Uni-Pixel, Inc., a Delaware corporation, is the parent company of Uni-Pixel Displays, Inc., its wholly-owned operating subsidiary. As used herein, “Uni-Pixel,” “the Company,” “we,” “us,” and “our” refer to Uni-Pixel, Inc. and Uni-Pixel Displays, Inc. Our common stock, par value $0.001 per share, is quoted on The NASDAQ Capital Market under the ticker symbol “UNXL.”

On April 16, 2015 we acquired certain assets and licenses related to the manufacture of XTouch touch sensors from Atmel Corporation and CIT Technology Ltd. and we closed a private offering consisting of $15 million in principal amount of our Senior Secured Convertible Promissory Notes together with warrants. On April 22, 2015 we terminated the Manufacturing Facility Installation and Supply Agreement dated April 15, 2013 which was entered into by Uni-Pixel Displays, Inc. and Eastman Kodak Company.

Our decision to change the focus of our business from developing and manufacturing InTouch sensors to manufacturing and selling XTouch touch sensors was based on, among other things, the pressure of declining prices and margin compression in the touch sensor market. We believe that our purchase of the XTouch technology will provide us with a stand-alone, go-to-market strategy that we expect to provide a better economic model and lead to a scalable business in a more rapid time frame.

In addition to the flexible electronic films described above, we are developing a hard coat resin that can be applied using film, spray or inkjet coating methods for applications as protective cover films, a cover lens replacement or a conformal hard coat for plastic components. We plan to sell our hard coat resin and optical films under the Diamond Guard® brand.

Our strategy is to further develop our proprietary Performance Engineered Film™ technology around the vertical markets that we have identified as high growth profitable market opportunities. These markets include touch sensors, antennas, automotive and lighting.

As of September 30, 2015,March 31, 2016, Uni-Pixel had accumulated a total deficit of $143.6$157.6 million from operations in pursuit of these objectives.

As of September 30, 2015,March 31, 2016, we had cash and cash equivalents of $2.2$4.8 million. We also have $6.0 million of restricted cash that is restricted related to our convertible note. Our long-term viability is dependent upon our ability to successfully operate our business, develop our manufacturing process, develop our products, establish the business relationships we need to manufacture and market our products, and raise additional capital through offerings of our debt and equity securities to meet our business objectives.

The Company is subject to a number of risks, including, but not limited to, whether it can successfully integrate the XTouch operations; whether the manufacture and sale of the XTouch touch sensors will ultimately prove to be profitable; whether the Company will be able to raise capital when it needs to do so; whether the Company can successfully compete in the industry, particularly against larger organizations with greater financial and other resources; whether the Company will continue to receive the services of its key personnel; whether its intellectual property is adequately protected; and other risks related to the electronics market industry.

The condensed consolidated financial statements presented in this quarterly report include Uni-Pixel, Inc. and our wholly-owned subsidiary, Uni-Pixel Displays, Inc. All significant intercompany transactions and balances have been eliminated.

The condensed consolidated financial statements included herein, which have not been audited pursuant to the rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission, reflect all adjustments which, in the opinion of management, are necessary for a fair presentation of financial position, results of operations and cash flows for the interim periods on a basis consistent with the annual audited statements. All such adjustments are of a normal recurring nature. The results of operations for interim periods are not necessarily indicative of the results that may be expected for any other interim period or for a full year. Certain information, accounting policies and footnote disclosures normally included in condensed consolidated financial statements prepared in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America have been omitted pursuant to such rules and regulations, although we believe that the disclosures are adequate to make the information presented not misleading. These condensed consolidated financial statements should be read in conjunction with our audited consolidated financial statements included in our Form 10-K, for the year ended December 31, 2014,2015, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on February 26, 2015.

The accounting and reporting policies of the Company conform to U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) and to the practices within the technology industry. There have been no significant changes in the Company’s significant accounting policies during the three months ended March 31, 2016 compared to what was previously disclosed in the Company’s Annual Report on 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2015. The consolidated financial information as of December 31, 20142015 included herein has been derived from the Company’s audited consolidated financial statements as of, and for the fiscal year ended, December 31, 2014.

The preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America requires us to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities, disclosures of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Examples include provision for excess and obsolete inventory, provisions for bad debts, useful lives of property and equipment and intangible assets, valuation of derivative liability, impairment of property and equipment and intangible assets, deferred taxes, valuation of warrants and beneficial conversion feature on debt, derivative liability, and the provision for and disclosure of litigation and loss contingencies and stock based compensation. Actual results may differ materially from those estimates.

For purposes of the statements of cash flows, we consider all highly liquid investments (i.e., investments which, when purchased, have original maturities of three months or less) to be cash equivalents.

We maintain our cash with major U.S. domestic banks. The amounts held in interest bearing accounts periodically exceed the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”) insured limit of $250,000 at September 30, 2015March 31, 2016 and December 31, 2014.  The amounts held in these banks exceeded the insured limit of $250,000 as of September 30, 2015 and December 31, 2014.2015. We have not incurred losses related to these deposits.

As of September 30,March 31, 2016 and December 31, 2015 we had restricted cash of $6.0 million.  This$0 and $4.1 million, respectively. At December 31, 2015 the $4.1 million of restricted cash represents the amount represents $6.0 million we are required to maintain on our balance sheetssheet in accordance with the terms of the Securities Purchase Agreement we entered into on April 16, 2015 for the sale of our Senior Secured Convertible Promissory Notes. As of December 31, 2014, we had restricted cash of $17,439. This amount secured certain obligations under our lease agreement for our facility located in The Woodlands, Texas aswas released from restriction during the three months ended March 31, 2016 upon conversion of December 31, 2014.  The restricted cash is reflected in a short-term classification based on its anticipated liquidation.

