified Party in connection with any claim relating to an indemnifiable event in such proportion as is deemed fair and reasonable in light of all of the circumstances to reflect the relative benefits received or relative fault of the parties in connection with such event.

Insofar as indemnification for liabilities arising under the Securities Act may be permitted to our directors, officers, and controlling persons pursuant to the foregoing provisions, or otherwise, we have been advised that in the opinion of the Securities and Exchange Commission such indemnification is against public policy as expressed in the Securities Act and is, therefore, unenforceable. In the event that a claim for indemnification against such liabilities (other than the payment of expenses incurred or paid by a director, officer or controlling person in a successful defense of any action, suit or proceeding) is asserted by such director, officer or controlling person in connection with the securities being registered, we will, unless in the opinion of its counsel the matter has been settled by controlling precedent, submit to the court of appropriate jurisdiction the question whether such indemnification by it is against public policy as expressed in the Securities Act and will be governed by the final adjudication of such issue.

There is no pending litigation or proceeding involving any of our directors, officers, employees or agents in which ~~MPLC agreed~~indemnification will be required or permitted. We are not aware of any threatened litigation or proceeding that may result in a claim for such indemnification.

Table of Contents

Item11. Executive Compensation.

The following table sets forth information regarding each element of compensation that we paid or awarded to ~~redeem 23,448,870 shares~~our named executive officers and for fiscal year ended December 31, 2016 and 2015.

Summary Compensation Table

Name and Principal Position	Year	Salary		Bonus ($)		Stock Awards ($)		Option Awards ($)			Non-Equity Incentive Plan Compensation ($)		Deferred Compensation ($)		All Other Compensation ($)			Total Compensation ($)

Garo H. Armen, Chairman	2016		N/A		N/A		N/A	$	580,000	(1)		N/A		N/A		N/A		$	580,000
	2015		N/A		N/A		N/A		N/A			N/A		N/A		N/A			N/A

Robert Ziroyan, Chief Operating Officer and Interim President (4)	2016	$	16,861	$	0	$	0	$	0		$	0	$	0	$	2,869	(2)	$	19,730
	2015	$	76,812	$	0	$	0	$	55,125	(3)	$	0	$	0	$	4,758	(2)	$	136,695

Alexander K. Arrow, Chief Financial Officer	2016	$	106,552	$	0	$	0	$	277,400	(5)	$	0	$	0		N/A		$	383,952
	2015		N/A		N/A		N/A		N/A			N/A		N/A		N/A			N/A

(1) We use the Black-Scholes option pricing model to value the options granted. On April 15, 2016, Dr. Armen was granted 580,000 options (exercise price of ~~common stock~~$1.25/option) which had vested by December 31, 2016 valued at US $1.16 each at December 31, 2016.

(2) Represents health benefits, Canada Pension Plan and employment insurance, cell phone and internet reimbursements.

(3) We use the Black-Scholes option pricing model to value the options granted. On March 9, 2015 Mr. Ziroyan was granted 75,000 options (exercise price of $1.25/option) which had vested by December 31, 2015 valued at US $0.98 each at December 31, 2015. A week earlier, on March 1, 2015 Mr. Ziroyan was granted 50,000 options (exercise price of $1.25/option) which had vested by December 31, 2015 using a value of US $0.98 each at December 31, 2015.

(4) Mr. Ziroyan ceased serving as an executive officer effective April 4, 2016. We compensated Mr. Ziroyan as an officer (President & COO) from January 1, 2016 through April 3, 2016, in the amount of $19,730. We then compensated him as an external consultant non-officer from April 4, 2016 through December 31, 2016, in the amount of $18,000. Mr. Ziroyan was not granted any options during 2016.

(5) We use the Black-Scholes option pricing model to value the options granted. On February 12, 2016, Dr. Arrow was granted 100,000 options (exercise price of $1.25/option) which had 25,000 options vested by December 31, 2016 valued at US $1.15 each at December 31, 2016. Then, on April 15, 2016, Dr. Arrow was granted 140,000 options (exercise price of $1.25/option) which had 33,057 options vested by December 31, 2016 valued at US $1.16 each at December 31, 2016.

------------------------------------------

Table of Contents

Employment Arrangements with Officers and Directors

Dr. Alexander Arrow, our Chief Financial Officer, receives base compensation of $125,000 per year for his part-time work for us. In addition, Dr. Arrow received 100,000 options (on a ~~pre-reverse stock split~~post-Reverse Split basis) ~~from~~under the ~~stockholders~~2006 Plan as a sign-on bonus when he joined us and ~~sell~~140,000 options under the 2016 plan on April 15, 2016. These options have an ~~aggregate~~exercise price of ~~69,750,000~~$1.25 per share, a ten-year term and vest over a three-year period in 35 monthly installments of 2,778 shares and a final installment of 2,770 shares and 3,889 shares and a final installment of 3,885 shares, respectively. The terms of Dr. Arrow’s option grant also include full vesting acceleration upon a change of control. Drs. Arrow and Armen are the only two executive officers of the Company.

Consultancy Agreements

Dalia Barsyte PhD, Chief Technology Officer. Our subsidiary, Protagenic Therapeutics Canada (2006) Inc., entered into a consulting agreement with Dr. Dalia Barsyte. Dr. Barsyte is responsible for overseeing i) design and development of ELISA assays for measuring TCAP, ii) evaluation of TCAP exposure biomarker assay, iii) development of pipeline peptides, iv) development of clinically compatible formulations for TCAP, as well as all of the bench research and development of formulation and extraction methods. Her consulting agreement is effective through December 2017. She is compensated at the rate of up to $3,000 (Canadian) per month, if she works at least 20 hours on behalf of the Company. As well, we have granted Dr. Barsyte 10,000 shares of our common stock ~~(on a pre-reverse stock split basis), representing 93%~~and ten-year options to purchase 150,000 shares of our common stock. Options to purchase 100,000 shares of common stock, at an exercise price of $1.00 per share, have fully vested; the options to purchase the remaining 50,000 shares of common stock, at an exercise price of $1.25 per share, vested in March 2016.

Robert B. Stein, PhD, MD. We entered into a consulting agreement with Dr. Stein effective January 2015. Dr. Stein is responsible for providing us with technical and advisory services related to our research and development efforts. The consulting agreement is effective through January 2020. On January 23, 2015, we granted Dr. Stein ten-year options to purchase 200,000 shares of our common stock, at an exercise price of $1.25 per share. The options vest in increments of 1.667% per month on the first day of each calendar month following January, 2015, such that the shares shall be fully vested on January 23, 2020, provided Dr. Stein remains a consultant to us.

Christina Faragalla, Director of Project Management. We entered into a consulting agreement with Ms. Faragalla effective June 2016, via her consultancy entitled Lotus Clinical Consulting. She is compensated at the rate $100 per hour invoices, subject to a 12-month cap of $100,000. In addition, on October 26, 2016, we granted Ms. Faragalla ten-year options to purchase 25,000 shares of our common stock, at an exercise price of $1.25 per share.

Outstanding Equity Awards at Fiscal Year End

The following table summarizes the equity awards made to our named executive officers that were outstanding at December 31, 2016.

Name	No. of Securities Underlying Unexercised Options (#) Exercisable		No. of Securities Underlying Unexercised Options (#) Unexercisable		Option Exercise Price		Option Expiration Date
Garo H. Armen (1)		118,057		381,943	$	1.25	April 15, 2026
Robert Ziroyan (2)		100,000		—	$	1.00	March 30, 2021
Robert Ziroyan (2)		50,000		—	$	1.00	March 1, 2024
Robert Ziroyan (2)		75,000		—	$	1.25	March 9, 2025
Alexander K. Arrow (3)		25,000		75,000	$	1.25	February 12, 2026
Alexander K. Arrow (3)		33,057		106,943	$	1.25	April 15, 2026

(1)Dr. Armen was granted a 500,000 share option grant on April 15, 2016

(2) Mr. Ziroyan ceased serving as an executive officer as of April 4, 2016.

(3) Dr. Arrow was granted a 100,000 share option grant on February 12, 2016, and a 140,000 share option grant on April 15, 2016

Table of Contents

For Drs. Armen and Arrow, following a qualified Change of Control, a resignation for Good Reason, or an involuntary termination other than For Cause, 100% of the executives’ then-unvested options shall become immediately vested.

Director Compensation

During fiscal year 2016 we compensated directors who were not employees of the Company.

Name	Fees earned or paid in cash	Stock awards	Option awards (1)		Non-equity incentive plan compensation	Nonqualified deferred compensation earnings	All other compensation	Total
Garo H. Armen			$	580,000				$	580,000
Khalil Barrage			$	52,200				$	52,200
Gregory Ekizian			$	52,200				$	52,200
Joshua Silverman			$	52,200				$	52,200
Robert Stein			$	46,400				$	46,400

______________________

(1)

All Directors’ option awards were granted under the 2006 Plan on April 15 of 2016, except for the options granted to Khalil Barrage, which were granted under the 2006 Plan on August 8, 2016.

Going forward, on April 15 of each fiscal year, each non-employee directors will receive an option under the 2016 Plan to purchase 40,000 shares of common stock, as well as an option to purchase 5,000 shares for each committee which they chair. No additional options shall be granted for serving on a committee without being its chair. All options will be granted at fair market value, as defined in the 2016 Plan, on the date of grant, and will vest over a three-year period in equal monthly installments. Vesting will accelerate in certain circumstances, such as a change of control of the Company, and unvested options will terminate upon the cessation of an individual’s service to us as a director.

Non-employee directors may be reimbursed for their reasonable expenses in attending Board and committee meetings.

We entered into a consulting agreement with Robert B. Stein, PhD, MD, which is described above.

Table of Contents

Item12. Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters.

Equity CompensationPlans

Equity CompensationPlan Information

Plan category	(a) No. ofsecurities to be issued upon exercise of outstanding options, warrants and rights		(b) Weighted-average exercise price of outstanding options, warrants and rights		(c) No. of securities remaining available for future issuance under equity compensation plans (excluding securities reflected in column (a)
Equity compensation plans approved by security holders		6,453,887		$1.18		2,148,300

Equity compensation plans not approved by security holders		0		0		0

Total		6,453,887		$1.18		2,148,300

In connection with the Merger, we adopted Protagenic’s 2006 Employee, Director and Consultant Stock Plan (the “2006 Plan”). On June 17, 2016, our stockholders adopted our 2016 Equity Compensation Plan and, as a result, we terminated the 2006 Plan. We will not grant any further awards under the 2006 Plan. All outstanding grants under the 2006 Plan will continue in effect in accordance with the terms of the particular grant and the 2006 Plan.

2006 Employee, Director and Consultant Stock Plan

The following description of the pertinent terms of the 2006 Plan is a summary and is qualified in its entirety by the full text of the 2006 Plan.

Administration. The administrator (the “Administrator”) of the 2006 Plan is the Board of Directors, except to the extent the Board of Directors delegates its authority to the Compensation committee (the “Committee”) of the Board, in which case the Committee shall be the Administrator. Subject to the provisions of the 2006 Plan, the Administrator is authorized to:

Interpret the provisions of the 2006 Plan or of any option or stock grant and to make all rules and determinations which it deems necessary or advisable for the administration of the 2006 Plan;

Determine which employees, directors and consultants shall be granted awards;

Determine the number of Shares for which an award shall be granted;

Specify the terms and conditions upon which an award may be granted; and

Adopt any sub-plans applicable to residents of any specified jurisdiction as it deems necessary or appropriate in order to comply with or take advantage of any tax laws applicable to the us or to 2006 Plan participants or to otherwise facilitate the administration of the 2006 Plan, which sub-plans may include additional restrictions or conditions applicable to options or shares acquired upon exercise of options.

provided, however, that all such interpretations, rules, determinations, terms and conditions shall be made and prescribed in the context of preserving the tax status under Section 422 of the Code of those options which are designated as ISOs. Subject to the foregoing, the interpretation and construction by the Administrator of any provisions of the 2006 Plan or of any award granted under it shall be final.

Table of Contents

If permissible under applicable law, the Board of Directors or the Committee may allocate all or any portion of its responsibilities and powers to any one or more of its members and may delegate all or any portion of its responsibilities and powers to any other person selected by it. Any such allocation or delegation may be revoked by the Board of Directors or the Committee at any time.

Terms and Conditions of Options. Options granted under the 2006 Plan may be either “incentive stock options” that are intended to meet the requirements of Section 422 of the Code or “nonqualified stock options” that do not meet the requirements of Section 422 of the Code. The Administrator will determine the exercise price of options granted under the 2006 Plan. The exercise price of stock options may not be less than the fair market value per share of our common stock on the date of grant (or 110% of fair market value in the case of incentive stock options granted to a ten-percent stockholder).

If on the date of grant the common stock is listed on a stock exchange or national market system, the fair market value will generally be the closing sale price on the date of grant. If the common stock is not traded on a stock exchange or national market system on the date of grant, the fair market value will generally be the mean between the bid and the asked price for the common stock at the close of trading in the over-the-counter market for the trading day on which common stock was traded immediately preceding the applicable date. If no such prices are available, the fair market value shall be determined in good faith by the Administrator.

No option intended to qualify as an ISO may be exercisable for more than ten years from the date of grant (five years in the case of an incentive stock option granted to a ten-percent stockholder). Options granted under the 2006 Plan will be exercisable at such time or times as the Administrator prescribes at the time of grant. No employee may receive incentive stock options that first become exercisable in any calendar year in an amount exceeding $100,000.

Generally, the exercise price of an option may be paid (a) in cash or by certified bank check, (b) at the discretion of the Administrator, through delivery of shares of our common stock held for at least six months having a fair market value equal to the purchase price, (c) at the discretion of the Administrator, by delivery of the grantee’s personal note, for full, partial or no recourse, bearing interest payable not less than annually at market rate on the date of exercise and at no less than 100% of the applicable Federal rate, as defined in Section 1274(d) of the Code, with or without the pledge of such shares as collateral, or (d) at the discretion of the Administrator, in accordance with a cashless exercise program established with a securities brokerage firm, and approved by the Administrator, or (e) at the discretion of the Administrator, by any combination of the above methods.

No option may be transferred other than by will or by the laws of descent and distribution, and during a recipient’s lifetime an option may be exercised only by the recipient. The Administrator will determine the extent to which a holder of a stock option may exercise the option following termination of service with us.

The Administrator will determine the extent to which a holder of a stock option may exercise the option following termination of service with us.

Effect of Certain Corporate Transactions. If the Company is to be consolidated with or acquired by another entity in a merger, sale of all or substantially all of the Company’s assets other than a transaction to merely change the state of incorporation (a “Corporate Transaction”), the Administrator or the board of directors of any entity assuming the obligations of the Company hereunder (the “Successor Board”), shall, as to outstanding options, either (i) make appropriate provision for the continuation of such options by substituting on an equitable basis for the Shares then subject to such options either the consideration payable with respect to the outstanding shares of common stock in connection with the Corporate Transaction or securities of any successor or acquiring entity (provided, that, at the discretion of the Administrator, all unvested options shall be made fully or partially exercisable for purposes of this Subparagraph upon the closing of the Corporate Transaction); or (ii) upon written notice to the participants, provide that all options must be exercised (either to the extent then exercisable or, at the discretion of the Administrator, all options being made fully or partially exercisable), within a specified number of days of the date of such notice, at the end of which period the options shall terminate; or (iii) terminate all options in exchange for a cash payment equal to the excess of the fair market value of the shares of common stock subject to such options (either to the extent then exercisable or, at the discretion of the Administrator, all options being made fully or partially exercisable) over the exercise price thereof.

Table of Contents

Tax Withholding. As and when appropriate, we shall have the right to require each optionee purchasing shares of common stock and each grantee receiving an award of shares of common stock under the 2006 Plan to pay any federal, state or local taxes required by law to be withheld.

2016 Equity Compensation Plan

The following description of the principal terms of the 2016 Plan is a summary and is qualified in its entirety by the full text of the 2016 Plan.

Administration. The 2016 Plan is administered by the Compensation Committee of our Board of Directors, provided that the entire Board of Directors may act in lieu of the Compensation Committee on any matter, subject to certain requirements set forth in the 2016 Plan. The Compensation Committee may grant options to purchase shares of our common stock, stock appreciation rights, stock units, restricted shares of our common stock, performance shares, performance units, incentive bonus awards, other cash-based awards and other stock-based awards. The Compensation Committee also has broad authority to determine the terms and conditions of each option or other kind of award, and adopt, amend and rescind rules and regulations for the administration of the 2016 Plan. Subject to applicable law, the Compensation Committee may authorize one or more reporting persons (as defined in the 2016 Plan) or other officers to make awards (other than awards to reporting persons, or other officers whom the Compensation Committee has specifically authorized to make awards). No awards may be granted under the 2016 Plan on or after the ten-year anniversary of the adoption of the 2016 Plan by our Board of Directors, but awards granted prior to such tenth anniversary may extend beyond that date.