The carrying value of our accounts receivable, net of allowance for doubtful accounts, represents their estimated net realizable value. We estimate the allowance for doubtful accounts based on type of customer, age of outstanding receivable, historical collection trends, and existing economic conditions. If events or changes in circumstances indicate that a specific receivable balance may be unrealizable, further consideration is given to the collectability of those balances, and the allowance is adjusted accordingly. Receivable balances deemed uncollectible are written off against the allowance. We have $0.9$0.7 million and $0$0.3 million accounts receivable balances at September 30, 2015March 31, 2016 and December 31, 2014, respectively, none2015, respectively.

Property and equipment

Property and equipment, consisting primarily of which was reservedproduction equipment, lab equipment, computer equipment, software, leasehold improvements, and office furniture and fixtures is carried at cost less accumulated depreciation and amortization. Depreciation and amortization for financial reporting purposes is provided by the straight-line method over the estimated useful lives of three to five years. Leasehold improvements are amortized using the straight-line method over the remaining lease term or the life of the asset, whichever is shorter. The cost of repairs and maintenance is charged as uncollectible.

Inventory is stated at the lower of cost or market. Cost is determined using standard cost, which approximates the first-in, first-out method. Adjustments to reduce the carrying value of inventory to its net realizable value are made for estimated excess, obsolete or impaired balances. These adjustments are measured as the excess of the cost of the inventory over its market value based upon assumptions about future demand and charged to cost of revenue. At the point of the loss recognition, a new, lower cost basis for that inventory is established, and subsequent changes in facts and circumstances do not result in the restoration of the original cost basis or increases in the newly established cost basis.

In accordance with ASC 815-40-25 and ASC 815-10-15 Derivatives and Hedging and ASC 480-10-25 Liabilities-Distinguishing from Equity, the Company’s convertible notes are accounted for net, outside of shareholder’s equity and warrants are accounted for as liabilities at their fair value during periods where the full ratchet anti-dilution provision is in effect.

The warrants are accounted for a liability at their fair value at each reporting period. The value of the derivative warrant liability will be re-measured at each reporting period with changes in fair value recorded as earnings. To derive an estimate of the fair value of these warrants, a binomial model is utilized that computes the impact of share dilution upon the exercise of the warrant shares. This process relies upon inputs such as shares outstanding, estimated stock prices, strike price and volatility assumptions to dynamically adjust the payoff of the warrants in the presence of the dilution effect.

We recognize revenue whenover the rights and risks of ownership have passed toperiod the customer, whenservice is performed. In general, this requires that four basic criteria must be met before revenue can be recognized: (1) persuasive evidence ofthat an arrangement exists, (2) delivery has occurred or services have been rendered, (3) the product has been delivered, the pricefee is fixed orand determinable, and collection of the resulting receivable(4) collectability is reasonably assured.  Allowances for sales returns and other credits are recorded at the time of sale.

Revenue on certain fixed price contracts where we provide research and development services isare recognized over the contract term based on achievement of milestones. When the contracts provide for milestone or other interim payments, the Company will recognize revenue under the milestone method. Contracts with Dell, Inc. (“Dell”) and Intel Corporation (“Intel”) entered into during 2012 and 2013, respectively, are being accounted for under the milestone method.  The milestone method requires the Company to designatedeem all milestone payments within each contract as either substantive or non-substantive. That conclusion is determined based upon a thorough review of each contract and the Company’s deliverables committed to be made by the Company pursuant toin each contract. For substantive milestones, the Company concludes that upon achievement of each milestone, the amount of the corresponding defined payments is commensurate with the effort required to achieve such milestone or the value of the delivered item. The payment associated with each milestone relates solely to past performance and is deemed reasonable upon consideration of the deliverables and the payment terms within the contract. For non-substantive milestones, including advance payments, the recognition of such payments isare pro-rated to the substantive milestones.

In April 2013, we entered into an agreement with Intel Corporation (“Intel”) (the “Agreement”“Capacity License Agreement”), whereby we were to receive $10.0$10 million of cash proceeds to assist us in increasing our production capacity. Under the terms of the Capacity License Agreement, there were two milestones with related contingent consideration of $5 million for each milestone plus certain commissions as described below. The Capacity License Agreement required us to purchase certain equipment, which we purchased in 2013 and which we consideredconsider not a substantive milestone. The Capacity License Agreement required us to have the capability to produce at least 1 million sensor units per month (as defined in the Capacity License Agreement) by April 2014, which we consideredconsider a substantive milestone. We received $5.0$5 million in May 2013, which wasis non-refundable and is recorded as accrued liabilitiesdeferred revenue in the accompanying consolidated balance sheet at September 30, 2015 and as deferred revenue at December 31, 2014. As of December 31, 2015 the $5 million is no longer in deferred revenue. Please refer to Note 5. Upon achieving the deliverables of the Capacity License Agreement, we would have paid a commission to Intel of 10% on revenue derived from the sales of InTouch sensorsInTouch™ Sensors jointly developed with Kodak made directly to Intel or to those of Intel’s manufacturing partners that use Intel’s Preferred Price and Capacity License Agreement (“Designated Customers”). The commission amount was to be paid until the aggregate commissions paid equaled the commission cap of $18.5 million. The term of the Capacity License Agreement is the later of 3 years or the full payment of the commission cap. If the Company committed a material breach of the license agreement, certain equipment of the Company with an original cost of approximately $10.1 million would be assigned to Intel to make Intelthem whole on any remaining amounts due under the commission cap of $18.5 million.

In April 2014, we entered into the First Amendment to the Capacity License Agreement with Intel (the “Amended Capacity License Agreement”). The Amended Capacity License Agreement modified the original Capacity License Agreement terms as follows: 1) the inability of the Company to reach, by April 2014, the minimum production capability and the required quality standards specified in the Capacity License Agreement will no longer constitute a material breach ofto the Capacity License Agreement; 2) the total amount of cash proceeds to be received was reduced from $10.0$10 million to $5.0$5 million, which included the $5.0$5 million we received in May 2013; 3) the cap on the commission amount was reduced from $18.5 million to $6.25 million; 4) the term “commission” iswas defined as 10% of gross revenue from the sale of all InTouch™ sensors sold by the Company, which includes sales of sensors to all customers including, but not limited to, Intel and its Designated Customers; 5) if the Company becomes the subject of any proceeding under any bankruptcy, insolvency or liquidation law, the Company will assign all title and ownership to certain designated equipment (the “Equipment”) to Intel; and 6) if the Company materially breaches the Amended Capacity License Agreement, which breach is not cured within 30 days after receipt of notice from Intel, the Company may choose to either (A) pre-pay the cap on the commission to Intel (less the total of all previously paid commissions) or (B) assign all title and ownership to the Equipment to Intel. The only remaining milestone of the Amended Capacity License Agreement iswas the capability to produce at least 1 million sensors units per month.

At September 30, 2015, 698,400March 31, 2016, 668,000 restricted shares and 2,245,124 options and 1,441,580 warrants to purchase 12,992,248 shares of common stock at exercise prices ranging from $1.24$0.55 to $38.70 per share were outstanding, and were not included in the computation of diluted earnings per share as their effect would be anti-dilutive.

In February 2016, the Financial Accounting standardsStandards Update (ASU) 2016-02 Leases (Topic). This ASU requires a lessee to recognize a right-of-use asset and a lease liability under most operating leases in its balance sheet. For public companies, the ASU is effective for annual and interim periods beginning after December 15, 2018. Early adoption is permitted. The company is currently evaluating the effects that have been issued or proposed by the FASB or other standards-setting bodies are not expected toadoption of ASU 2016-02 will have a material impact on the Company’s financial position, results of operations or cash flows.

In May 2014, the FASB issued ASU 2014-09, Revenue from Contracts with Customers. ASU 2014-09 requires an entity to recognize revenue to depict the transfer of promised goods or services to customers in an amount that reflects the consideration to which the entity expects to be entitled in exchange for those goods or services. To achieve this core principle, the guidance provides that an entity should apply the following steps: (1) identify the contract(s) with a customer; (2) identify the performance obligations in the contract; (3) determine the transaction price; (4) allocate the transaction price to the performance obligations in the contract; and (5) recognize revenue when, or as, the entity satisfies a performance obligation. The Company expects to adopt ASU 2014-09 for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2017 and the Company will continue to assess the impact on its financial statements.

Other accounting standards that have been issued or proposed by the FASB or other standards-setting bodies are not expected to have a material impact on the Company’s financial position, results of operations and cash flows.

The Company has entered into a lease for office, warehouse and laboratory facilities for approximately 13,079 square feet at 8708 Technology Forest Pl., Ste. 100, The Woodlands, Texas 77381 under a third party non-cancelable operating lease through April 30, 2016.  The Company has also entered into a lease for office, warehouse and laboratory facilities for approximately 7,186 square feet at 3400 Research Forest Drive, Suite B2, The Woodlands, Texas 77381 under a third party non-cancelable operating lease through May 31, 2016. In conjunction with the acquisition of the XTouch technology, the Company entered into a lease for office and production facilities for approximately 28,918 square feet at 1150 E. Cheyenne Mountain Boulevard, Colorado Springs, Colorado 80906 under a third party non-cancelable operating lease through October 15, 2016. In July 2015, the company entered into a lease for office space for 4,478 square feet at 4699 Old Ironsides Drive, Ste. 300, Santa Clara, CA 95054 through July 14, 2018 Future minimum lease commitments as of September 30, 2015March 31, 2016 are as follows:

As discussed in Note 2 above, in April 2013, we entered into an agreementa Capacity License Agreement with Intel, (the “Agreement”), whereby we were to receive $10.0$10 million of cash proceeds to assist us in increasing our production capacity. Under the terms of the Capacity License Agreement, there were two milestones with related contingent consideration of $5 million for each milestone plus certain commissions as described below. The Capacity License Agreement required us to purchase certain equipment, which we purchased in 2013 and which we consideredconsider not a substantive milestone. The Capacity License Agreement required us to have the capability to produce at least 1 million sensor units per month (as defined in the Capacity License Agreement) by April 2014, which we consideredconsider a substantive milestone. We received $5 million in May 2013, which wasis non-refundable and is recorded as accrued liabilitiesdeferred revenue in the accompanying consolidated balance sheet at September 30, 2015 and as deferred revenue at December 31, 2014. As of December 31, 2015 the $5 million is no longer in deferred revenue. Upon achieving the deliverables of the Capacity License Agreement, we would have paid a commission to Intel of 10% on revenue derived from the sales of InTouch sensorsInTouch™ Sensors jointly developed with Kodak made directly to Intel or to those of Intel’s manufacturing partners that use Intel’s Preferred Price and Capacity License Agreement (“Designated Customers”).Customers. The commission amount was to be paid until the aggregate commissions paid equaled the commission cap of $18.5 million. The term of the Capacity License Agreement is the later of 3 years or the full payment of the commission cap. If the Company committed a material breach of the license agreement, certain equipment of the Company with an original cost of approximately $10.1 million would be assigned to Intel to make Intelthem whole on any remaining amounts due under the commission cap of $18.5 million.