Eligibility. Awards may be granted under the 2016 Plan to any person who is an employee, officer, director, consultant, advisor or other individual service provider of the Company or any subsidiary, or any person who is determined by the Compensation Committee to be a prospective employee, officer, director, consultant, advisor or other individual service provider of the Company or any subsidiary.

Shares Subject to the 2016 Plan. The aggregate number of shares of common stock proposed to be available for issuance in connection with options and awards granted under the 2016 Plan is 3,000,000 shares. Incentive Stock Options may, but need not be, granted with respect to all of the shares available for issuance under the 2016 Plan;provided,however, that the maximum aggregate number of shares of common stock which may be issued in respect of Incentive Stock Options (after giving effect to any increases pursuant to the “evergreen” provisions of the 2016 Plan discussed below) shall not exceed 6,000,000 shares, subject to adjustment in the event of stock, splits and similar transactions. If any award granted under the 2016 Plan payable in shares of common stock is forfeited, cancelled, or returned for failure to satisfy vesting requirements, otherwise terminates without payment being made, or if shares of common stock are withheld to cover withholding taxes on options or other awards, the number of shares of common stock as to which such option or award was forfeited, or which were withheld, will be available for future grants under the 2016 Plan.

In addition, the 2016 Plan contains an “evergreen” provision allowing for an annual increase in the number of shares of our common stock available for issuance under the 2016 Plan on January 1 of each year during the period beginning January 1, 2017, and ending on (and including) January 1, 2026. The annual increase in the number of shares shall be equal to (i) five point five percent (5.5%) of the total number of shares of common stock outstanding on December 31st of the preceding calendar year, or (ii) with respect to shares of common stock which may be issued under the 2016 Plan other than in respect to Incentive Stock Options, the difference between (x) eighteen percent (18%) of the total number of shares of common stock outstanding on December 31st of the preceding calendar year, and (y) the total number of shares of common stock reserved under the 2016 Plan on December 31st of such preceding calendar year (including shares subject to outstanding awards, issued pursuant to awards or available for future awards) if such amount is greater than the amount determined in (i) immediately above; provided, however, that our Board may act prior to the first day of any calendar year to provide that there shall be no increase such calendar year, or that the increase shall be a lesser number of shares of common stock than would otherwise occur. On January 1, 2017, 564,378 shares of common stock were added to the 2016 Plan pursuant to this evergreen provision.

Table of Contents

Terms and Conditions of Options. Options granted under the 2016 Plan may be either “incentive stock options” that are intended to meet the requirements of Section 422 of the Code or “nonqualified stock options” that do not meet the requirements of Section 422 of the Code. The Compensation Committee will determine the exercise price of options granted under the 2016 Plan. The exercise price of stock options may not be less than the fair market value, on the date of grant, per share of our common stock issuable upon exercise of the option (or 110% of fair market value in the case of incentive options granted to a ten-percent stockholder).

If on the date of grant the common stock is listed on a stock exchange or national market system, the fair market value shall generally be the closing sale price as of such date, or if there were no trades recorded on such date, then the most recent date preceding such date on which trades were recorded. If on the date of grant the common stock is traded in an over-the-counter market, the fair market will generally be the average of the closing bid and asked prices for the shares of common stock as of such date, or, if there are no closing bid and asked prices for the shares of common stock on such date, then the average of the bid and asked prices for the shares of common stock on the most recent date preceding such date on which such closing ~~date, to Trinad~~bid and asked prices are available. If the common stock is not listed on a national securities exchange or national market system or traded in an over-the-counter market, the fair market value shall be determined by the Compensation Committee in a ~~private placement transaction~~manner consistent with Section 409A of the Code. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if on the date of grant the common stock is listed on a stock exchange or is quoted on a national market system, or is traded in an over-the-counter market, then solely for purposes of determining the exercise price of any grant of a stock option or the base price of any grant of a stock appreciation right, the Compensation Committee may, in its discretion, base fair market value on the last sale before or the first sale after the grant, the closing price on the trading day before or the trading day of the grant, the arithmetic mean of the high and low prices on the trading day before or the trading day of the grant, or any other reasonable method using actual transactions of the common stock as reported by the exchange or market on which the common stock is traded. In addition, the determination of fair market value also may be made using any other method permitted under Treasury Regulation section 1.409A-1(b)(5)(iv).

No option may be exercisable for more than ten years from the date of grant (five years in the case of an incentive stock option granted to a ten-percent stockholder). Options granted under the 2016 Plan will be exercisable at such time or times as the Compensation Committee prescribes at the time of grant. No employee may receive incentive stock options that first become exercisable in any calendar year in an amount exceeding $100,000. The Compensation Committee may, in its discretion, permit a holder of a nonqualified stock option to exercise the option before it has otherwise become exercisable, in which case the shares of our common stock issued to the recipient will continue to be subject to the vesting requirements that applied to the option before exercise.

Generally, the option price may be paid in cash or by bank check, or such other means as the Compensation Committee may accept. As set forth in an award agreement or otherwise determined by the Compensation Committee, in its sole discretion, at or after grant, payment in full or part of the exercise price of an option may be made (a) in the form of shares of common stock that have been held by the participant for such period as the Compensation Committee may deem appropriate for accounting purposes or otherwise, valued at the fair market value of such shares on the date of exercise; (ii) by surrendering to the Company shares of common stock otherwise receivable on exercise of the option; (iii) by a cashless exercise program implemented by the Compensation Committee in connection with the 2016 Plan; and/or (iv) by such other method as may be approved by the Compensation Committee and set forth in an award agreement.

No option may be transferred other than by will or by the laws of descent and distribution, and during a recipient’s lifetime an option may be exercised only by the recipient or the recipient’s guardian or legal representative. However, the Compensation Committee may permit the transfer of a nonqualified stock option, share-settled stock appreciation right, restricted stock award, performance share or share-settled other stock-based award either (a) by instrument to the participant’s immediate family (as defined in the 2016 Plan), (b) by instrument to an inter vivos or testamentary trust (or other entity) in which the award is to be passed to the participant’s designated beneficiaries, or (c) by gift to charitable institutions. The Compensation Committee will determine the extent to which a holder of a stock option may exercise the option following termination of service.

Table of Contents

Stock Appreciation Rights. The Compensation Committee may grant stock appreciation rights independent of or in connection with an option. The Compensation Committee will determine the terms applicable to stock appreciation rights. The base price of a stock appreciation right will be determined by the Compensation Committee, but will not be less than 100% of the fair market value of a share of our common stock with respect to the date of grant of such stock appreciation right. The maximum term of any SAR granted under the 2016 Plan is ten years from the date of grant. Generally, each SAR stock appreciation right will entitle a participant upon exercise to an amount equal to:

●

the excess of the fair market value of a share of common stock on the date of exercise of the stock appreciation right over the base price of such stock appreciation right, multiplied by

●

the number of shares as to which such stock appreciation right is exercised.

Payment may be made in shares of our common stock, in cash, or partly in common stock and partly in cash, all as determined by the Compensation Committee.

Restricted Stock and Stock Units. The Compensation Committee may award restricted common stock and/or stock units under the 2016 Plan. Restricted stock awards consist of shares of stock that are transferred to a participant subject to restrictions that may result in forfeiture if specified conditions are not satisfied. Stock units confer the right to receive shares of our common stock, cash, or a combination of shares and cash, at a future date upon or following the attainment of certain conditions specified by the Compensation Committee. The Compensation Committee will determine the restrictions and conditions applicable to each award of restricted stock or stock units, which may include performance-based conditions. Dividends with respect to restricted stock may be paid to the holder of the shares as and when dividends are paid to stockholders or at the times of vesting or other payment of the restricted stock award. Stock unit awards may be granted with dividend equivalent rights, which may be accumulated and may be deemed reinvested in additional stock units, as determined by the Compensation Committee in its discretion. If any dividend equivalents are paid while a stock unit award is subject to restrictions, the dividend equivalents shall be subject to the same restrictions on transferability as the underlying stock units, unless otherwise set forth in an award agreement. Unless the Compensation Committee determines otherwise, holders of restricted stock will have the right to vote the shares.

Performance Shares and Performance Units. The Compensation Committee may award performance shares and/or performance units under the 2016 Plan. Performance shares and performance units are awards which are earned during a specified performance period subject to the attainment of performance criteria, as established by the Compensation Committee. The Compensation Committee will determine the restrictions and conditions applicable to each award of performance shares and performance units.

Incentive Bonus Awards. The Compensation Committee may award Incentive Bonus Awards under the 2016 Plan. Incentive Bonus Awards may be based upon the attainment of specified levels of Company or subsidiary performance as measured by pre-established, objective performance criteria determined at the discretion of the Compensation Committee. Incentive Bonus Awards will be paid in cash or common stock, as set forth in an award agreement.

Other Stock-Based and Cash-Based Awards. The Compensation Committee may award other types of equity-based or cash-based awards under the 2016 Plan, including the grant or offer for sale of unrestricted shares of our common stock and payment in cash or otherwise of amounts based on the value of shares of common stock.

Section 162(m) Compliance. If stock or cash-based awards are intended to satisfy the conditions for deductibility under Section 162(m) of the Code as “performance-based compensation,” the performance criteria will be selected from among the following, which may be applied to our Company as a whole, any subsidiary or any division or operating unit thereof: (a) pre-tax income; (b) after-tax income; (c) net income; (d) operating income or profit; (e) cash flow, free cash flow, cash flow return on investment, net cash provided by operations, or cash flow in excess of cost of capital; (f) earnings per share; (g) return on equity; (h) return on sales or revenues; (i) return on invested capital or assets; (j) cash, funds or earnings available for distribution; (k) appreciation in the fair market value of the common stock; (l) operating expenses; (m) implementation or completion of critical projects or processes; (n) return on investment; (o) total return to stockholders; (p) dividends paid; (q) net earnings growth; (r) related return ratios; (s) increase in revenues; (t) the Company’s published ranking against its peer group of pharmaceutical companies based on total stockholder return; (u) net earnings; (v) changes (or the absence of changes) in the per share or aggregate ~~gross proceeds~~market price of the common stock; (w) number of securities sold; (x) earnings before or after any one or more of the following items: interest, taxes, depreciation or amortization, as reflected in the Company’s financial reports for the applicable period; (y) total revenue growth; (z) economic value created; (aa) operating margin or profit margin; (bb) share price or total stockholder return; (cc) cost targets, reductions and savings, productivity and efficiencies; (dd) strategic business criteria, consisting of one or more objectives based on meeting objectively determinable criteria: specified market penetration, geographic business expansion, progress with research and development activities, investor satisfaction, employee satisfaction, human resources management, supervision of litigation, information technology, and goals relating to acquisitions, divestitures, joint ventures and similar transactions, and budget comparisons; (ee) objectively determinable personal or professional objectives, including any of the following performance goals: the implementation of policies and plans, the negotiation of transactions, the development of long term business goals, formation of joint ventures, research or development collaborations, and the completion of other corporate transactions, and (ff) any combination of, or a specified increase or improvement in, any of the foregoing.

Table of Contents

At the end of the performance period established in connection with any award, the Compensation Committee will determine the extent to which the performance goal or goals established for such award have been attained, and shall determine, on that basis, the number of performance shares or performance units included in such award that have been earned and as to which payment will be made. The Compensation Committee will certify in writing the extent to which it has determined that the performance goal or goals established by it for such award have been attained.

With respect to awards intended to be performance-based compensation under Section 162(m) of the Code, no participant of the 2016 Plan may receive in any one fiscal year (a) options or stock appreciation rights relating to more than 1,000,000 shares of our common stock, and (b) stock units, restricted shares, performance shares, performance units or other stock-based awards that are denominated in shares of common stock relating to more than 1,000,000 shares of our common stock in the aggregate. The maximum dollar value payable to any participant for a fiscal year of the Company with respect to stock units, performance units or incentive bonus awards or other stock-based awards that may be settled in cash or other property (other than common stock) is $1,500,000.

Effect of Certain Corporate Transactions. The Compensation Committee may, at the time of the grant of an award, provide for the effect of a change in control (as defined in the 2016 Plan) on any award, including (i) accelerating or extending the time periods for exercising, vesting in, or realizing gain from any award, (ii) eliminating or modifying the performance or other conditions of an award, (iii) providing for the cash settlement of an award for an equivalent cash value, as determined by the Compensation Committee, or (iv) such other modification or adjustment to an award as the Compensation Committee deems appropriate to maintain and protect the rights and interests of participants upon or following a change in control. The Compensation Committee may, in its discretion and without the need for the consent of any recipient of an award, also take one or more of the following actions contingent upon the occurrence of a change in control: (a) cause any or all outstanding options and stock appreciation rights to become immediately exercisable, in whole or in part; (b) cause any other awards to become non-forfeitable, in whole or in part; (c) cancel any option or stock appreciation right in exchange for a substitute option; (d) cancel any award of restricted stock, stock units, performance shares or performance units in exchange for a similar award of the capital stock of any successor corporation; (e) redeem any restricted stock, stock unit, performance share or performance unit for cash and/or other substitute consideration with a value equal to the fair market value of an unrestricted share of our common stock on the date of the change in control; (f) cancel any option or stock appreciation right in exchange for cash and/or other substitute consideration based on the value of our common stock on the date of the change in control, and cancel any option or stock appreciation right without any payment if its exercise price exceeds the value of our common stock on the date of the change in control; (g) cancel any stock unit or performance unit held by a participant affected by the change in control in exchange for cash and/or other substitute consideration with a value equal to the fair market value per share of common stock on the date of the change in control, or (h) make such other modifications, adjustments or amendments to outstanding awards as the Compensation Committee deems necessary or appropriate.

Table of Contents

Amendment, Termination. The 2016 Equity Compensation Plan will remain in effect until March 2026, or, if earlier, when awards have been granted covering all available shares under the 2016 Plan or the 2016 Plan is otherwise terminated by the Board. The Board may amend the terms of awards in any manner not inconsistent with the 2016 Plan, provided that no amendment shall adversely affect the rights of a participant with respect to an outstanding award without the participant’s consent. In addition, our Board of Directors may at any time amend, suspend, or terminate the 2016 Plan, provided that (i) no such amendment, suspension or termination shall materially and adversely affect the rights of any participant under any outstanding award without the consent of such participant and (ii) to the extent necessary and desirable to comply with any applicable law, regulation, or stock exchange rule, the 2016 Plan requires us to obtain stockholder consent. Stockholder approval is required for any plan amendment that increases the number of ~~$750,000, $547,720~~shares of ~~which was~~common stock available for issuance under the 2016 Plan or changes the persons or classes of persons eligible to receive awards.

Tax Withholding.The Company has the power and right to deduct or withhold, or require a participant to remit to the Company, the minimum statutory amount to satisfy federal, state, and local taxes, domestic or foreign, required by law or regulations to be withheld.

Recoupment Policy.Awards granted under the 2016 Plan will be subject to any provisions of applicable law providing for the recoupment or clawback of incentive compensation, such as provisions imposed pursuant to the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act; the terms of any Company recoupment, clawback or similar policy in effect at the time of grant of the award; and any recoupment, clawback or similar provisions that may be included in the applicable award agreement.

Federal Income Tax Consequences.The following is a brief summary of the U.S. federal income tax consequences applicable to awards granted under the 2016 Plan based on the federal income tax laws in effect on the date of this report. This summary is not intended to be exhaustive and does not address all matters relevant to a particular participant based on his or her specific circumstances. The summary expressly does not discuss the income tax laws of any state, municipality, or non-U.S. taxing jurisdiction, or the gift, estate, excise (including the rules applicable to deferred compensation under Code Section 409A), or other tax laws other than federal income tax law. The following is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the ~~redemption described above,~~purposes of avoiding taxpayer penalties. Because individual circumstances may vary, the Company advises all participants to consult their own tax advisor concerning the tax implications of awards granted under the 2016 Plan.

A recipient of a stock option or stock appreciation right will not have taxable income upon the grant of the stock option or stock appreciation right. For non-statutory stock options and ~~$202,280 was used~~stock appreciation rights, the participant will recognize ordinary income upon exercise in an amount equal to ~~repay all loans to MPLC from Isaac Kier, a former director~~the difference between the fair market value of the shares and the exercise price on the date of exercise. Any gain or loss recognized upon any later disposition of the shares generally will be a capital gain or loss.