As discussed in Note 2 above, in April 2014, we entered into the First Amendment to theAmended Capacity License Agreement with Intel (the “Amended Agreement”).Intel. The Amended Capacity License Agreement modified the original Capacity License Agreement terms as follows: 1) the inability of the Company to reach, by April 2014, the minimum production capability and the required quality standards specified in the Capacity License Agreement will no longer constitutesconstitute a material breach ofto the Capacity License Agreement; 2) the total amount of cash proceeds to be received was reduced from $10.0$10 million to $5.0$5 million, which included the $5.0$5 million we received in May 2013; 3) the cap on the commission amount was reduced from $18.5 million to $6.25 million; 4) the term “commission” is defined as 10% of gross revenue from the sale of all sensors sold by the Company, which includes sales of sensorsInTouch™ Sensors to all customers including, but not limited to, Intel and its Designated Customers; 5) if the Company becomes the subject of any proceeding under any bankruptcy, insolvency or liquidation law, the Company will assign all title and ownership to certain designated equipment (the “Equipment”)the Equipment to Intel; and 6) if the Company materially breaches the Amended Capacity License Agreement, which breach is not cured within 30 days after receipt of notice from Intel, the Company may choose to either (A) pre-pay the cap on the commission to Intel (less the total of all previously paid commissions) or (B) assign all title and ownership to the Equipment to Intel. The only remaining milestone of the Amended Capacity License Agreement is the capability to produce at least 1 million sensors units per month.

In the fourth quarter of 2015, the Company recorded a $5.0 million gain on relief of deferred revenue liability for discontinued operations. The $5 million was originally received in 2013 and was related to the technology in the Capacity License Agreement that was based on the InTouch™ Sensor technology which is no longer used. The InTouch™ Sensor technology was developed in the partnership with Kodak which was terminated in April 2015.

In March 2016, Intel, claiming that the XTouch sensors manufactured using the assets acquired from Atmel are the same as the InTouch™ Sensors jointly developed by the Company and Kodak that the Company has discontinued its joint development activities withabandoned and transferred to Kodak, alleged that the Company breached the Amended Capacity License Agreement by not paying commissions to develop, manufacture and market touch sensorsIntel based on the InTouch technology (Note 8),sales of the XTouch sensors which were subsequently developed using assets acquired and licensed from Atmel because Intel claims (and the Company disputes) that the XTouch sensors are somehow the same as the InTouch™Sensors that were abandoned and transferred to Kodak. No litigation or other legal proceeding has commenced on this claim. The Company is currentlyengaged in discussions with Intel regarding formulation of a mutually agreeable commercial relationship. While it is not possible to predict the Capacity License Agreement.  Thereforeoutcome of these discussions with certainty at the $5 millionpresent time, if the Company is unable to reach an acceptable relationship, it intends to vigorously contest any claim that Intel funded pursuant to the terms of the Capacity License Agreement to support the increase in production capacity for that technology has now been reclassified from deferred revenue to accrued liabilities in the accompanying balance sheet pending further discussion with Intel.

In June 2013, two purported class action complaints were filed in the United States District Court, Southern District of New York and the United States District Court, Southern District of Texas against the Company and our former CEO, former CFO, and former Chairman. The Southern District of New York complaint was voluntarily dismissed by plaintiff on July 2, 2013. The surviving complaint, with the caption Fitzpatrick, Charles J. v. Uni-Pixel, Inc., et. al. (Cause No. 4:13-cv-01649), alleged that we and our officers and directors violated the federal securities laws, specifically Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, by making purportedly false and misleading statements concerning our licensing agreements and product development (the “Class Action Litigation”). The complaint sought unspecified damages on behalf of a purported class of purchasers of our common stock during the period from December 7, 2012 to May 31, 2013. On July 25, 2014, the judge granted in part and denied in part our motion to dismiss the case, significantly limiting the claims remaining in the Class Action Litigation. On August 25, 2014, we filed an answer to the complaint. In November 2014, we entered into a memorandum of understanding to settle the Class Action Litigation. The proposed settlement would result in a payment of $2.35 million in cash to the settlement class, inclusive of fees and expenses. In addition, we agreed to issue $2.15 million in common stock to the settlement class with a range of shares of common stock between 358,333 shares and 430,000 shares, calculated by using the trailing 5 day average stock price from the date of Court approval of the settlement. On April 30, 2015, the Court approved the settlement of the Class Action Litigation on the terms set forth above. As a result, the Company issued 430,000 shares of common stock. The cash payment portion of the settlement of $2.35 million was paid from insurance proceeds. The common stock portion of this settlement, totaling $2.15 million is included in other expense and in current liabilities (Settlement of Class Action and Derivative Lawsuits) on the accompanying consolidated financial statements. Following the issuance of the common stock in May 2015, this amount was reclassified to Additional Paid In Capital and Common Stock.