The acquisition of shares upon exercise of an incentive stock option will not result in any taxable income to the participant, except, possibly, for purposes of the alternative minimum tax. The gain or loss recognized by the participant on a later sale or other disposition of such shares will either be long-term capital gain or loss or ordinary income, depending upon whether the participant holds the shares for the legally-required period (two years from the date of grant and one year from the date of exercise). If the shares are not held for the legally-required period, the participant will recognize ordinary income equal to the lesser of (i) the difference between the fair market value of the shares on the date of exercise and the exercise price, or (ii) the difference between the sales price and the exercise price, and the balance of the gain, if any, will be afforded capital gain treatment.

For awards of stock grants, the participant will not have taxable income upon the receipt of the award (unless the participant elects to be taxed at the time of the stock is granted rather than when it becomes vested). The stock grants will generally be subject to tax upon vesting as ordinary income equal to the fair market value of the shares at the time of vesting less the amount paid for such shares (if any).

A participant is not deemed to receive any taxable income at the time an award of restricted stock units is granted. When vested restricted stock units (and dividend equivalents, if any) are settled and distributed, the participant will recognize ordinary income equal to the amount of cash and/or the fair market value of shares received less the amount paid for such restricted stock units (if any).

Table of Contents

If the participant is an employee or former ~~president, treasurer~~employee, the amount a participant recognizes as ordinary income in connection with any award is subject to withholding taxes (not applicable to incentive stock options) and ~~secretary~~the Company is allowed a tax deduction equal to the amount of ~~MPLC. Upon~~ordinary income recognized by the participant. In addition, Code Section 162(m) contains special rules regarding the federal income tax deductibility of compensation paid to the Company’s chief executive officer and to certain of the Company’s other executive officers. The general rule is that annual compensation paid to any of these specified executives will be deductible only to the extent that it does not exceed $1,000,000. However, the Company can preserve the deductibility of certain compensation in excess of $1,000,000 if such compensation qualifies as “performance-based compensation” by complying with certain conditions imposed by the Code Section 162(m) rules (including the establishment of a maximum number of shares with respect to which awards may be granted to any one employee during one fiscal year).

Option Grants and Stock Awards

As of December 31, 2016, we had outstanding stock options to purchase 2,627,229 shares at an average exercise price of approximately $1.05 per share. Included in the total outstanding stock options were 117,784 stock options granted under the 2006 Plan in 2016 at an exercise price of $1.25 and 1,333,299 nonqualified stock options granted under the 2016 Plan in 2016 to our executive officers and others at an exercise price of $1.25 per share.

All awards to be made under the 2016 Plan are discretionary, subject to the terms of the 2016 Plan. Therefore, the benefits and amounts that will be received or allocated under the 2016 Plan are generally not determinable at this time. The equity grant program for our non-employee directors is described under the Compensation of Directors section in this proxy statement. The following table summarizes these 2016 awards to our named executive officers, all executive officers and the non-executive officer employees and consultants.

New Plan Benefits Table

Name and Position	Number of Units (options)
Garo H. Armen, Executive Chairman		500,000	(1)
Alexander K. Arrow, Chief Financial Officer		140,000	(1)
Non-Executive Director Group		325,000	(2)
Non-Executive Officer Employee/Consultant Group		243,300	(3)

_________________

(1)

These options vest over three years in monthly installments.

(2)

175,000 of these options vest over two years in equal monthly installments, and as of December 31, 2016, 58,333 have fully vested.

(3)

10,000 of these options vest over one year in equal monthly installments, 100,000 of these options vest over three years in equal monthly installments, and 258,299 of these options vest over 4 years in equal monthly installments.

Outstanding Equity Awards at Fiscal Year End

The following table summarizes the equity awards made to our named executive officers that were outstanding at December 31, 2016.

Name	No. of Securities Underlying Unexercised Options (#) Exercisable		No. of Securities Underlying Unexercised Options (#) Unexercisable		Option Exercise Price		Option Expiration Date
Garo H. Armen (1)		118,057		381,943	$	1.25	April 15, 2026
Robert Ziroyan (2)		100,000		—	$	1.00	March 30, 2021
Robert Ziroyan (2)		50,000		—	$	1.00	March 1, 2024
Robert Ziroyan (2)		75,000		—	$	1.25	March 9, 2025
Alexander K. Arrow (3)		25,000		75,000	$	1.25	February 12, 2026
Alexander K. Arrow (3)		33,057		106,943	$	1.25	April 15, 2026

(1)	Dr. Armen was granted a 500,000 share option grant on April 15, 2016

(2)	Mr. Ziroyan ceased serving as an executive officer as of April 4, 2016.

(3)	Dr. Arrow was granted a 100,000 share option grant on February 12, 2016, and a 140,000 share option grant on April 15, 2016.

Table of Contents

Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management

The following table summarizes the beneficial owners of more than 5% of the Company’s voting securities and the securities of the Company beneficially owned by the Company’s directors and officers as of March 27, 2017.

Name and address of Beneficial Owner	Amount of Beneficial Ownership			Percent of Beneficial Ownership

Garo H. Armen⁽¹⁾		3,979,936	⁽²⁾		34

Robert B. Stein⁽¹⁾		114,995	⁽³⁾		1

Khalil Barrage⁽¹⁾		224,375	⁽⁴⁾		2

Alexander K. Arrow⁽¹⁾		210,487	⁽⁵⁾		2

Larry N. Feinberg 808 North St., Greenwich, CT 06831		800,000	⁽⁶⁾		8

Gregory H. Ekizian⁽¹⁾		624,375	⁽⁷⁾		6

David A. Lovejoy		480,207	⁽⁸⁾		5

Josh Silverman⁽¹⁾		24,375	⁽⁹⁾		*

Strategic Bio Partners LLC⁽¹⁰⁾ 777 Third Avenue 30th Floor New York, NY 10017		2,193,413	⁽¹¹⁾		21

All directors and executive officers as a group (6 persons)		5,178,543	⁽¹²⁾

* Less than 1%

(1) Executive officer and/or director.

Table of Contents

(2) Includes warrants to purchase 1,253,367 shares of common stock at an exercise price of approximately $1.00 per share. Includes 2,296,012 shares held in the name of Dr. Armen and 250,000 shares held in the name of the Garo H. Armen IRA, as to which Dr. Armen has sole voting and dispositive power. Also includes options to purchase 180,557 shares of common stock at an exercise price of $1.25 per share. Does not include options to purchase 319,443 shares that are not exercisable within 60 days of the date of this report.

(3) Represents options to purchase 114,995 shares of common stock at an exercise price of $1.25 per share. Does not include options to purchase 125,005 shares in the aggregate that are not exercisable within 60 days of the date of this report.

(4) Includes 50,000 shares of common stock and options to purchase 174,375 shares of common stock at an exercise price of $1.25 per share. Does not include options to purchase 20,625 shares in the aggregate that are not exercisable within 60 days of the date of this report.

(5) Includes 100,000 shares held in the name of Dr. Arrow and 18,260 shares held in the name of the Alexander K. Arrow IRA, as to which Dr. Arrow has sole voting and dispositive power. Also includes options to purchase 92,227 shares of common stock at an exercise price of $1.25 per share. Does not include options to purchase 147,773 shares of common stock in the aggregate that are not exercisable within 60 days of the date of this report.

(6) Includes 200,000 shares of common stock held in the name of Mr. Feinberg and warrants to purchase 600,000 shares of common stock at an exercise price of $1.00 per share.

(7) Includes 125,000 shares held in the name of the Gregory H. Ekizian Revocable Trust and 100,000 shares and 300,000 warrants held in the name of Pensco Trust Company f/b/o Gregory H. Ekizian, as to which Mr. Ekizian has sole voting and dispositive power. Also includes warrants to purchase 75,000 shares of common stock at an exercise price of $1.00 per share and options to purchase 24,375 shares of common stock at an exercise price of $1.25 per share. Does not include options to purchase 20,625 shares that are not exercisable within 60 days of the date of this report.

(8) Includes 148,800 shares of common stock held in the name of Dr. Lovejoy and options to purchase 331,407 shares of common stock in the aggregate with an exercise price ranging from $1.00 to $1.25 per share. Does not include options to purchase 151,892 shares of common stock that are not exercisable within 60 days of the date of this report.

(9) Includes options to purchase 24,375 shares of common stock at an exercise price of $1.25 per share. Does not include options to purchase 20,625 shares of common stock that are not exercisable within 60 days of the date of this report.

(10) Hudson Bay Master Fund Ltd. (the "Managing Member") is the managing member of Strategic Bio Partners, LLC ("SBP"). Pursuant to SBP's Limited Liability Company Operating Agreement, the Managing Member has delegated to Hudson Bay Capital Management LP ("HBC") full and sole investment discretion and voting control of SBP's portfolio securities. Sander Gerber is the managing member of Hudson Bay Capital GP LLC, which is the general partner of HBC. Each of SBP, the Managing Member and Sander Gerber disclaims beneficial ownership over these securities.

(11) SBP also holds shares of Series B Preferred Stock convertible into common stock and Predecessor Warrants to purchase common stock. However, the Series B Preferred and the Predecessor Warrants are subject to a "Beneficial Ownership Cap" limitation pursuant to which the holder thereof does not have the right to convert Series B Preferred Stock or exercise the Predecessor Warrants to the extent that such exercise would result in beneficial ownership by the holder thereof, or any of its affiliates and any other persons or entities whose beneficial ownership of common stock would be aggregated with the holder's for purposes of Section 13(d) of the Exchange Act, of more than 9.99% of the total number of shares of common stock issued and outstanding immediately after giving effect to such conversion or exercise. Disregarding the Beneficial Ownership Cap, SBP would own 2,193,413 shares of common stock, including the shares underlying Series B Preferred Stock and Predecessor Warrants.

(12) Includes warrants to purchase 1,628,367 shares of common stock and options to purchase 610,904 shares of common stock.

Table of Contents

Item13. Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence.

Certain Relationships and Related Party Transactions

Other than compensation arrangements for our named executive officers and directors, we describe below each transaction or series of similar transactions, since January 1, 2015, to which we were a party or will be a party, in which:

●

the amounts involved exceeded or will exceed $120,000; and

●

any of our directors, executive officers or holders of more than 5% of our capital stock, or any member of the immediate family of the foregoing persons, had or will have a direct or indirect material interest.

Compensation arrangements for our named executive officers and directors are described in Item 11, Executive Compensation.

Our principal offices are located at 149 Fifth Avenue, Suite 500, New York, New York 10010, in a conference room of Agenus, Inc. We utilize our principal office for quarterly board meetings and our annual shareholder meeting at no cost. Our personnel and consultants all work remotely, the Company’s basic science laboratory work is conducted in the Lovejoy Lab at the University of Toronto, and its preclinical efficacy work is conducted at CROs. Hence the company does not have the need for a day-to-day physical office location other than a mailing address and conference room facility for meetings. For that reason, the Agenus conference room suits its purposes without imposing any inconveniences upon Agenus. . Dr. Armen, our Executive Chairman, is also the Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Agenus Inc.

Transactions with Predecessor Shareholders

Split-Off

At the closing of the ~~transactions, Mr. Ellin, an affiliate~~Merger we had a 51% interest in MomSpot LLC, and the remaining 49% was held by B.E. Global LLC. Barry Eisenberg is the sole owner of ~~Trinad (please see the section above called “Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners~~B.E. Global LLC and ~~Management” for further information) was appointed as~~is the Chief Executive Officer of MomSpot LLC. Immediately after the closing of the Merger, we split off our 51% membership interests in MomSpot LLC. The split-off was accomplished through the transfer of all of our membership interests of MomSpot LLC to B.E. Global LLC having nominal value of nominal considerations via a split off agreement.

Secured Convertible Notes/Predecessor Warrants

Between February 11, 2014 and ~~President~~December 9, 2015, Atrinsic issued secured convertible promissory notes (the “Secured Convertible Notes”) in the aggregate principal amount of ~~MPLC. Mr. Ellin resigned as an executive officer~~$665,000 and $35,000 in interest to two of ~~MPLC on February 12, 2007~~its stockholders, of which Secured Convertible Notes in the aggregate principal amount of $332,500 were issued to Iroquois Master Fund Ltd. (“IMF”). Josh Silverman, who became one of our directors upon the closing of the ~~exchange transaction~~Merger, is an affiliate of IMF. The Secured Convertible Notes, as revised and ~~from Atinsic’s Board~~amended, had a maturity date of ~~Directors on April 20, 2011.~~

August 31, 2016 and bore interest at the rate of 5.0% per annum, payable at maturity. The outstanding principal and accrued interest of each Secured Convertible Note was convertible, subject to a 4.99% beneficial ownership cap), into shares of Atrinsic’s common stock at an initial conversion price of $5.00 per share (subject to adjustment), at the option of the respective holders. IMF exchanged the Secured Convertible Notes that it held for 147,972 Predecessor Warrants, which Predecessor Warrants were issued to the Designee at the closing of the Merger, and the instruments by which the Secured Convertible Notes were secured were simultaneously terminated.

Table of Contents~~ITEM 14. PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTANT FEES AND SERVICES~~

~~(a) New independent registered public accounting firm~~

Transactions Relating to Protagenic

During 2013 and 2012, Dr. Armen made loans to us in the amount of $310,000. The ~~Audit Committee~~proceeds of the loans were used to fund research, development and general operating activity of Protagenic. The loans accrued interest at the rate of 10% per annum. In February 2013, in connection with a capital raise by Protagenic, the loans and accrued interest thereon, totaling $317,789, were converted into Protagenic warrants to purchase 953,367 shares of Protagenic common stock at an exercise price of $1.00 per share. Other than with respect to the payment of the purchase price for the securities by the conversion of debt, Dr. Armen participated in this capital raise on the same terms as all other investors.

On December 21, 2015, Alexander K. Arrow purchased 60,000 shares of common stock of Protagenic from Mark Berg at a per share purchase price equal to $0.50 for an aggregate purchase price of $30,000. In addition, Dr. Arrow purchased 58,260 shares of Series B Preferred Stock in the Private Offering, on the same terms as all other investors.

Effective December 23, 2015, Dr. Armen entered into an additional loan agreement with Protagenic pursuant to which he agreed to loan Protagenic up to $150,000. The loans under this Agreement accrued interest at the rate of 10% per year. The principal and interest on these loans is convertible into common stock at a price of $1.25 per share. On December 23, 2015, Protagenic borrowed $37,628 of the $150,000 available Borrowings under the agreement.

Effective June 17, 2016, the Board of Directors ~~appointed KPMG, LLP~~determined that it was in the best interest of the Company to convert the last remaining portion of debt owed to Dr. Armen into equity, per the terms of the loan agreements. The sum total of remaining debt and accumulated interest as of December 31, 2016 was $0.

Merger Transaction

On February 12, 2016, which we refer to as the ~~Company’s new independent registered public accounting firm~~Merger Closing Date, Atrinsic, Inc., Protagenic Therapeutics, Inc. and Protagenic Acquisition Corp., Atrinsic, Inc.’s wholly-owned subsidiary, entered into a merger agreement and completed the merger contemplated by the merger agreement. Pursuant to the merger agreement, on ~~January 30, 2009. During 2007~~the Merger Closing Date, Protagenic Acquisition Corp. merged with and ~~2008~~into Protagenic Therapeutics, Inc., with Protagenic Therapeutics, Inc. remaining as the surviving entity and ~~through January 30, 2009,~~wholly-owned subsidiary of Atrinsic, Inc. On June 17, 2016, we merged our wholly-owned subsidiary Protagenic Therapeutics, Inc. with and into the Company ~~did not consult with KPMG, LLP regarding~~and we changed our name from Atrinsic, Inc. to Protagenic Therapeutics, Inc.

While we believe that all of these agreements and arrangements are in the best interests of our Company, related parties of the Placement Agent may derive material benefits as the result of these transactions. In addition, related parties of the Placement Agent will have a continuing substantial interest in our Company and will derive substantial benefits from any success of our Company.