On February 19, 2014, a shareholder derivative lawsuit, Jason F. Gerzseny v. Reed J. Killion, et. al., was filed in the 165th Judicial District in Harris County, Texas. On February 21, 2014, another shareholder derivative lawsuit, Luis Lim v. Reed J. Killion, et. al., was also filed in Harris County district court. Both complaints alleged various causes of action against certain of the Company’s current and former officers and directors, including claims for breach of fiduciary duty, corporate waste, insider selling, and unjust enrichment. On April 8, 2014, these derivative actions were consolidated into one action, captioned In re Uni-Pixel, Inc., Shareholder Derivative Litigation (Cause No. 2014-08251) (the “Shareholder Derivative Litigation”), and on September 9, 2014, plaintiff filed an amended consolidated complaint. On April 13, 2015, the Court approved the settlement of the Shareholder Derivative Litigation, which required the payment of $150,000 in cash and the issuance of 20,833 shares of the common stock. The cash payment portion of the settlement was paid from insurance proceeds. The common stock portion of the settlement, totaling $125,000, is included in other expense and in current liabilities (Settlement of Class Action and Derivative Lawsuits) on the accompanying consolidated financial statements. Following issuance of the common stock in April 2015, this amount was reclassified to Additional Paid In Capital and Common Stock.

On November 19, 2013, the Company learned that the Fort Worth Regional Office of the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) issued subpoenas concerning the Company’s agreements related to its InTouch sensors.our InTouch™ Sensors. The Company is cooperatingcooperated fully with the SEC regarding this non-public, fact-finding inquiry. The SEC has informedinquiry, and the Company that this inquiry should not be construed as an indication that any violationsU.S. District Court for the Southern District of law have occurred or that the SEC has any negative opinion of any person, entity or security. The Company does not intend to comment furtherTexas on this matter unless and until this matter is closed or further action is takenMarch 16, 2016 signed a final judgment on a complaint filed by the SEC pursuant to our consent (the “Final Judgment”). Without admitting or denying the allegations of the SEC’s complaint, we consented to the Final Judgment, which permanently enjoins us from violating Sections 10(b) and 13(b)(2)(A) and (B) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”), Rule 10b-5 of the SEC and Section 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933. The Final Judgment also permanently enjoins the filing with the SEC any periodic report pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act and Rules 13a-1, 13a-11, 13a-13 and 12b-20 of the SEC, which contains any untrue statement of material fact, or which omits to state a material fact necessary in order to make the statements made, in the Company’s judgment, merits further commentlight of the circumstances under which they were made, not misleading, or public disclosure.

(1) $20,000, within 14 days of entry of this Final Judgment;

(2) $20,000, within 104 days of entry of this Final Judgment;

(3) $30,000, within 194 days of entry of this Final Judgment;

(4) $45,000, within 284 days of entry of this Final Judgment;

(5) $60,000, within 374 days of entry of this Final Judgment;

(6) $70,000, within 464 days of entry of this Final Judgment;

(7) $80,000, within 554 days of entry of this Final Judgment;

(8) $80,000, within 644 days of entry of this Final Judgment;

(9) $80,000, within 734 days of entry of this Final Judgment;

(10) $85,000, within 824 days of entry of this Final Judgment;

(11) $90,000, within 914 days of entry of this Final Judgment;

(12) $90,000, within 1004 days of entry of this Final Judgment

The $750,000 settlement was recorded in other expense on the consolidated income statement and $115,000 in current liabilities and $635,000 in long-term liabilities in the consolidated balance sheet at December 31, 2015. As of September 30, 2015,March 31, the settlement is recorded in current liabilities of $155,000 and $575,000 in long-term liabilities. The Company paid $20,000 in March 2016.

Two former company executive officers faced related charges in the complaint filed by the SEC. The allegations of the SEC against these former executive officers include that they made more than $2 million in personal profits from selling their own shares of the Company’s common stock following disclosures regarding the Company’s agreement related to our InTouch™ Sensors. The Company’s Amended and Restated Bylaws contain provisions regarding indemnification and advancement of expenses actually and reasonably incurred by the Company’s officers in connection with civil, criminal, administrative or investigative matters provided that such officers acted in good faith and in a manner such officers reasonably believed to be in or not opposed to the best interests of the Company, does not haveand, with respect to any employment agreements outstanding.criminal action or proceeding, had no reason or cause to believe such officer’s conduct was unlawful. The Company has agreed that, ifadvancement of expenses is expressly conditioned upon receipt of an undertaking by the employment of Jeff Hawthorne, the Company’s Chief Executive Officer and President, is terminated as a result of a Change of Control, Mr. Hawthorne will receive a severance payment consisting of 2 times his annual base salary andofficer to repay all unvested options and restricted shares of stock shall become vested immediately.  The Company has also agreed that, if the employment of Christine Russell, the Company’s Chief Financial Officer, is terminated during the period that begins when negotiations for a Change in Control (as definedsuch amounts so advanced in the offer letter dated May 21, 2015) begin and ends onevent that it shall ultimately be determined that the nine month anniversary of the closing of the Change in Control transaction and such terminationofficer is not a termination for any other reason, (i) Ms. Russell will receive a severance payment equalentitled to one year of her annual salary, (ii) all unvested equity awards she may have received during her employment will, tobe indemnified by the extent that such awards are unvested, immediately vest and (iii) should she elect to continue to receive group health benefits under COBRA, for a period of 12 months following her termination the Company will pay the premiums for her continuation coverage, up to a maximum of $1,500 per month.