Table of Contents

Policies and Procedures for Related Party Transactions

We have adopted a policy that our executive officers, directors, nominees for election as a director, beneficial owners of more than 5% of any class of our common stock, any members of the immediate family of any of the ~~following:~~

The application of accounting principles to a specific transaction, either completed or proposed or the type of audit opinion that might be rendered on the Company's consolidated financial statements, and neither a written report nor oral advice was provided to the Company by KPMG, LLP that KPMG, LLP concluded was an important factor considered by the Company in reaching a decision as to an accounting, auditing or financial reporting issue;

~~Any matter that was the subject of a disagreement, as that term is defined in Item 304(a)(1)(iv) of Regulation S-K and the related instructions to Item 304 of Regulation S-K; or~~

~~Any matter that was a reportable event, as that item is defined in Item 304(a)(1)(v) of Regulation S-K.~~

~~(b) Previous Independent Registered Public Accounting Firms~~

~~McGladrey & Pullen, LLP~~

~~We engaged McGladrey & Pullen, LLP as our independent registered public accounting firm as~~foregoing persons and any firms, corporations or other entities in which any of ~~May 7, 2008. Traffix, Inc., our wholly-owned subsidiary~~the foregoing persons is employed or is a partner or principal or in a similar position or in which such person has a 5% or greater beneficial ownership interest, which we ~~acquired~~refer to collectively as related parties, are not permitted to enter into a transaction with us without the prior consent of our board of directors acting through the audit committee or, in certain circumstances, the chairman of the audit committee. Any request for us to enter into a transaction with a related party, in which the amount involved exceeds $100,000 and such related party would have a direct or indirect interest must first be presented to our audit committee, or in certain circumstances the chairman of our audit committee, for review, consideration and approval. In approving or rejecting any such proposal, our audit committee, or the chairman of our audit committee, is to consider the material facts of the transaction, including, but not limited to, whether the transaction is on ~~February 4, 2008, engaged McGladrey & Pullen, LLP~~terms no less favorable than terms generally available to ~~audit~~an unaffiliated third party under the ~~financial statements~~same or similar circumstances, the extent of ~~Traffix, Inc. for~~ the ~~year ended November 30, 2007~~benefits to us, the availability of other sources of comparable products or services and the ~~stub-period from December 1, 2007 to January 31, 2008. As a result~~extent of the ~~acquisition~~related party’s interest in the transaction.

Director Independence

We are not currently listed on any national securities exchange or in an inter-dealer quotation system that has a requirement that the Board of ~~Traffix, Inc.~~Directors be independent. However, in evaluating the independence of our members and the composition of the committees of our Board of Directors, our Board utilizes the definition of “independence” as that term is defined by ~~Atrinsic, these engagements were not performed by McGladrey~~applicable listing standards of the NASDAQ Stock Market and ~~Pullen, LLP.~~

SEC rules, including the rules relating to the independence standards of an audit committee and the non-employee director definition of Rule 16b-3 promulgated under the Exchange Act.

Our ~~Audit Committee approved a process~~Board of Directors expects to continue to evaluate ~~a change in our accountants. During~~its independence standards and whether and to what extent the process, McGladrey & Pullen, LLP resigned as our independent registered public accounting firm on January 21, 2009. During the year ended December 31, 2008, and through January 21, 2009, there were no disagreements with McGladrey & Pullen, LLP on any matter of accounting principles or practices, financial statement disclosure or auditing scope and procedure, which disagreements, if not resolved to the satisfaction of McGladrey & Pullen LLP would have caused McGladrey and Pullen, LLP to make reference to the subject mattercomposition of the ~~disagreements in connection with~~Board and its ~~reports. During~~committees meets those standards. We ultimately intend to appoint such persons to our ~~year ended December 31, 2008~~Board and ~~through January 21, 2009, there were no reportable events (as defined in~~committees of our Board as are expected to be required to meet the corporate governance requirements imposed by a national securities exchange. Therefore, we intend that a majority of our directors will be independent directors of which at least one director will qualify as an “audit committee financial expert,” within the meaning of Item ~~304(a)(I)(v)~~407(d)(5) of Regulation ~~S-K).~~

S-K, as promulgated by the SEC.

We believe that Messrs. Barrage, Ekizian, and Silverman are each an “independent” director as that term is defined by the NASDAQ Stock Market, Inc. Marketplace Rules and SEC Regulations. In addition, the Board also designated Gregory Ekizian as an "audit committee financial expert," as that term is defined by the NASDAQ Listing Rules and SEC regulations.

With regard to Mr. Silverman’s independent status, the Board considered the fact that he is an ex-CEO of one of the institutional funds (Iroquois Asset Management) that is a 50% owner of a limited liability company which owns just under 10% of the Company’s common stock. The Board noted that Mr. Silverman is no longer the CEO of Iroquois Asset Management, and as such, he does not represent a major single shareholder.

With regard to Mr. Ekizian’s independent status, the Board considered the fact that he is among the top five largest shareholders of the Company, ~~furnished McGladrey & Pullen, LLP with a copy of its Report on Form 8-K dated January 21, 2009 prior to filing~~but has no other business relationship with the ~~SEC. The Company also requested~~Company.

With regard to Mr. Barrage’s independent status, the Board considered the fact that ~~McGladrey & Pullen, LLP furnish it with a letter addressed to the Securities and Exchange Commission stating whether or not it agrees~~he has no business relationship with the ~~above statements. A letter from McGladrey & Pullen, LLP, addressed~~Company.

Dr. Stein, a member of the Compensation Committee, is not considered “independent.”

Chief Executive Officer of Agenus Inc.

~~Fees Paid to KPMG, LLP~~69

Table of Contents

Item14. Principal Accounting Fees and Services.

The following table sets forth the fees for services provided and billed by Marcum LLP, and Schulman Lobel.The following is a summary of the fees billed to ~~us by our auditors, KPMG, LLP relating to~~the Company for professional services rendered for the fiscal years ended December 31, ~~2010~~2016 and ~~2009:~~

(In thousands) December 31, 2010 December 31, 2009
Audit Fees (1)
403 375
Audit related fees (2)
35 5
Tax Fees (3)
93 -
Total 531 380

~~(1)~~ 2015.

	Fiscal Year 2016		Fiscal Year 2015
Audit fees	$	88,500	$	45,000
Audit-related fees	$	15,458	$	-
Tax Fees	$	-	$	-
All other fees	$	-	$	-
Total	$	103,958	$	45,000

Audit Fees:For the fiscal years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015, the aggregate audit fees ~~include~~billed by our independent auditors were for professional services rendered for audits and quarterly reviews of our consolidated financial statements, and assistance with reviews of registration statements and documents filed with the SEC.

Audit-Related Fees:Audit-related fees are for assurance and other activities not explicitly related to the audit of our ~~annual~~ financial ~~statements~~statements.For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015, there were no audit-related fees.

Tax Fees:For the fiscal years ended December 31, 2016 and ~~review of~~2015, there were $0 and $6,926 in tax fees, respectively.

All Other Fees:For the fiscal years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015, there were $0 and $0, respectively

Audit Committee Pre-Approval Policies and Procedures. The Audit Committee oversees and monitors our financial ~~statements included in our Form 10-Q quarterly reports,~~reporting process and ~~services that are normally provided by the independent registered public accounting firm in connection with statutory~~internal control system, reviews and ~~regulatory filings or engagements for those fiscal years. This category also includes advice on accounting matters that arose during, or as a result of,~~evaluates the audit ~~or the review of interim financial statements.~~

~~(2) Audit related fees consist of assurance~~performed by our registered independent public accountants and ~~related services that are reasonably related~~reports to the ~~performance of~~Board any substantive issues found during the audit or review of our financial statements and are not reported above under audit fees. Audit related fees incurred in 2010 related to forensic internal control matters. Audit related fees incurred in 2009 related to the company’s preparation and filing of its Registration Statement on Form S-8.

(3) Tax fees consist of tax services for tax compliance and tax preparation plus tax services relating to a study to determine the extent that research and development credits can be claimed on our corporate tax returns.

~~Our~~audit. The Audit Committee is directly responsible for ~~interviewing~~the appointment, compensation and ~~retaining~~oversight of the work of our registered independent ~~accountant, considering~~public accountants. The Audit Committee convenes on a quarterly basis to approve each quarterly filing, and an annual basis to review the ~~accounting firm’s~~engagement of the Company’s external auditor.

The Audit Committee has considered whether the provision of Audit-Related Fees, Tax Fees, and all other fees as described above is compatible with maintaining Marcum LLP’s independence and ~~effectiveness,~~has determined that such services for fiscal year 2015 and ~~pre-approving the engagement fees and other compensation to be paid to, and the~~2016 were compatible. All such services to be conducted by, the independent accountant. During each of the fiscal years ended December 31, 2010 and December 31, 2009, respectively, our Audit Committee pre-approved 100% of the services described above. None of the aforementioned services provided by KPMG, LLP were approved by the ~~audit committee~~Audit Committee pursuant to Rule ~~2-01(c)(7)(i)(C)~~2-01 of Regulation ~~S-X.~~

S-X under the Exchange Act to the extent that rule was applicable.

Table of Contents

PARTIV

Item15. Exhibits, Financial Statement Schedules.

(a) List of Documents filed as part of this Report

(1) Consolidated Financial Statements

The financial statements and related notes, together with the report of Marcum LLP appear at pages F-1 through F-21 following the Exhibit List as required by Part II, Item 8 “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data” of this Form 10-K.

(2) Financial Statement Schedules.

Schedules are omitted because they are either not required, not applicable, or the information is otherwise included.

(3) Exhibits

The Company has filed with this report or incorporated by reference herein certain exhibits as specified below pursuant to Rule 12b-32 under the Exchange Act. See Exhibit Index following the signature page to this report for a complete list of documents filed with this report.

Exhibit No.		Description

2.1		Agreement and Plan of Merger and Reorganization, dated as of February 12, 2016, by and among Atrinsic, Inc. a Delaware corporation, Protagenic Acquisition Corp., a Delaware corporation and Protagenic Therapeutics, Inc., a Delaware corporation (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 2.1 to Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as filed with the SEC on February 12, 2016).

2.2		Certificate of Merger as filed with the Delaware Secretary of State effective February 12, 2016 (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 2.2 to Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as filed with the SEC on February 12, 2016).

2.3		Certificate of Ownership and Merger Merging Protagenic Therapeutics, Inc. with and into Atrinsic, Inc. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 2.1 to Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as filed with the SEC on June 20, 2016.)

2.4		Agreement of Merger of Atrinsic, Inc. and Protagenic Therapeutics, Inc. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 2.2 to Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as filed with the SEC on June 20, 2016.)

3.1		Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation of Atrinsic, Inc. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.1(A) to Company’s registration statement on Form 10, as filed with the SEC on July 2, 2014 (the “Form 10”)).

3.2		Certificate of Designations, Powers, Preferences and Other Rights of Preferred Stock and Qualifications, Limitations and Restrictions Thereof of Series B Convertible Preferred Stock of Atrinsic, Inc. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.1 to Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as filed with the SEC on February 4, 2016.)

3.3		Certificate of Elimination of Series A Convertible Preferred Stock of Atrinsic, Inc. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.1 to Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as filed with the SEC on April 5, 2016.)

Table of Contents

~~Part IV~~

~~ITEM 15. EXHIBITS, FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULES~~

~~(a)(3) Exhibits.~~

~~Exhibit~~ ~~Number~~ 3.4		Certificate of Incorporation, Restated Certificate of Incorporation, Certificate of Amendment of Restated Certificate of Incorporation, Certificate for Renewal and Revival of Charter, Certificate for Renewal and Revival of Charter, and Certificate of Amendment of Restated Certificate of Incorporation, each of Protagenic Therapeutics, Inc., as filed with the Secretary of State of the State of Delaware on September 24, 2004, August 19, 2005, October 26, 2006, March 5, 2007, September 14, 2015 and October 2, 2015, respectively (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit ~~Title~~3.3 to Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as filed with the SEC on February 12, 2016).

3.5		Third Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation of Protagenic Therapeutics, Inc. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.1 to Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as filed with the SEC on June 20, 2016.)

3.6		Bylaws of Protagenic Therapeutics, Inc. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.1 to Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as filed with the SEC on July 15, 2016.)

4.1		Form of Warrant of Protagenic Therapeutics, Inc. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as filed with the SEC on February 12, 2016.)

4.2		Form of Predecessor Warrant of Atrinsic, Inc. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.2 to Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as filed with the SEC on February 12, 2016.)

4.3(i)		Warrant of Protagenic Therapeutics, Inc. issued to Garo H. Armen on May 19, 2011. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.3(i) to Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as filed with the SEC on February 12, 2016.)

4.3(ii)		Warrant of Protagenic Therapeutics, Inc. issued to Garo H. Armen on February 18, 2013. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.3(ii) to Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as filed with the SEC on February 12, 2016.)

4.4(i)		Warrant of Protagenic Therapeutics, Inc. issued to Gregory H. Ekizian on July 7, 2011. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.4(i) to Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as filed with the SEC on February 12, 2016.)

4.4(ii)		Warrant of Protagenic Therapeutics, Inc. issued to PENSCO Trust Company, FBO Gregory H. Ekizian on February 18, 2013. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.4(ii) to Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as filed with the SEC on February 12, 2016.)

4.5		Form of Placement Agent Warrant (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.5 to Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as filed with the SEC on April 18, 2016).

10.1		Form of Securities Purchase Agreement, by and between Atrinsic, Inc. and the investors in the Private Offering. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as filed with the SEC on April 18, 2016.)

~~31.1~~ 10.2		Form of Registration Rights Agreement by and between Atrinsic, Inc. and the investors in the Private Offering. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2 to Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as filed with the SEC on April 18, 2016.)

10.3		Placement Agency Agreement (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.3 to Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as filed with the SEC on April 18, 2016).

10.4		Delaware Escrow Agreement, by and between Atrinsic Inc., Depositor and Delaware Trust Company. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.4 to Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as filed with the SEC on April 18, 2016.)

Table of Contents

10.5		Voting Agreement, effective February 12, 2016, among Atrinsic, Inc., the stockholders of Protagenic Therapeutics, Inc., and Strategic Bio Partners, LLC. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.4 to Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as filed with the SEC on February 12, 2016.)

10.6		Indemnity Agreement, effective February 12, 2016, among Atrinsic, Inc., Strategic Bio Partners, LLC, and Iroquois Capital Management LLC and Hudson Bay Capital Management LP as guarantors. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.5 to Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as filed with the SEC on February 12, 2016.)

10.7		Split-Off Agreement, effective February 12, 2016, among Atrinsic, Inc.,��B.E. Global LLC and MomSpot LLC. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.6 to Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as filed with the SEC on February 12, 2016.)

10.8		General Release Agreement, effective February 12, 2016, among Atrinsic, Inc., B.E. Global LLC and MomSpot LLC. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.7 to Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as filed with the SEC on February 12, 2016.)

10.9		Split-Off Agreement, effective February 12, 2016, between Atrinsic, Inc. and Quintel Holdings, Inc. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.8 to Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as filed with the SEC on February 12, 2016.)

10.10		General Release Agreement, effective February 12, 2016, between Atrinsic, Inc. and Quintel Holdings, Inc. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.9 to Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as filed with the SEC on February 12, 2016.)

10.11		Investor Note Exchange Agreement, effective February 12, 2016, among Atrinsic, Inc. and the investors of Atrinsic, Inc. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.10 to Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as filed with the SEC on February 12, 2016.)

10.12		Preferred Stock Exchange Agreement, effective February 12, 2016, among Atrinsic, Inc. and the investors of Atrinsic, Inc. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.11 to Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as filed with the SEC on February 12, 2016.)

10.13		Employment Agreement, effective January 1, 2014, between Protagenic Therapeutics Canada (2006) Inc. and Dr. Robert Ziroyan. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.12 to Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as filed with the SEC on February 12, 2016.)**

10.14		Consulting Agreement, as amended, between Protagenic Therapeutics Canada (2006) Inc. and Dr. Dalia Barsyte. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.13 to Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as filed with the SEC on February 12, 2016.)

10.15		Consulting Agreement, effective January 23, 2015, between Protagenic Therapeutics, Inc. and Dr. Robert B. Stein. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.15 to Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as filed with the SEC on February 12, 2016.)**

10.16		Consulting Agreement, effective June 3, 2016, between Protagenic Therapeutics, Inc. and Christina Fam Faragalla. (Lotus Clinical Consulting, LLC)**

10.17		Protagenic Therapeutics, Inc. 2006 Employee, Director and Consultant Stock Plan (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.16 to Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as filed with the SEC on February 12, 2016.)**

10.18		Form of Nonqualified Stock Option Award Agreement under the 2006 Employee, Director and Consultant Stock Plan. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.17 to Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as filed with the SEC on February 12, 2016.) **

Table of Contents

10.19		Form of Indemnification Agreement. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.7 to the Form 10.)**

10.20(i)		Technology License Agreement, effective July 21, 2005, between The University of Toronto Innovations Foundation and Protagenic Therapeutics, Inc. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.19(i) to Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as filed with the SEC on February 12, 2016.)