During the ninethree months ended September 30,March 31, 2016, (1) we issued 57,203 shares of common stock for three employees;

During the three months ended March 31, 2015, (1) we (1) issued 12,500 shares of common stock for cash in connection with the exercise of stock options; and (2) issued 105,017 shares of common stock to various directors, officers and employees as stock awards; (3) issued 20,833 shares of common stock for the settlement of the derivative lawsuit; (4) issued 430,000 shares of common stock for the settlement of the class action lawsuit; and (5) issued 6,548,225 shares of common stock to convert $8.1

Total compensation expense recognized for restricted stock was approximately $1.1$0.3 million and $0.9$0.4 million for the ninethree months ended September 30,March 31, 2016 and March 31, 2015, and September 30, 2014, respectively. The Company has recorded approximately $0.9$0.3 million of restricted stock expense in selling, general and administrative expenses and $0 in research and development expense for the three months ended March 31, 2016 and approximately $0.3 million of restricted stock expense in selling, general and administrative expenses and approximately $0.2$0.1 million in research and development expense for the ninethree months ended September 30, 2015 and approximately $0.5 million of restricted stock expense in selling, general and administrative expenses and approximately $0.4 million in research and development expense for the nine months ended September 30, 2014.

At September 30, 2015,March 31, 2016, there was $1.7$1.0 million of total unrecognized compensation cost related to non-vested shares of restricted stock which is expected to be recognized over a weighted-average period of 1.061.69 years. There were 105,01757,203 shares of restricted stock, net that became vested during the ninethree months ended September 30, 2015.

The Company has adopted four stock incentive plans: the 2005 Stock Incentive Plan, the 2007 Stock Incentive Plan, the 2010 Stock Incentive Plan and the 2011 Stock Incentive Plan (collectively, the “Stock Incentive Plans”). The Stock Incentive Plans allow for an aggregate of up to 3,900,0013,766,667 shares of our common stock to be awarded through incentive and non-qualified stock options, stock appreciation rights, restricted stock, performance shares and other types of awards.

Our Stock Incentive Plans are administered by our Board of Directors, which has the sole discretion to select participants who will receive the awards and to determine the type, size and terms of each award granted. As of September 30, 2015,March 31, 2016, there were 274,275469,022 shares available for issuance under the Stock Incentive Plans.

The following disclosures provide information regarding the Company’s stock-based compensation awards, all of which are classified as equity awards:

Total compensation expense recognized for options was approximately $1.3$0.2 million and $1.8$0.5 million for the ninethree months ended September 30,March 31, 2016 and March 31, 2015, and September 30, 2014, respectively. The Company has recorded approximately $0.5$0.1 million of stock compensation expense in selling, general and administrative expenses, approximately $0.8$0.1 million in research and development expense and approximately $46,000$18,000 in cost of goods sold for the ninethree months ended September 30, 2015March 31, 2016 and approximately $0.7$0.1 million of stock compensation expense in selling, general and administrative expenses and approximately $1.2$0.4 million in research and development expense for the ninethree months ended September 30, 2014.

A summary of the changes in the total stock options outstanding during the ninethree months ended September 30, 2015March 31, 2016 follows:

The fair valuesvalue of the Company’s options werewas estimated on the date of grant using the Black-Scholes valuation model with the following weighted-average assumptions:

At September 30, 2015,March 31, 2016, there was $1.1$0.6 million of total unrecognized compensation cost related to non-vested stock option awards which is expected to be recognized over a weighted-average period of 0.931.68 years. There were approximately 57,000,was an approximate 0.1 million, net, increase in the vested options that became vested during the ninethree months ended September 30, 2015.

As of September 30, 2015,March 31, 2016, the Company has 1,441,58011,070,360 common stock warrants outstanding with a weighted average exercise price of $8.81$1.59 per share. Information regarding outstanding warrants as of September 30, 2015March 31, 2016 is as follows:

Depreciation and amortization expense of property and equipment for the ninethree months ended September 30,March 31, 2016 and March 31, 2015 and September 30, 2014 was approximately $3.6$0.3 million and $4.5$1.6 million, respectively. Per

A summary of the Kodak agreement signed in Augustcomponents of inventory at March 31, 2016 and 2015 the Company had $10.2 million write-down in the assets and accumulated depreciation.

Concurrent with the consummation of the XTouch acquisition, on April 16, 2015 (the “Effective Date”), and pursuant to a Securities Purchase Agreement, we sold $15 million in Senior Secured Convertible Notes, (the “Notes”), together with warrants for the purchase of 1,151,121 shares of our common stock (the “Warrants”), to two accredited investors (the “Investors”). In addition, we sold an additional $0.5 million Convertible Note to one of these Investors in November 2015, and the Warrant issued to that Investor was adjusted for an additional 38,371 shares of common stock. The number of shares of common stock subject to the Warrants equaled 65% of the number of shares of common stock the Investors would receive if the Convertible Notes were converted at the Conversion Price (as defined below) on the trading day immediately prior to the Effective Date.

The Convertible Notes accrue simple interest at the rate of 9% per year (“Interest”). On November 23, 2015, the Interest was reduced to 4%. The Convertible Notes together with all accrued and unpaid Interest are due and payable on April 16, 2016 (the “Maturity Date”). The Investors may, at any time, elect to convert the Convertible Notes into shares of our common stock at the conversion price, subject to certain beneficial ownership limitations. The conversion price is the lesser of $8.47 per share (the “Conversion Price”), subject to adjustment as set forth in the Convertible Notes for stock splits, dividends, recapitalizations and similar events, which equaled 110% of the last closing price of our common stock prior to the execution and delivery of the Securities Purchase Agreement and 85% of the lowest closing sale price during the prior 30 trading day period.

Provided there has been no Equity Conditions Failure, as defined in the Convertible Notes, we will pay the Installment Amount, as defined in the Convertible Notes, by converting all or some of the Installment Amount into common stock (a “Company Conversion”). However, we may also, at our option, pay the Installment Amount by redeeming the Installment Amount in cash (a “Company Redemption”) or by any combination of a Company Conversion and a Company Redemption. Any Company Conversion occurs at a price which is the lower of the Conversion Price and 85% of the lower of the arithmetic average of the 4 lowest daily weighted average prices of the common stock during the prior 12 consecutive trading days and the closing sale price on the prior day.

The Investors have the right to accelerate payment on each monthly redemption date of up to two monthly redemption amounts upon written notice to us, and the Investors have the option to be paid such accelerated amount in common stock as if it were a Company Conversion. The Investors also have the right to defer payment of a monthly redemption amount.

Following an Event of Default, as defined in the Convertible Notes, the Investors may require us to redeem all or any portion of the Convertible Notes. The redemption amount may be paid in cash or with shares of our common stock, at the election of the Investor, at a price equal to the Event of Default Redemption Price, as defined in the Convertible Notes.

The Warrants havewhen issued had a five-year term and a per share exercise price of $9.63, subject to adjustment as set forth in the Warrants, which equaled 125% of the closing price of our common stock prior to the Effective Date. If, after the Effective Date, we issue or sell, or are deemed to have issued or sold, any shares of common stock (with the exception of certain Excluded Securities, as those are defined in the Warrants) for a consideration per share less than a price equal to the exercise price of the Warrants in effect immediately prior to such issue or sale (or deemed issuance or sale) (a “Dilutive Issuance”), then immediately after the Dilutive Issuance, (x) if the Dilutive Issuance occurs prior to the one year anniversary of the Effective Date, then the exercise price then in effect will be reduced to an amount equal to the product of (A) the exercise price in effect immediately prior to the Dilutive Issuance and (B) the quotient determined by dividing (1) the sum of (I) the product derived by multiplying the exercise price in effect immediately prior to the Dilutive Issuance and the number of Common Shares Deemed Outstanding (as defined in the Warrants) immediately prior to the Dilutive Issuance plus (II) the consideration, if any, received by us on such Dilutive Issuance, by (2) the product derived by multiplying (I) the exercise price in effect immediately prior to the Dilutive Issuance by (II) the number of Common Shares Deemed Outstanding immediately after the Dilutive Issuance and (y) if the Dilutive Issuance occurs after the one year anniversary of the Effective Date but within five years of the Effective Date, the exercise price then in effect will be reduced to an amount equal to the price of the shares of common stock issued in the Dilutive Issuance. The Warrants will be exercisable for cash, but if a prospectus covering the shares of common stock underlying the Warrants is not available, the Investors may exercise the Warrants using a cashless exercise provision. The Warrants may not be exercised if, after giving effect to the exercise, the Investor would beneficially own in excess of 4.99% or 9.99% of the outstanding shares of common stock, depending on the Investor. At the Investor’s option, the cap applicable to the exercise of the Warrants may be raised or lowered to any other percentage not in excess of 9.99%, except that any increase will only be effective upon 61-days’ prior notice to us.

As per the terms of the November 2015 equity transaction, the 1,189,492 Warrants were exchanged for new warrants to purchase an equivalent number of shares of common stock in the same form and same terms as the warrants issued in such equity transaction, including a repricing to $1.50 per share exercise price. The exercise price of the Warrants and the number of shares for which the Warrants are exercisable are subject to certain adjustments if the Company issues or sells additional shares of common stock or common stock equivalents at a price per share less than the exercise price then in effect, or without consideration. Notwithstanding the foregoing, there will be no adjustment to the exercise price of the Warrants or number of warrant shares issuable upon exercise in connection with the issuance of common stock upon Board of Director-approved employee benefit plans or upon the conversion, exercise or payment of certain outstanding, excluded securities.

Pursuant to a Pledge and Security Agreement (the “Security Agreement”) we entered into in favor of Hudson Bay Fund LP as Collateral Agent, the Convertible Notes are secured by a perfected first priority security interest in all of our assets and are senior in right of payment to all of our existing and future indebtedness, subject to Permitted Liens, as defined in the Convertible Notes. With the exception of Permitted Liens, we have agreed that we will not grant a security interest in our assets so long as the Convertible Notes remain outstanding and that we will not incur any new debt except for Permitted Indebtedness, as that term is defined in the Convertible Notes.

In conjunction with the issuance of the Convertible Notes and the Warrants, we entered into a Registration Rights Agreement pursuant to which we agreed to file a registration statement covering the sum of (i) 200% of the maximum number of shares underlying the Convertible Notes and (ii) the maximum number of shares underlying the Warrants (the “Registrable Securities”). We have agreed to keep any registration statement we file pursuant to the Registration Rights Agreement effective until the earlier of (i) the date as of which the Investors may sell all of the Registrable Securities covered by the Registration Statement without restriction or limitation pursuant to Rule 144 and without the requirement to be in compliance with Rule 144(c)(1) (or any successor thereto) or (ii) the date on which the Investors shall have sold all of the securities covered by such Registration Statement.