10.20(ii)		First Amendment to Technology License Agreement, effective February 18, 2015, between the Governing Council of the University of Toronto and Protagenic Therapeutics, Inc. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.19(ii) to Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as filed with the SEC on February 12, 2016.)

10.21(i)		Sponsored Research Agreement, effective April 1, 2014, between the Governing Council of the University of Toronto and Protagenic Therapeutics Canada (2006), Inc., Protagenic Therapeutics, Inc. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.20(i) to Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as filed with the SEC on February 12, 2016.)

10.21(ii)		Amendment to the Sponsored Research Agreement, effective April 1, 2015, between the Governing Council of the University of Toronto and Protagenic Therapeutics Canada (2006), Inc., Protagenic Therapeutics, Inc. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.20(ii) to Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as filed with the SEC on February 12, 2016.)
		~~Certification~~
10.22(i)		Bridge Loan Agreement, effective April 15, 2015, between Protagenic Therapeutics, Inc. and Dr. Garo H. Armen. (Incorporated by ~~Principal Executive Officer pursuant~~reference to ~~Rule 13a-14(a) or 15d-14(a)~~Exhibit 10.21(i) to Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as filed with the SEC on February 12, 2016.)

10.22(ii)		Bridge Loan Agreement, effective May 28, 2015, between Protagenic Therapeutics, Inc. and Dr. Garo H. Armen. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.21(ii) to Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as filed with the SEC on February 12, 2016.)

10.22(iii)		Bridge Loan Agreement, effective July 1, 2015, between Protagenic Therapeutics, Inc. and Dr. Garo H. Armen. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.21(iii) to Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as filed with the SEC on February 12, 2016.)

10.22(iv)		Bridge Loan Agreement, effective September 1, 2015, between Protagenic Therapeutics, Inc. and Dr. Garo H. Armen. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.21(iv) to Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as filed with the SEC on February 12, 2016.)

10.22(v)		Bridge Loan Agreement, effective October 29, 2015, between Protagenic Therapeutics, Inc. and Dr. Garo H. Armen. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.21(v) to Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as filed with the SEC on February 12, 2016.)

10.22(vi)		Bridge Loan Agreement, effective December 23, 2015, between Protagenic Therapeutics, Inc. and Dr. Garo H. Armen. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.21(vi) to Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as filed with the SEC on February 12, 2016.)

10.23		Stock Purchase Agreement, effective December 21, 2015, between Mark Berg and Alexander Arrow. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.22 to Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as filed with the SEC on February 12, 2016.)

10.24		Protagenic Therapeutics, Inc. 2016 Equity Compensation Plan. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as filed with the SEC on June 20, 2016.)**

10.25		Form of Incentive Stock Option Agreement under the ~~Securities Exchange Act~~Protagenic Therapeutics, Inc. 2016 Equity Compensation Plan. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2 to Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as filed with the SEC on June 20, 2016.) **

Table of Contents

10.26		Form of ~~1934,~~Non-Qualified Stock Option Agreement under the Protagenic Therapeutics, Inc. 2016 Equity Compensation Plan. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.3 to Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as ~~amended.~~filed with the SEC on June 20, 2016.) **
~~31.2~~
10.27		Letter dated June 17, 2016 from Schulman Lobel Zand Katzen Williams & Blackman LLP re change in Certifying accountant. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.4 to Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as filed with the SEC on June 20, 2016.)

14.1		Company Code of Business Conduct and Ethics, adopted February 24, 2017.
14.2		Company Guidelines on Significant Corporate Governance Issues, adopted February 24, 2017.
14.3		Company Process for Security Holder Communications with Directors, adopted February 24, 2017.

21.1		Subsidiaries of Atrinsic, Inc. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 21.1 to Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as filed with the SEC on February 12, 2016.)

23.1		Consent of Marcum LLP

24.1		Power of Attorney (included on signature page).

31.2		Certification ~~by Principal~~of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) or Rule 15d-14(a) ~~under~~.

32.1		Certification of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Rule 13a-14(b) or Rule 15d-14(b).

99.1		Charter of the ~~Securities Exchange Act~~Science Committee of ~~1934, as amended.~~the Board of Directors of the Company.

101.INS		XBRL Instance Document (*€)

101.CAL		XBRL Taxonomy Extension Schema Document (*€)

101.SCH		XBRL Taxonomy Extension Calculation Linkbase Document (*€)

101.LAB		XBRL Taxonomy Extension Label Linkbase Document (*€)

101.PRE		XBRL Taxonomy Extension Presentation Linkbase Document (*€)

101.DEF		XBRL Taxonomy Extension Definition Linkbase Document (*€)

(*€)

- Filed herewith.

(*)

- Furnished, not filed, in accordance with item 601(32)(ii) of Regulation S-K.

Table of Contents

SIGNATURES

Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the ~~Registrant~~registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.

	~~Atrinsic, Inc.~~ PROTAGENIC THERAPEUTICS, INC.

Date: April 17, 2017	By:	/s/ ~~Thomas Plotts~~Garo H. Armen
	~~By: Thomas Plotts~~	Garo H. Armen
	~~Its: Chief Financial~~	Chairman (Principal Executive Officer
	~~Date: May 2, 2011~~ and Duly Authorized Officer)

~~In accordance~~

KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS, that each person whose signature appears below constitutes and appoints Garo H. Armen as the undersigned’s true and lawful attorney-in-fact and agent, with full power of substitution and resubstitution, for the undersigned and in the undersigned’s name, place, and stead, in any and all capacities, to sign any and all amendments to this report, and to file the same, with all exhibits thereto, and other documents in connection therewith, with the Securities and Exchange Commission, granting unto said attorney-in-fact and agent full power and authority to do and perform each and every act and thing requisite and necessary to be done in connection therewith, as fully to all intents and purposes as the undersigned might or could do in person, hereby ratifying and confirming that said attorney-in-fact and agent or his substitute or substitutes, may lawfully do or cause to be done by virtue hereof.

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, this report has been signed below by the following persons ~~on behalf of the Registrant and~~ in the capacities and on the dates indicated.

~~Name~~ Signatures	Title	Date

/s/ Garo H. Armen	Director and Chairman of the Board	April 17, 2017
Garo H. Armen	(Principal Executive Officer)
~~/s/ Thomas Plotts~~
/s/ Alexander K. Arrow	Chief Financial Officer	~~May 2, 2011~~ April 17, 2017
~~Thomas Plotts~~ Alexander K. Arrow	(Principal Financial ~~and Accounting~~Officer)

/s/ Robert B. Stein	Director	April 17, 2017
Robert B. Stein

/s/ Khalil Barrage	Director	April 17, 2017
Khalil Barrage

/s/ Gregory H. Ekizian	Director	April 17, 2017
Gregory H. Ekizian

/s/ Joshua Silverman	Director	April 17, 2017
Joshua Silverman

Table of Contents

PROTAGENIC THERAPEUTICS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARY

CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

FOR THE YEARS ENDED

DECEMBER 31, 2016 AND 2015


	Page
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm	~~Officer)~~F-1

Consolidated Balance Sheets	F-3

* Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Loss		~~Director~~	~~May 2, 2011~~ F-4
~~Raymond Musci~~		~~(Principal Executive Officer)~~
Consolidated Statements of Stockholders’ Equity (Deficit)	F-5

* Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows		~~Director~~	~~May 2, 2011~~ F-6
~~Lawrence Burstein~~
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
*		~~Director~~	~~May 2, 2011~~
~~Mark Dyne~~

*		~~Director~~	~~May 2, 2011~~
~~Jerome A. Chazen~~

*		~~Director~~	~~May 2, 2011~~
~~Stuart Goldfarb~~			F-7

*By: /s/ Thomas Plotts
~~Thomas Plotts~~
~~As Attorney-In-Fact~~

F-1

Table of Contents

REPORTOF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

To the Audit Committee of the

Board of Directors and Shareholders

of Protagenic Therapeutics, Inc.

We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of Protagenic Therapeutics, Inc. (the “Company”) as of December 31, 2016 and 2015, and the related consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive loss, stockholders’ equity (deficit) and cash flows for the years then ended. These consolidated financial statements are the responsibility of the Company’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audits.

We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audits 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 audits 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 audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.

In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the consolidatedfinancial position of Protagenic Therapeutics, Inc., as of December 31, 2016 and 2015 and the consolidated results of its operations and its cash flows for the yearsthen ended in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.

/s/ Marcumllp

New York, NY

April 17, 2017

F-2

Table of Contents

Protagenic Therapeutics, Inc., and Subsidiaries

CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS

	December 31,			December 31,
	2016			2015

ASSETS

CURRENT ASSETS

Cash and cash equivalents	$	3,100,398		$	3,343
Prepaid expenses		60,417			-

TOTAL CURRENT ASSETS		3,160,815			3,343

EQUIPMENT - NET

		1,097			1,569

OTHER ASSETS		-			6,230

TOTAL ASSETS	$	3,161,912		$	11,142

LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS' EQUITY (DEFICIT)

CURRENT LIABILITIES

Bridge loan payable - stockholder and accrued interest	$	-		$	399,103
Accounts payable and accrued expenses		167,987			279,255
Derivative liability		516,870			-

TOTAL CURRENT LIABILITIES		684,857			678,358

COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

STOCKHOLDERS' EQUITY (DEFICIT)
Preferred stock, par value $0.000001: 20,000,000 shares authorized; 0 shares designated		-			-
Series B convertible preferred stock, $0.000001 par value, 18,000,000 shares authorized, 872,766 shares issued and outstanding at December 31, 2016, and 0 shares issued and outstanding at December 31, 2015		1			-
Common stock, $.0001 par value, 100,000,000 shares authorized, 10,257,078 shares issued and outstanding at December 31, 2016 , 7,612,838 shares issued and 6,612,838 shares outstanding at December 31, 2015		1,026			761
Additional paid-in-capital		11,239,786			5,886,971
Accumulated deficit		(8,582,123	)		(6,306,297	)
Treasury stock, at cost $.10 per share, 1,000,000 shares, for December 31, 2015		-			(100,000	)
Accumulated other comprehensive loss		(181,635	)		(148,651	)

TOTAL STOCKHOLDERS' EQUITY (DEFICIT)		2,477,055			(667,216	)

TOTAL LIABILITIES ANDSTOCKHOLDERS'EQUITY (DEFICIT)	$	3,161,912		$	11,142

See accompanying notes to the consolidated financial statements

~~EXHIBIT INDEX~~F-3

Table of Contents

Protagenic Therapeutics, Inc., and Subsidiaries

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS AND COMPRHENSIVE LOSS

	For the year ended December 31,
	2016			2015
OPERATIONS
REVENUE	$	-		$	-
OPERATING AND ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES
Research and development		533,693			456,274
General and administrative		1,295,639			568,764
Goodwill impairment		404,169			-
TOTAL OPERATING AND ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES		2,233,501			1,025,038
LOSS FROM OPERATIONS		(2,233,501	)		(1,025,038	)
OTHER (EXPENSE) INCOME
Interest income		907			-
Interest expense - stockholder		(7,162	)		(11,473	)
Realized loss on foreign exchange transactions		(6,625	)		13,089
Change in fair value of derivative liability		(29,445	)		-
TOTAL OTHER (EXPENSE) INCOME		(42,325	)		1,616
NET LOSS	$	(2,275,826	)	$	(1,023,422	)
COMPREHENSIVE LOSS
NET LOSS	$	(2,275,826	)	$	(1,023,422	)
Other Comprehensive Loss - net of tax
Foreign exchange translation loss		(32,984	)		(1,070	)
TOTAL COMPREHENSIVE LOSS	$	(2,308,810	)	$	(1,024,492	)
Net loss per share - Basic and Diluted	$	(0.43	)	$	(0.15	)
Weighted average common shares - Basic and Diluted		5,306,035			6,613,338

See accompanying notes to the consolidated financial statements

~~Exhibit~~
~~No.~~		~~Title~~

~~31.1~~		~~Certification of Principal Executive Officer pursuant to Securities Exchange Act Rules 13a-14(a) and 15d-14(a) as adopted pursuant to section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.~~

~~31.2~~		~~Certification of Principal Financial Officer pursuant to Securities Exchange Act Rules 13a-14(a) and 15d-14(a) as adopted pursuant to section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.~~

F-4

Table of Contents

Protagenic Therapeutics, Inc., and Subsidiaries

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF STOCKHOLDERS' EQUITY (DEFICIT)

For the Year Ended December 31, 2016

	Series B Convertible Preferred Stock						Common Stock						Additional Paid-in-			Accumulated			Treasury Stock						Other Comprehensive			Stockholders' (Deficit)
	Shares			Amount			Shares			Amount			Capital			(Deficit)			Shares			Amount			Loss			Equity

BALANCE - December 31, 2014		-			-			7,612,838		$	761		$	5,409,103		$	(5,282,875	)		(1,000,000	)	$	(100,000	)	$	(147,581	)	$	(120,592	)

Foreign currency translation (loss)																										(1,070	)		(1,070	)
Stock compensation - stock options														477,868															477,868
Net (loss)																	(1,023,422	)											(1,023,422	)




BALANCE - January 1, 2016		-			-			7,612,838			761			5,886,971			(6,306,297	)		(1,000,000	)		(100,000	)		(148,651	)		(667,216	)

Merger:
Atrinsic shares converted		297,468			1			25,867			3			63,381															63,385
Protagenic shares converted		6,612,838			6			(7,612,838	)		(761	)		(99,245	)					1,000,000			100,000						-
Private offerings, net of expenses		4,108,460			4									4,761,793															4,761,797
Foreign currency translation (loss)																										(32,984	)		(32,984	)
Stock compensation - stock options														546,134															546,134
Conversion of series B Preferred Stock		(10,146,000	)		(10	)		10,146,000			1,015			(1,005	)														-

Conversion of Bridge loan								60,211			6			75,259															75,265
Stock options converted to common								25,000			2			6,498															6,500

Net loss																	(2,275,826	)											(2,275,826	)


BALANCE - December 31, 2016		872,766		$	1			10,257,078		$	1,026		$	11,239,786		$	(8,582,123	)	$	-		$	-		$	(181,635	)	$	2,477,055

See accompanying notes to the consolidated financial statements.

F-5

Table of Contents

Protagenic Therapeutics, Inc., and Subsidiaries

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS

	For the year ended December 31,
	2016			2015

CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES
Net Loss	$	(2,275,826	)	$	(1,023,422	)
Adjustments to reconcile net loss to net cash used inoperating activities
Depreciation expense		534			143
Goodwill impairment		404,169			-
Stock based compensation		546,134			478,629
Accretion to bridge loan		7,162			11,473
Legal fees satisfied through issuance of Series B preferred stock		150,000			-
Change in fair value of the derivative liability		29,445			-
Changes in operating assets and liabilities
Prepaid expenses		(60,417	)		-
Other assets		6,230			(2,916	)
Accounts payable and accrued expenses		52,250			154,752

NET CASH USED IN OPERATING ACTIVITIES		(1,140,319	)		(381,341	)

CASH FLOWS USED IN INVESTING ACTIVITIES

Purchase of equipment		-			(1,791	)

NET CASH USED IN INVESTING ACTIVITIES		-			(1,791	)

CASH FLOWS FROM FINANCING ACTIVITIES

Proceeds from exercise of stock options		6,500			-
Proceeds from bridge loan		19,000			387,630
Proceeds from issuance of Series B Preferred Stock		4,283,437			-

NET CASH PROVIDED BY FINANCING ACTIVITIES		4,283,938			387,630

Effect of exchange rate on cash and cash equivalents		(46,564	)		(23,888	)

NET INCREASE (DECREASE) IN CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS		3,097,055			(19,390	)

CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS, BEGINNING OF PERIOD		3,343			22,733

CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS, END OF PERIOD	$	3,100,398		$	3,343

SUPPLEMENTAL DISCLOSURES OF CASH FLOW INFORMATION
Cash paid for interest expense	$	-		$	-
Cash paid for income taxes	$	-		$	-

NONCASH TRANSACTIONS
Debt settled with issuance of Series B preferred stock	$	425,265		$	-
Reclassification of warrants to derivative liabilities from equity	$	487,425		$	-
Shares issued in connection with reverse business combination	$	404,169		$	-
Accrued liabilities paid through the issuances of Series B preferred stock	$	150,000		$	-
Series B Preferred stock converted to common stock	$	10		$	-

See accompanying notes to the consolidated financial statements

F-6

Table of Contents

PROTAGENIC THERAPEUTICS, INC & SUBSIDIARIES

NOTESTO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

December 31, 2016

NOTE 1 –ORGANIZATION AND NATURE OF BUSINESS

Company Background

Protagenic Therapeutics, Inc. (“we,” “our,” “Protagenic” or “the Company”), a Delaware corporation with one subsidiary named Protagenic Therapeutics Canada (2006) Inc., a corporation formed in 2006 under the laws of the Province of Ontario, Canada.

The Company was most recently known as Atrinsic, Inc., a company that was once a reporting company under the Securities Act, but that, in 2012 and 2013, reorganized under Chapter 11 of the United States Bankruptcy Code and emerged from bankruptcy. On February 12, 2016, the Company acquired Protagenic Therapeutics, Inc. through a reverse merger. On June 17, 2016, Protagenic Therapeutics, Inc. (the then wholly-owned subsidiary of Atrinsic, Inc.) was merged with and into Atrinsic, Inc. Atrinsic, Inc. was the surviving corporation in this merger and changed its name from Atrinsic, Inc. to Protagenic Therapeutics, Inc.

The Company originally incorporated as a Delaware corporation under the name Millbrook Acquisition Corp. in 1994. In 2007, Millbrook Acquisition Corp. changed its name to New Motion, Inc. In 2008, New Motion, Inc. merged with Traffix, Inc., pursuant to which Traffix, Inc. became a wholly-owned subsidiary of New Motion, Inc. In 2009, New Motion, Inc. changed its name to Atrinsic, Inc. On June 15, 2012, the Company filed Chapter 11 in the United States Bankruptcy Court in Southern District of New York (Case No. 12-12553). As of that date, the Company terminated all remaining employees and ceased normal business operations.

Prior to March 30, 2012, the Company was a reporting company under the Exchange Act, and filed periodic reports with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”). On March 30, 2012, the Company filed a Form 15 with the SEC, terminating its obligation to file periodic reports under Sections 13 and 15(d) of the Exchange Act. Prior to the filing of our Plan of Reorganization under Chapter 11 of the United States Bankruptcy Code on June 15, 2012 (the “Plan of Reorganization”), the Company was a marketer of direct-to-consumer subscription products and an Internet search marketing agency. The Company sold entertainment and lifestyle subscription products directly to consumers, which the Company marketed through the Internet. The Company also sold Internet marketing services to our corporate and advertising clients.

The Company emerged from Chapter 11 on June 26, 2013, at which time the Plan of Reorganization was conditionally confirmed by the United States Bankruptcy Court, Southern District of New York. The confirmation was subject to the consummation of the Company’s acquisition of a 51% controlling interest in MomSpot LLC (“MomSpot”), which was subsequently completed on July 12, 2013 (“Emergence Date”). MomSpot’s goal was to be the premier specialty retail affiliate marketing company targeting women between the ages of 24 and 45 who are either mothers or expecting their first child. The Emergence Date was the date the Company adopted fresh start accounting in accordance with Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) Topic 852. The adoption of fresh-start accounting resulted in the Company becoming a new entity for financial reporting purposes. At that time, our principal activities were conducted through MomSpot.

On February 12, 2016, the Company acquired Protagenic Therapeutics, Inc. (referred to herein as “Prior Protagenic”) through a reverse merger, pursuant to which all the issued and outstanding shares of Protagenic common stock converted on a 1-for-1 basis into shares of the Company’s Series B Preferred Stock, par value $0.000001 per share. Concurrently with the reverse merger, the Company conducted the first closing of a private offering of our Series B Preferred Stock.

Protagenic Therapeutics Canada (2006) Inc. (“PTI Canada”) was incorporated in 2006 in the Province of Ontario, Canada. PTI Canada was a wholly-owned subsidiary of Prior Protagenic, and following the Special Meeting, as defined in Note 7 below, it became a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company. PTI Canada provides operational support and assistance for the implementation of corporate and operational activities conducted in Canada.

Reverse Business Combination (Merger)

On February 12, 2016 (“Closing Date”), Protagenic Acquisition Corp., a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company (which at the time was named Atrinsic, Inc.), merged (the “Merger”) with and into Prior Protagenic. Prior Protagenic was the surviving corporation of the Merger. As a result of the Merger, the Company acquired the business of prior Protagenic and will continue the existing business operations of Prior Protagenic as a wholly-owned subsidiary. On June 17, 2016, Prior Protagenic merged with and into the Company with the Company as the surviving corporation in the merger. Immediately thereafter, the Company changed its name from Atrinsic, Inc. to Protagenic Therapeutics, Inc.

F-7

Table of Contents

On the Closing Date, all of the issued and outstanding (6,612,838) shares of Prior Protagenic common stock converted, on a 1 for 1 basis, into shares of the Company’s Series B Convertible Preferred Stock, par value $0.000001 per share (“Series B Preferred Stock”). Also on the Closing Date, all of the issued and outstanding options to purchase shares of Prior Protagenic common stock, and all of the issued and outstanding warrants to purchase shares of Prior Protagenic common stock, converted, on a 1 for 1 basis, into options (the “New Options”) and warrants (the “New Warrants”) respectively, to purchase shares of Series B Preferred Stock. New Options to purchase 1,807,744 shares of Series B Preferred Stock, having an average exercise price of approximately $0.87 per share, were issued to Prior Protagenic optionees. New Warrants to purchase 3,403,367 shares of Series B Preferred Stock at an average exercise price of approximately $1.03 per share were issued to holders of Prior Protagenic warrants.

The common stockholders of Atrinsic, Inc. before the Merger (“Predecessor”) retained 25,867 shares of common stock, par value $0.0001 per share (the “Common Stock”). Upon the effectiveness of the Merger, the holders of the Predecessor’s Series A Preferred Stock exchanged all of the issued and outstanding Series A Preferred Stock for an aggregate of 297,468 shares of Series B Preferred Stock. In addition, the holders of options to purchase Predecessor common stock were issued options (“Predecessor Options”) to purchase 17,784 shares of Series B Preferred Stock at $1.25 per share. Warrants (“Predecessor Warrants”) to purchase 295,945 shares of Series B Preferred Stock at $1.25 per share were issued to Strategic Bio Partners, LLC, the designee (the “Designee”) of the holders of the Predecessor’s debt in consideration of the cancellation of such debt amounting to $665,000 in principal and $35,000 in interest.

The Merger is being accounted for as a “Reverse Business Combination,” and Prior Protagenic is deemed to be the accounting acquirer in the merger. Consequently, the assets and liabilities and the historical operations that will be reflected in the financial statements prior to the Merger will be those of Prior Protagenic, and the consolidated financial statements after completion of the Merger will include the assets and liabilities of Prior Protagenic, historical operations of Prior Protagenic and combined operations of Prior Protagenic, Predecessor and the Company from the Closing Date of the Merger. Further, as a result of the issuance of the shares of Series B Preferred Stock pursuant to the Merger, a change in control of the Company occurred as of the date of consummation of the Merger.

The Merger will be treated as a recapitalization of the Company for financial accounting purposes. The historical financial statements of Predecessor before the Merger will be replaced with the historical financial statements of Prior Protagenic before the Merger in all future filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”).

At the closing of the Merger, Predecessor had a 51% interest in MomSpot, and the remaining 49% was held by B.E. Global LLC. Barry Eisenberg is the sole owner of B.E. Global LLC and is the Chief Executive Officer of MomSpot LLC. Immediately after the closing of the Merger, the Company split off its 51% membership interests in MomSpot. The split-off was accomplished through the transfer of all of its membership interests of MomSpot, having nominal value, to B.E. Global LLC via a split off agreement for nominal consideration.

Immediately after the closing of the Merger, the Company also split off all of its equity interest in 29 wholly-owned subsidiaries of Predecessor. The split-off was accomplished through the sale of all equity interests in these wholly-owned subsidiaries to Quintel Holdings, Inc. for nominal considerations via a split off agreement. These entities had nominal value.

Private Offering

Concurrently and a condition of the closing of the Merger, the Company conducted the first closing of an offering (the “Private Offering”) of our Series B Preferred Stock. At the first closing, we sold 2,775,000 shares of Series B Preferred Stock at a purchase price of $1.25 per share, for which we received total gross consideration of $3,468,750. Of this amount, $350,000 consisted of the conversion of outstanding stockholder debt held by Garo H. Armen, our chairman and a member of our board of directors, and $150,000 of legal expenses incurred by Strategic Bio Partners, LLC, on behalf of the stockholders of Predecessor, in conjunction with and as permitted under the terms of the Merger. On March 2, 2016, we completed the second closing of the Private Offering, at which we sold an additional 913,200 shares of Series B Preferred Stock, for total gross proceeds of $1,141,500. On April 15, 2016 we completed the final closing of the Private Offering, at which we issued an additional 420,260 shares of Series B Preferred Stock to accredited investors, for total gross proceeds of $525,325. The Company paid commissions, legal and miscellaneous fees aggregating $373,778 associated with these closings. We also issued Placement Agent Warrants to purchase 127,346 shares of Series B Preferred Stock valued at $146,641 using a Black-Scholes model at an exercise price of $1.25 per share to the Placement Agent and its selected dealers. The Company determined the fair value of the binomial lattice model and the Black-Scholes valuation model to be materially the same. For all three closings, the Company issued 4,108,460 shares of Series B Preferred Stock and raised total gross proceeds of $4,635,575 and total net proceeds of $4,261,797 (or total gross proceeds of $5,135,575 and total net proceeds of $4,761,797 , including the conversion of the $350,000 in principal of stockholder debt, and $150,000 of legal expenses incurred by the Predecessor’s stockholders.

F-8

Table of Contents

Debt Exchange

Simultaneous with the Merger and the Private Offering, holders of $665,000 of Predecessor debt accompanied with $35,000 in accrued interest exchanged such debt for Predecessor Warrants to purchase 295,945 shares of Series B Preferred Stock at $1.25 per share. The Predecessor Warrants were valued at $340,784 (see Note 6).

Reverse Stock Split

On June 17, 2016, the Company held a Special Meeting of Stockholders (the “Special Meeting”). At the Special Meeting, the Company’s stockholders approved a third amendment and restatement (the “Third Amendment and Restatement”) to the Company’s Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation, effective July 27, 2016 (the “Effective Time”), to effect a one-for-15,463.7183 reverse split of the Company’s common stock (the “Reverse Stock Split”). Pursuant to the Reverse Stock Split, at the Effective Time, each 15,463.7183 shares of common stock owned by a stockholder were combined into one new share of common stock, with any fractional shares that would otherwise be issuable as a result of the Reverse Stock Split being rounded up to the nearest whole share. The Third Amendment and Restatement also effected (i) a reduction in the Company’s authorized shares of common stock from 100 billion shares to 100 million shares, (ii) an increase in the par value of the Company’s common stock from $0.000001 per share to $0.0001 per share and (iii) a reduction in the Company’s authorized shares of preferred stock from 5 billion shares to 20 million shares.

As a result of the Reverse Split, 400,000,000 shares of common stock were split into 25,867 shares of common stock. Additionally, as a result of the Reverse Split and in accordance with our certificate of designations for our Series B Preferred Stock, our Series B Preferred Stock immediately and automatically converted into our common stock on a 1-for-1 basis other than any Series B Preferred Stock (i) to the extent (but only to the extent) a Series B Preferred Stock holder would beneficially own greater than 9.99% of our common stock (the “Springing Blocker”) and (ii) such holder has notified the Company in writing that it wants the Springing Blocker to apply to such holder. On July 27, 2016, 10,146,000 of the Company’s 11,018,766 outstanding shares of Series B Preferred Stock were eligible to immediately convert into 10,146,000 shares of the Company’s common stock with 872,766 shares of Series B Preferred Stock remaining as a result of one holder exercising the Springing Blocker. As of December 31, 2016, 10,146,000 shares of the Series B Preferred Stock were converted into 10,146,000 shares of common stock on the records of the Company.

All share and per share amounts for the common stock have been retroactively restated to give effect to the reverse split.

NOTE 2 - LIQUIDITY

As shown in the accompanying consolidated financial statements, the Company incurred a net loss of $2,275,826 and $1,023,442 for the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively. The Company has incurred losses since inception resulting in an accumulated deficit of $8,582,123 as of December 31, 2016. The net loss presented for the twelve months is attributed to goodwill impairment, an increase in professional fees as related to the Merger, and an increase in stock compensation expense. The net loss present for the prior period was attributed to stock compensation expense and research and development expenses. The Company anticipates further losses in the development of its business. The Company had a net working capital of $2,475,958 at December 31, 2016 as a result of the Merger and simultaneous financings. Based on its current forecast and budget, Management believes that its cash resources will be sufficient to fund its operations at least until the third quarter of 2018. Absent generation of sufficient revenue from the execution of the Company’s business plan, it will need to obtain debt or equity financing by the third quarter of 2018.

F-9

Table of Contents

NOTE 3 -SUMMARY OF SIGNFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES

Basis of presentation

The Company’s consolidated financial statements have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“US GAAP”) and the rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”).

Principles of consolidation

Use of estimates

The preparation of consolidated financial statements in conformity with US GAAP requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the consolidated financial statements and the reported amounts of revenue and expense during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from those estimates. Significant estimates underlying the consolidated financial statements include the allocation of the fair value of acquired assets and liabilities associated with the Merger, assessment of goodwill and income tax provisions and allowances, impairment of goodwill, valuation of stock options and warrants and assessment of deferred tax valuation allowance. The Company also relies on estimates for the valuation of stock-based compensation expense and financial instruments.

Concentrations of Credit Risk

The Company maintains its cash accounts at financial institutions which are insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation ("FDIC"). At times, the Company may have deposits in excess of federally insured limits.

Cash and Cash Equivalents

The Company considers all highly liquid investments with an original maturity of three months or less when purchased to be cash equivalents. As of December 31, 2016 and 2015, the Company did not have any cash equivalents.

Equipment

Equipment is stated at cost less accumulated depreciation. Cost includes expenditures for computer equipment. Maintenance and repairs are charged to expense as incurred. When assets are sold, retired, or otherwise disposed of, the cost and accumulated depreciation are removed from the accounts and any resulting gain or loss is reflected in operations. The cost of equipment is depreciated using the straight-line method over the estimated useful lives of the related assets which is 3 years. Depreciation expense was not material for the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015.

Goodwill

Goodwill represents the excess of the purchase price over the fair value of the assets acquired and liabilities assumed. The Company is required to perform impairment reviews annually and more frequently in certain circumstances. The Company performs the annual assessment on December 31.

In accordance with ASC 350–20 “Goodwill”, the Company is able to make a qualitative assessment of whether it is more likely than not that a reporting unit’s fair value is less than its carrying amount before applying the two–step goodwill impairment test. If the Company concludes that it is more likely than not that the fair value of a reporting unit is not less than its carrying amount it is not required to perform the two–step impairment test for that reporting unit.

Atrinsic’s assets and liabilities acquired in the Merger had a minimal value therefore the Company recorded the fair value of shares given to predecessor stockholders as goodwill. Immediately subsequent to the merger the Company fully impaired the goodwill, in as the predecessor business had limited operations.

The allocation of the consideration transferred is as follows:

Shares issued in connection with Merger:
Atrinsic 25,867 shares Common stock	$	32,334
Atrinsic Series A preferred stock as converted to Series B preferredstock, 297,468 shares		371,835
Total value of shares issued to Atrinsic on Merger		404,169
Fair value of net assets identified		-

Goodwill		404,169
Net value of consideration	$	-

Goodwill impairment for the year ended December 31, 2016 was $404,169.

F-10

Table of Contents

Fair Value Measurements

Accounting Standards Codification ASC 820, “Fair Value Measurements and Disclosure,” defines fair value as the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date, not adjusted for transaction costs. ASC 820 also establishes a fair value hierarchy that prioritizes the inputs to valuation techniques used to measure fair value into three broad levels giving the highest priority to quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities (Level 1) and the lowest priority to unobservable inputs (Level 3).

The three levels are described below:

Level 1 Inputs – Unadjusted quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities that is accessible by the Company;

Level 2 Inputs – Quoted prices in markets that are not active or financial instruments for which all significant inputs are observable, either directly or indirectly;

Level 3 Inputs – Unobservable inputs for the asset or liability including significant assumptions of the Company and other market participants.

The carrying amount of the Company’s financial assets and liabilities, such as cash, accounts payable and accrued expenses approximate their fair value because of the short maturity of those instruments.

Transactions involving related parties cannot be presumed to be carried out on an arm's-length basis, as the requisite conditions of competitive, free-market dealings may not exist. Representations about transactions with related parties, if made, shall not imply that the related party transactions were consummated on terms equivalent to those that prevail in arm's-length transactions unless such representations can be substantiated.

The assets or liability’s fair value measurement within the fair value hierarchy is based upon the lowest level of any input that is significant to the fair value measurement. The following table provides a summary of financial instruments that are measured at fair value as of December 31, 2016.

	Carrying		Fair Value Measurement Using
	Value		Level 1		Level 2		Level 3		Total

Derivative warrants liabilities	$	516,870	$	—	$	—	$	516,870	$	516,870

The table below provides a summary of the changes in fair value, including net transfers in and/or out, of all financial assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis using significant unobservable inputs (Level 3) during the year ended December 31, 2016:

	Fair Value Measurement Using Level 3 Inputs
	Total
Balance, December 31, 2015	$	—
Issuance of derivative warrants liabilities		487,425
Change in fair value of derivative warrants liabilities		29,445
Balance, December 31, 2016	$	516,870

F-11

Table of Contents

The fair value of the derivative feature of the 127,346 and 295,945 warrants to the placement agent of the private offering and to Strategic Bio Partners for debt cancellation, respectively on the issuance dates and at the balance sheet date were calculated using a Black-Scholes option model valued with the following average assumptions:

	February 12, 2016			December 31, 2016
Exercise price	$	1.25		$	1.25
Risk free interest rate		1.20	%		1.93	%
Dividend yield		0.00	%		0.00	%
Expected volatility		156	%		219	%
Contractual term (in years)		5.0			4.25

Risk-free interest rate: The Company uses the risk-free interest rate of a U.S. Treasury Note with a similar expected term on the date of the grant.

Dividend yield: The Company uses a 0% expected dividend yield as the Company has not paid dividends to date and does not anticipate declaring dividends in the near future.

Volatility: The Company calculates the expected volatility of the stock price based on the corresponding volatility of the Company’s peer group stock price for a period consistent with the warrants’ expected term.

Expected term: The Company’s expected term is based on the remaining contractual maturity of the warrants.

During the year ended December 31, 2016, the Company marked the derivative feature of the warrants to fair value and recorded a loss of $29,445 relating to the change in fair value.

During the year ended December 31, 2016, there was a full impairment of Goodwill which arose at the time of the reverse business combination in the amount of $404,169, a level 3 measurement.

Derivative Liability

The Company evaluates its options, warrants or other contracts, if any, to determine if those contracts or embedded components of those contracts qualify as derivatives to be separately accounted for in accordance with ASC 815-10-05-4 and 815-40-25. The result of this accounting treatment is that the fair value of the embedded derivative is marked-to-market each balance sheet date and recorded as either an asset or a liability. In the event that the fair value is recorded as a liability, the change in fair value is recorded in the consolidated statement of operations as other income or expense. Upon conversion, exercise or cancellation of a derivative instrument, the instrument is marked to fair value at the date of conversion, exercise or cancellation and then the related fair value is reclassified to equity.

F-12

Table of Contents

Stock-Based Compensation

The Company accounts for stock based compensation costs under the provisions of ASC 718, “Compensation—Stock Compensation”, which requires the measurement and recognition of compensation expense related to the fair value of stock based compensation awards that are ultimately expected to vest. Stock based compensation expense recognized includes the compensation cost for all stock based payments granted to employees, officers, and directors, based on the grant date fair value estimated in accordance with the provisions of ASC 718. ASC. 718 is also applied to awards modified, repurchased, or canceled during the periods reported.

Stock-Based Compensation for Non-Employees

The Company accounts for warrants and options issued to non-employees under ASC 505-50,Equity – Equity Based Payments to Non-Employees, using the Black-Scholes option-pricing model. The value of such non-employee awards unvested are re-measured over the vesting terms and at each reporting date.

Basic and Diluted Net (Loss) per Common Share

Basic (loss) per common share is computed by dividing the net (loss) by the weighted average number of shares of common stock outstanding for each period. Diluted (loss) per share is computed by dividing the net (loss) by the weighted average number of shares of common stock outstanding plus the dilutive effect of shares issuable through the common stock equivalents.

	Potentially Outstanding Dilutive Common Shares

	For the Year Ended December 31, 2016		For the Year Ended December 31, 2015

Conversion Feature Shares

Common shares issuable under the conversion feature of preferred shares		872,766		-

Stock Option		2,484,445		1,707,744

Warrant		3,826,658		3,403,367

Total potentially outstanding dilutive common shares		7,183,869		5,051,111

Foreign Currency Translation

The Company follows Section 830-10-45 of the FASB Accounting Standards Codification (“Section 830-10-45”) for foreign currency translation to translate the financial statements of the foreign subsidiary from the functional currency, generally the local currency, into U.S. Dollars. Section 830-10-45 sets out the guidance relating to how a reporting entity determines the functional currency of a foreign entity (including of a foreign entity in a highly inflationary economy), re-measures the books of record (if necessary), and characterizes transaction gains and losses. Pursuant to Section 830-10-45, the assets, liabilities, and operations of a foreign entity shall be measured using the functional currency of that entity. An entity’s functional currency is the currency of the primary economic environment in which the entity operates; normally, that is the currency of the environment, or local currency, in which an entity primarily generates and expends cash.

The functional currency of each foreign subsidiary is determined based on management’s judgment and involves consideration of all relevant economic facts and circumstances affecting the subsidiary. Generally, the currency in which the subsidiary transacts a majority of its transactions, including billings, financing, payroll and other expenditures, would be considered the functional currency, but any dependency upon the parent and the nature of the subsidiary’s operations must also be considered. If a subsidiary’s functional currency is deemed to be the local currency, then any gain or loss associated with the translation of that subsidiary’s financial statements is included in accumulated other comprehensive income. However, if the functional currency is deemed to be the U.S. Dollar, then any gain or loss associated with the re-measurement of these financial statements from the local currency to the functional currency would be included in the consolidated statements of income and comprehensive income (loss). If the Company disposes of foreign subsidiaries, then any cumulative translation gains or losses would be recorded into the consolidated statements of income and comprehensive income (loss). If the Company determines that there has been a change in the functional currency of a subsidiary to the U.S. Dollar, any translation gains or losses arising after the date of change would be included within the statement of income and comprehensive income (loss).

Based on an assessment of the factors discussed above, the management of the Company determined the relevant subsidiary’s local currency to be the functional currency for its foreign subsidiary.

F-13

Table of Contents

Recent Accounting Pronouncements

In May 2014, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued Accounting Standards Update No. 2014-09 (ASU 2014-09), Revenue from Contracts with Customers. ASU 2014-09 will eliminate transaction- and industry-specific revenue recognition guidance under current GAAP and replace it with a principle based approach for determining revenue recognition. ASU 2014-09 will require that companies recognize revenue based on the value of transferred goods or services as they occur in the contract. ASU 2014-09 also will require additional disclosure about the nature, amount, timing and uncertainty of revenue and cash flows arising from customer contracts, including significant judgments and changes in judgments and assets recognized from costs incurred to obtain or fulfill a contract. ASU 2014-09 is effective for reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2017, with early adoption permitted only as of annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2016, including interim reporting periods within that reporting period. Entities will be able to transition to the standard either retrospectively or as a cumulative-effect adjustment as of the date of adoption. The adoption of ASU 2014-09 is not expected to have any impact on the Company’s financial statement presentation or disclosures.

In August 2014, the FASB Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) issued ASU No. 2014-15,“Presentation of Financial Statements-Going Concern (Subtopic 205-40): Disclosure of Uncertainties about an Entity’s Ability to Continue as a Going Concern.” ASU 2014-15 provides guidance on management’s responsibility to evaluate whether there is substantial doubt about an organization’s ability to continue as a going concern and to provide related footnote disclosures. For each reporting period, management will be required to evaluate whether there are conditions or events that raise substantial doubt about a company’s ability to continue as a going concern within one year from the date the financial statements are issued.The amendments in ASU 2014-15 are effective for annual reporting periods ending after December 15, 2016, and for annual and interim periods thereafter. Early adoption is permitted. The Company has elected to adopt the methodologies prescribed by ASU 2014-15. The adoption of ASU 2014-15 had no material effect on its financial position or results of operations.

In November 2015, the FASB issued ASU No 2015-17, Income Taxes (Topic 740). The amendments in ASU 2015-17 change the requirements for the classification of deferred taxes on the balance sheet. Currently, GAAP requires an entity to separate deferred income tax liabilities and assets into current and noncurrent amounts in a classified statement of financial position. To simplify the presentation of deferred income taxes, the amendments in this ASU require that deferred tax liabilities and assets be classified as noncurrent in a classified statement of financial position. The pronouncement is effective for fiscal years and interim periods within those fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2016. Earlier application is permitted for all entities as of the beginning of an interim or annual reporting period. The Company does not believe the adoption of this standard will have a material effect on the Company’s consolidated financial position and results of operations.

In February 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-02, Leases. The main provisions of ASU No. 2016-02 require management to recognize lease assets and lease liabilities for all leases. ASU 2016-02 retains a distinction between finance leases and operating leases. The classification criteria for distinguishing between finance leases and operating leases are substantially similar to the classification criteria for distinguishing between capital leases and operating leases in the previous leases guidance. The result of retaining a distinction between finance leases and operating leases is that under the lessee accounting model, the effect of leases in the statement of comprehensive income and the statement of cash flows is largely unchanged from previous GAAP. The amendments in this ASU are effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018, including interim periods within those fiscal years. The Company is currently assessing the impact of this ASU on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.

On March 30, 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-09, "Compensation - Stock Compensation" which simplifies several aspects of the accounting for employee share-based payment transactions for both public and nonpublic entities, including the accounting for income taxes, forfeitures, and statutory tax withholding requirements, as well as classification in the statement of cash flows. For public business entities, the ASU is effective for annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2016, including interim periods within those annual reporting periods. Early adoption will be permitted in any interim or annual period for which financial statements have not yet been issued or have not been made available for issuance. If early adoption is elected, all amendments in the ASU that apply must be adopted in the same period. In addition, if early adoption is elected in an interim period, any adjustments should be reflected as of the beginning of the annual period that includes that interim period. The Company is currently assessing the impact of this ASU on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.

In August 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-15,“Statement of Cash Flows (Topic 230): Classification of Certain Cash Receipts and Cash Payments” (“ASU 2016-15”). ASU 2016-15 will make eight targeted changes to how cash receipts and cash payments are presented and classified in the statement of cash flows. ASU 2016-15 is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017. The new standard will require adoption on a retrospective basis unless it is impracticable to apply, in which case it would be required to apply the amendments prospectively as of the earliest date practicable. The Company is currently assessing the impact of this ASU on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.

In November 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-18, “Statement of Cash Flows (Topic 230)”, requiring that the statement of cash flows explain the change in the total cash, cash equivalents, and amounts generally described as restricted cash or restricted cash equivalents. This guidance is effective for fiscal years, and interim reporting periods therein, beginning after December 15, 2017 with early adoption permitted. The provisions of this guidance are to be applied using a retrospective approach which requires application of the guidance for all periods presented. The Company is currently assessing the impact of this ASU on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.

In December 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-20, “Technical Corrections and Improvements to Topic 606, Revenue from Contracts with Customers”. The amendments in this Update affect the guidance in Update 2014-09, which is not yet effective. The effective date and transition requirements for the amendments are the same as the effective date and transition requirements for Topic 606 (and any other Topic amended by Update 2014-09). Accounting Standards Update No. 2015-14, Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606): Deferral of the Effective Date, defers the effective date of Update 2014-09 by one year.

NOTE 4 - ACCOUNTS PAYABLE AND ACCRUED EXPENSES

Accounts payable and accrued expenses consist of the following at:

	December 31, 2016		December 31, 2015

Legal	$	1,190	$	186,936
Payroll and related		-		47,388
Patent expense		37,142		29,239
Research and development		116,255		8,128
Other		13,400		7,564

	$	167,987	$	279,255

F-14

Table of Contents

NOTE 5 – BRIDGE LOAN PAYABLE – STOCKHOLDER

During January 1, 2015 through February 12, 2016, the Company had entered into a series of bridge loan arrangements for total borrowings received and interest accrued of $425,265 ($399,103 at December 31, 2015) with a major Stockholder and Chairman. The proceeds were used to fund research, development and the general operating activity of the Company. The Company has guaranteed the payment of all principal and interest in the form of the Company’s common stock at a purchase price of $1.25 per share. The loan bears interest at a rate of 10% per annum. The Company recorded interest expense of $7,162 and $11,473 for the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively. On February 12, 2016, the Company settled $350,000 of principal and interest by issuing shares of Series B Preferred Stock in the Private Offering at a price of $1.25 per share as part of its private offering. On June 17, 2016, the Company settled the remaining $75,265 in principal and accrued interest by issuing shares of Common Stock at a price of $1.25 per share.

NOTE 6 - DERIVATIVE LIABILITIES

Upon closing of the private placement transactions on February 12, 2016, the Company issued 127,346 and 295,945 warrants, to the placement agent of the private offering and to Strategic Bio Partners for debt cancellation, respectively, to purchase the Company’s Series B Preferred Stock with an exercise price of $1.25 and a five-year term. The warrants have a cashless exercise feature that requires the Company to classify the warrants as a derivative liability.

NOTE 7 - STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY (DEFICIT)

Stock-Based Compensation

In connection with the Merger, all of the issued and outstanding options to purchase shares of Prior Protagenic common stock converted, on a 1-for-1 basis, into options (the “New Options”), to purchase shares of our Series B Preferred Stock. The New Options will be administered under Prior Protagenic’s 2006 Employee, Director and Consultant Stock Plan (the “2006 Plan”), which the Company assumed and adopted.

The Plan is authorized to issue up to 2,000,000 stock options. In accordance with the Plan, the Company can grant to certain employees, directors or consultants options to purchase shares of the Company’s common stock which vest automatically or ranging from a one-year period to a five-year period. The shares are exercisable over a period of ten years from the date of grant. The Plan provides that qualified options be granted at an exercise price equal to the fair market value at the date of grant.

F-15

Table of Contents

There were 2,484,445 options outstanding as of December 31, 2016. The fair value of each stock option granted was estimated using the Black-Scholes assumptions and or factors as follows:

Exercise price	$.26	-	$1.25
Expected dividend yield	0%
Risk free interest rate	1.01%	-	2.43%
Expected life in years	5
Expected volatility	85%	-	213%

The following is an analysis of the stock option grant activity under the Plan:

	Number			Weighted Average Exercise Price		Weighted Average Remaining Contractual Life
*Stock Options*

Outstanding January 1, 2016		1,707,744		$	0.84		6.45
Granted		1,193,300		$	1.25		10.35
Expired		(506,599	)	$	0.26
Converted		(25,000	)	$	0.26
Outstanding December 31, 2016		2,369,445		$	1.18		9.82

As of December 31, 2016 the Company had 2,484,445 shares issuable under options outstanding at a weighted average exercise price of $1.04 and an intrinsic value of $$697,820.

On February 12, 2016, the Company issued 100,000 options under the 2006 Plan to its Chief Financial Officer as a sign-on bonus. These options have an exercise price of $1.25 per share, a ten-year term and vest over a three-year period in 35 monthly installments of 0.18 shares and a final installment of 2,778 shares. The terms of the option grant also include full vesting acceleration upon a change of control as defines. The Company recognized compensation expense related to this issuance of $25,696 for the year ended December 31, 2016.

F-16

Table of Contents

On April 15, 2016, our Compensation Committee of our Board determined that each board member will be compensated an option grant of 40,000 options per year, plus 5,000 options for serving as the Chair of a committee. Options shall have 10-year expiration dates, 24-month vesting cycles, and a strike price of $1.25 per share, or more in future time periods to match the fair market value of the Company’s common stock. The aggregate amount granted was 175,000 options.

On April 15, 2016, the Board granted 1,009,300 options to employees and consultants. These options shall have 10-year expiration dates, 12 to 48 month vesting cycles, and a strike price of $1.25 per share. Having an aggregate fair market value of $1,261,625 on December 31, 2016.

During the year, 17,785 options were granted to former Atrinsic executives. These options have 3-year expiration dates, and a strike price of $1.25 per share. Having an aggregate fair market value of $22,231 on December 31, 2016.

The total number of options granted and vested during the year ended December 31, 2016 and 2015 was 1,308,300 and 1,272,982, respectively. The exercise price for these options was $1.25 per share.

The Company recognized compensation expense related to options issued of $546,134 and $477,868 during the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively, which is included in general and administrative expenses.

On June 17, 2016, the stockholders of the Company approved the adoption of the 2016 equity compensation plan at the Special Meeting. No further options will be granted under the 2006 equity compensation plan, which we assumed in connection with the Merger.

On July 31, 2016 25,000 options were exercised into common stock of the Company for $6,500.

On October 26, 2016, the Board granted 25,000 options to an employee. These options shall have 10-year expiration dates, a 48 month vesting cycle with a one-year cliff, and a strike price of $1.25 per share.

Warrants:

In connection with the Merger, all of the issued and outstanding warrants to purchase shares of Prior Protagenic common stock, converted, on a 1 for 1 basis, into new warrants (the “New Warrants”) to purchase shares of our Series B Preferred Stock.

Simultaneous with the Merger and the Private Offering, New Warrants to purchase 3,403,367 shares of Series B Preferred Stock at an average exercise price of approximately $1.05 per share were issued to holders of Prior Protagenic warrants; additionally, holders of $665,000 of our debt and $35,000 of accrued interest exchanged such debt for five-year warrants to purchase 295,945 shares of Series B Preferred Stock at $1.25 per share. Placement Agent Warrants to purchase 127,346 shares of Series B Preferred Stock at an exercise price of $1.25 per share were issued in connection with the Private offering. These warrants to purchase 423,291 shares of Series B Preferred Stock have been recorded as derivative liabilities. See Note 6.

A summary of warrant issuances are as follows:

	Number		Weighted Average Exercise Price		Weighted Average Remaining Life
*Warrants*

Outstanding January 1, 2016		3,403,367	$	1.03		5.80
Granted		423,291	$	1.25		4.12
OutstandingDecember 31, 2016		3,826,658	$	1.05		5.61

As of December 31, 2016 the Company had 3,826,658 shares issuable under warrants outstanding at a weighted average exercise price of $1.07 and an intrinsic value of $763,342.

F-17

Table of Contents

NOTE 8 –INCOME TAXES

The components of (loss) income before income taxes are as follows:

	2016			2015
Domestic		(2,182,114	)		(747,693	)
Foreign		(93,712	)		(275,729	)
(Loss) income before income taxes		(2,275,826	)		(1,023,422	)

The Company had no income tax expense due to operating losses incurred for the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015.

For the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015, a reconciliation of the Company’s effective tax rate to the statutory U.S. Federal rate is as follows:

	2016			2015
Income taxes at Federal statutory rate		(34.0	%)		(34.0	%)
State income taxes, net of Federal income tax effect		(16.0	%)		(13.0	%)
Perm difference		(7.0	%)		0.0	%
Foreign tax rate differential		(0.2	%)		2.4	%
Change in valuation allowance		50.4	%		43.5	%
Other		6.8	%		1.1	%
Income tax provision		0.0	%		0.0	%

The tax effects of temporary differences that give rise to the Company’s deferred tax assets and liabilities are as follows:

	2016			2015
U.S. net operating loss carryforwards		1,733,000			563,000
Stock compensation		(29,000	)		206,000
Canadian Provincial income tax losses		116,000			402,000
Canadian Provincial scientific investment tax credits		56,000			201,000
		1,876,000			1,372,000
Valuation allowance		(1,876,000	)		(1,372,000	)
Net deferred tax assets		-			-

F-18

Table of Contents

As of December 31, 2016 and 2015, the Company had federal net operating loss carryforwards (“NOL”) of approximately $4,035,000 and $1,310,000, respectively. The losses expire beginning in 2024. The Company has not performed a detailed analysis to determine whether an ownership change under IRC Section 382 has occurred. The effect of an ownership change would be the imposition of annual limitation on the use of NOL carryforwards attributable to periods before the change Any limitation may result in expiration of a portion of the NOL before utilization. As of December 31, 2016 and 2015, the Company had state and local net operating loss carryforwards of approximately $4,027,000 and $1,303,000, respectively, to reduce future state tax liabilities also through 2035.

As of December 31, 2016 and 2015, the Company had Canadian NOL of approximately $1,174,000 and $1,256,000, respectively. The Canadian losses expire in stages beginning in 2026. As of December 31, 2016 and 2015, the Company also has unclaimed Canadian federal scientific research and development investment tax credits, which are available to reduce future federal taxes payable of approximately $56,000 and $201,000, respectively.

As a result of losses and uncertainty of future profit, the net deferred tax asset has been fully reserved. The net change in the valuation allowance during the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015 was an increase of $242,000 and $445,000, respectively.

Foreign earnings are assumed to be permanently reinvested. U.S. Federal income taxes have not been provided on undistributed earnings of our foreign subsidiary.

The Company recognizes interest and penalties related to uncertain tax positions in selling, general and administrative expenses. The Company has not identified any uncertain tax positions requiring a reserve as of December 31, 2016 and 2015.

The Company is required to file U.S. federal and state income tax returns. These returns are subject to audit by tax authorities beginning with the year ended December 31, 2013.

NOTE 9 - COLLABORATIVE AGREEMENTS

The Company and the University of Toronto, a stockholder of the Company (the “University”) entered into an agreement effective December 14, 2004 (the “Research Agreement”) for the performance of a research project titled “Evidence for existence of TCAP receptors in neurons” (the “Project”). The Research Agreement expired on March 31, 2013.

The Company and the University entered into an agreement effective April 1, 2014 (the “New Research Agreement”) for the performance of a research project titled “Teneurin C-terminal Associated Peptide (“TCAP”) mediated stress attenuation in vertebrates: Establishing the role of organismal and intracellular energy and glucose regulation and metabolism" (the “New Project”). The New Project is to perform research related to work done by a professor at the University and stockholder of the Company (the “Professor”) in regard to TCAP mediated stress attenuation in vertebrates: Establishing the role of organismal and intracellular energy and glucose regulation and metabolism. In addition to the New Research Agreement, the Professor entered into an agreement with the University in order to commercialize certain technologies. The New Research Agreement expired on March 30, 2016. In February 2017, the New Research Agreement was extended to December 31, 2016 which allows for further development of the technologies and use of their applications. Upon expiration of the agreement, payments to the University and research support from the University will suspend until an agreement can be made.

Prior to January 1, 2016, the University has been granted 25,000 stock options which are fully vested at the exercise price of $1.00 exercisable over a 10 year period which ends on April 1, 2022. As of December 31, 2016, the Professor has been granted 483,299 stock options, of which 297,190 are fully vested, at an exercise price of $1.00 exercisable over 10 or 13 year periods which end either on March 30, 2021, December 1, 2022, April 15, 2026 or on March 1, 2027.

F-19

Table of Contents

The sponsorship research and development expenses pertaining to the Research Agreements were $65,252 and $10,584 for the year ended December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively.

NOTE 10 - LICENSING AGREEMENTS

On July 31, 2005, the Company had entered into a Technology License Agreement (“License Agreement”) with the University pursuant to which the University agreed to license to the Company patent rights and other intellectual property, among other things (the “Technologies”). The Technology License Agreement was amended on February 18, 2015 and currently does not provide for an expiration date.

Pursuant to the License Agreement and its amendment, the Company obtained an exclusive worldwide license to make, have made, use, sell and import products based upon the Technologies, or to sublicense the Technologies in accordance with the terms of the License Agreement and amendment. In consideration, the Company agreed to pay to the University a royalty payment of 2.5% of net sales of any product based on the Technologies. If the Company elects to sublicense any rights under the License Agreement and amendment, the Company agrees to pay to the University 10% of any up-front sub-license fees for any sub-licenses that occurred on or after September 9, 2006, and, on behalf of the sub-licensee, 2.5% of net sales by the sub-licensee of all products based on the Technologies. The Company had no sales revenue for the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015 and therefore was not subject to paying any royalties.

In the event the Company fails to provide the University with semi-annual reports on the progress or fails to continue to make reasonable commercial efforts towards obtaining regulatory approval for products based on the Technologies, the University may convert our exclusive license into a non-exclusive arrangement. Interest on any amounts owed under the License Agreement and amendment will be at 3% per annum. All intellectual property rights resulting from the Technologies or improvements thereon will remain the property of the other inventors and/or the Professor, and/or the University, as the case may be. The Company has agreed to pay all out-of- pocket filing, prosecution and maintenance expenses in connection with any patents relating to the Technologies. In the case of infringement upon any patents relating to the Technologies, the Company may elect, at its own expense, to bring a cause of action asserting such infringement. In such a case, after deducting any legal expenses the Company may incur, any settlement proceeds will be subject to the 2.5% royalty payment owed to the University under the License Agreement and amendment.

NOTE 11 - COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

Consulting Agreement

The Company had an employment agreement with its Officer/Related Party which expired on December 31, 2015. The employment agreement indicated a salary of $6,489 per month plus a bonus, other healthcare benefits and was granted stock options during the year ended December 31, 2015, the Officer/Related Party has been granted 75,000 stock options, valued at $64,223 using the Black-Scholes calculation of which $53,519 was expensed in 2015.

As the agreement above expired, the Company issued a consulting agreement in its place that extended the majority of the terms of the employment agreement on a month-to-month basis. As a consultant, he is responsible for financial reporting, data compilation, and document retrieval services, reporting to the Chief Financial Officer, and to endeavor to secure non-dilutive grant funding for the Company. Prior to January 1, 2016, the Consultant had been granted 250,000 stock options, which are fully vested, at exercise prices of $0.26, $1.00, and $1.25 exercisable over 10 year periods which ends either August 1, 2016 or March 9, 2025. The consultant will be paid $2,000 per month for the remainder of the year ended December 31, 2016 and is eligible for bonus payments both contingent and not contingent on obtaining non-dilutive grant financing for the Company. Either party may terminate the agreement (a) immediately at any time upon written notice to the other party in the event of a breach of the agreement by the other party which cannot be cured (i.e. breach of the confidentiality obligations) and or (b) at any time without cause upon not less than fifteen (15) days’ prior written notice to the other party. Upon expiration or termination, neither the Company nor Consultant will have any further obligations under the consulting agreement.

F-20

Table of Contents

The Company has accrued $41,595 to the Consultant for research and development projects during the year ended December 31, 2016 and paid $0 during the year ended December 31, 2016.

Consulting Agreement

PTI Canada entered into a consulting agreement with a stockholder of the Company (the “Consultant”) which expired on December 31, 2015, pursuant to which the Consultant is responsible for overseeing i) design and development of enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay “(ELISA”), assays for measuring TCAP, ii) evaluation of TCAP exposure biomarker assay, iii) development of pipeline peptides, and iv) development of clinically compatible formulations for TCAP, as well as all of the bench research and development of formulation and extraction methods. The agreement has been extended through December 31, 2016 and updated accordingly. Prior to January 1, 2016, the Consultant had been granted 150,000 stock options which are fully vested at exercise prices of $1.00 and $1.25 exercisable over 10 year periods which ends either on March 30, 2021 or on March 1, 2025. The Consultant is paid approximately CA$3,000 per month. Either party may terminate the agreement (a) immediately at any time upon written notice to the other party in the event of a breach of the agreement by the other party which cannot be cured (i.e. breach of the confidentiality obligations) and or (b) at any time without cause upon not less than fifteen (15) days’ prior written notice to the other party. Upon expiration or termination, neither the Company nor Consultant will have any further obligations under the consulting agreement.

The Company has accrued $22,656 to pay the Consultant for research and development projects during the year ended December 31, 2016 and paid $10,861 during the year ended December 31, 2016.

Legal Proceedings

From time to time we may be named in claims arising in the ordinary course of business. Currently, no legal proceedings, government actions, administrative actions, investigations or claims are pending against us or involve us that, in the opinion of our management, could reasonably be expected to have a material adverse effect on our business and financial condition.

NOTE 12 - SUBSEQUENT EVENTS

The Company has evaluated the period after the balance sheet date up through the date that the condensed consolidated financial statements were filed, and determined that other than noted above, there were subsequent events or transactions that required recognition or disclosure in the condensed consolidated financial statements.

F-21

Delaware		06-1390025
(State or other jurisdiction of		(I.R.S. Employer
incorporation or organization)		~~(I.R.S. Employer~~ Identification No.)

~~469 7th~~
149 Fifth Avenue ~~10th Floor,~~
New York, ~~NY 10018~~New York		10010
(Address of principal executive offices) ~~(ZIP~~		(Zip Code)

Large accelerated filer ¨ ☐	Accelerated filer ¨ ☐
Non-accelerated filer ¨ ~~(Do~~☐	Smaller reporting company ☒
(Do not check if a smaller reporting company)	~~Smaller reporting company~~ x

Title of each class	Name of ~~each~~ exchange on which registered
N/A	N/A

	PART ~~III~~I	4
Item 1	Business	4
Item 1A	Risk Factors	19
Item 1B	Unresolved Staff Comments	35
Item 2	Properties	35
Item 3	Legal Proceedings	35
Item 4	Mine Safety Disclosures	36

	PART II	36
Item 5	Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities	36
Item 6	Selected Financial Data	39
Item 7	Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations	39
Item 7A	Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk	47
Item 8	Financial Statements and Supplementary Data	47
Item 9	Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure	47
Item 9A	Controls and Procedures	47
Item 9B	Other Information	49

	PART III	49
Item 10		Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance		449
Item 11	Executive Compensation				54
~~Item 11~~		~~Executive Compensation~~		8

Item 12		Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters		1757

Item 13		Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence		1967
Item 14	Principal Accountant Fees and Services	70

~~Item 14~~	PART IV		~~Principal Accounting Fees and Services~~		2071

~~PART IV~~

Item 15		Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules	71
	22 SIGNATURES	76

Name	Age	Director Since	Position

Jerome Chazen	83	2005	Chairman of the Board
Raymond Musci	49	2007	Executive Vice President, Corporate Development, Director
Lawrence Burstein	68	2008	Director
Mark Dyne	48	2008	Director
Stuart Goldfarb	56	2010	Director

		Option Awards							Stock Awards
				Number of Securities Underlying Unexercised Options (#)
Name	Grant Date	Exercisable		Unexercisable		Option Exercise Price ($)		Option Expiration Date	Number of shares or Units of Stock That Have Not Vested (#)		Market Value of Shares or Units of Stock That Have Not Vested ($)

Thomas Plotts (1)	02/04/08		-		-		-	-		424	$	1123.60
	05/31/10		13,888		48,612	$	3.64	May 31, 2020		-		-
										-		-
Andrew Stollman(2)	04/09/10		7,606		-	$	14.79	April 9, 2011		-		-
	04/09/10		7,606		-	$	13.67	April 9, 2011		-		-
	04/09/10		7,606		-	$	17.75	April 9, 2011		-		-
	01/12/01		17,747		-	$	33.72	December 1. 2011		-		-
	03/06/04		68,453		-	$	43.43	June 3, 2014		-		-
	06/25/09		-		-		-			68,750	$	182,187.50
	06/25/09		-		-		-	-		25,000	$	66,250
												-

	Fees Earned		Restricted
	or		Stock		Option		All Other
Name	Paid in Cash		Awards (1)		Awards		Compensation		Total

Jerome Chazen (2)	$	100,625	$	26,306	$	-	$	-	$	126,931
Lawrence Burstein (3)	$	65,000	$	15,421	$	-	$	-	$	80,421
Robert Ellin (4)	$	50,000	$	15,421	$	-	$	-	$	65,421
Mark Dyne (5)	$	50,000	$	15,421	$	-	$	-	$	65,421
Stuart Goldfarb	$	51,875	$	-	$	-	$	-	$	51,875

	Number of Shares		Percentage of
	Beneficially		Shares
Name of Beneficial Owner	Owned		Outstanding

Executive Officers and Directors:
Thomas Plotts (1)		29,730		*
Mark Dyne (2)		1,058,747		16.8	%
Robert Ellin (3)		448,174		7.1	%
Andrew Stollman (4)		214,448		3.4	%
Raymond Musci (5)		123,955		2.0	%
Lawrence Burstein (6)		22,534		*
Jerome Chazen (7)		25,809		*
Jeffrey Schwartz (8)		-		*
Stuart Goldfarb		-		*

All Executive Officers and Directors as a Group (9 persons) (9)		1,923,397		30.5	%

5% Shareholders:
MPLC Holdings, LLC & Europlay (2)		871,182		13.8	%
Trinad Capital Master Fund, Ltd. (3)		448,174		7.1	%
Destar LLC & David Smith (10)		430,295		6.8	%
Mercury Fund IX Ltd (11)		450,000		7.1	%
Briliant Digital Entertainment, Inc. (12)		1,040,358		16.5	%
Outstanding shares				6,297,236

(In thousands)	December 31, 2010		December 31, 2009
Audit Fees (1)		403		375
Audit related fees (2)		35		5
Tax Fees (3)		93		-
Total		531		380