We were to use our reasonable best efforts to have the registration statement declared effective within 90 days after the Effective Date (the “Registration Statement Effective Date”). If we failed to register the Registrable Securities or the registration statement is not declared effective by the SEC before the Registration Statement Effective Date, or if on any day after the Registration Statement Effective Date, sales of the Registrable Securities required to be included on the Registration Statement cannot be made (collectively, a “Registration Default”), we will pay to each Investor an amount in cash equal to 1% of the aggregate Purchase Price (as that term is defined in the Securities Purchase Agreement) of the Investor’s Registrable Securities, whether or not the Registrable Securities were included in the registration statement, and 1% per month (or a portion thereof pro rata) that the Registration Default continues to exist. We are not required to make these payment if, when a Registration Default occurs, the Investors can freely sell our common stock pursuant to Rule 144 without restriction or limitation. We filed the registration statement within 90 days and therefore did not have to make any payments to the Investors.

Investors in the offering have the right to participate for no less than 35% of any future offering of our equity or equity equivalent securities until the second anniversary of the Effective Date.

We obtained shareholder approval within 60 days. As of September 30, 2015 we have not taken any additional monies related to the convertible note.

As additional security for repayment of the Convertible Notes, Uni-Pixel Displays, Inc. entered into to a Guarantee Agreement in favor of the Investors.

Cowen and Company, LLC acted as our financial advisor in the acquisition of the assets and as our placement agent in the financing transaction. We paid Cowen and Company, LLC approximately $1.7 million for these services.

The Company also determined there was a beneficial conversion feature (“BCF”) as a result of the intrinsic value between the effective exercise price and the market price at the time of conversion of $6.0 million. The BCF was included in additional paid in capital. As a result of the down-round protection on the warrants, they have been accounted for as a derivative liability upon issuance and at September 30,December 31, 2015.

As of September 30, 2015,March 31, 2016, both Investors werehad been issued andan aggregate of 6,548,22513,984,411 shares of common stock when the Investor had converted $8.1as of such date $11.6 million of principal and $0.3 million of interest into shares of commonscommon stock.

The following table summarizes the charges to interest, amortization and other expense, net for the ninethree months ended September 30, 2015:

Through the Patent License Agreement, Atmel licensed to Displays a non-sublicensable, worldwide, royalty-bearing license under its Touch Sensors patents to make or have made, use, offer for sale, sell, and import the Touch Sensors. In consideration for this license, Displays agreed to pay an annual royalty fee during the initial five year term of the license (the “Initial Term”) of the greater of $3.25 million or 3.33% of the total net sales (as defined in the Patent License Agreement) of the Touch Sensors during the Initial Term. Displays has the right to renew the license for a term of 10 years. If Displays exercises this right, the annual royalty fee will consist of 2.5% of the total net sales of the Touch Sensors until it reaches a total of $16.75 million, at which time no further annual royalty fees will be due. Upon execution of the Patent License Agreement, Displays paid a non-refundable, non-returnable prepayment of minimum annual royalty fees of $9.33 million (the “Royalty Prepayment”). The Royalty Prepayment will be applied to the annual royalty fees Displays owes under the Patent License Agreement. If, during the Initial Term, Displays’ cash balances as of the quarter end immediately prior to the date of the royalty period to which an unpaid annual royalty relates is less than $30 million, it may pay the annual royalty fee with a secured promissory note. If Displays decides to pay the annual royalty fee with a secured promissory note, the security interest will be subordinate to the security interest held by the Investors, as discussed in Note 6. Atmel has agreed that it will not enter into a license agreement for the licensed patents that is effective prior to the second anniversary of the Effective Date.

Through the IP License Agreement, Atmel licensed to Displays a non-sublicensable, worldwide, royalty-free license to the intellectual property necessary to make or have made, use, offer for sale, sell, and import the Touch Sensors. The term of the IP License Agreement is co-extensive with the term of the Patent License Agreement. Atmel has agreed that it will not enter into a license agreement for the licensed intellectual property that is effective prior to the second anniversary of the Effective Date.

As part of the asset acquisition, Displays also entered into leases with Atmel Corporation for Building 2 and Building 4, both of which are located at 1150 E. Cheyenne Mountain Boulevard, Colorado Springs, Colorado. The term of each lease is 18 months (the “Primary Lease Term”). The term of each lease may be extended for two additional six month periods. During the Primary Lease Term, the initial base rent for each of Building 2 and Building 4 will be $100 per month. During the first renewal term, the monthly base rent for Building 2 will be $5,625 and during the second renewal term the monthly base rent will be $8,437.50.$8,437. During the first renewal term, the monthly base rent for Building 4 will be $39,375 and during the second renewal term the monthly base rent will be $59,062.50.$59,062. Aside from the base rent, Displays is responsible for the payment of its share of operating expenses attributable to the buildings, real estate taxes attributable to the buildings, sales and personal property taxes, utilities and additional services provided by Atmel (as defined in the leases).

In conjunction with the above-described transaction, Displays and Atmel entered into a Transition Services Agreement. Pursuant to the Transition Services Agreement, Atmel agreed to provide the following services for the periods described: (i) quality assurance and failure analysis services for the XTouch Touch Sensors for a period of six months starting from the Effective Date, (ii) operations services for a period of 30 days starting from the Effective Date and (iii) other services, as those are defined in the Transition Services Agreement, for a period of three months starting from the Effective Date. In exchange for the services, Displays has agreed to pay reasonable and documented direct costs incurred by Atmel in performing the services together with actual out-of-pocket third-party expenses reasonably incurred by Atmel in providing the services. The service fees include, but are not limited to, (a) the actual out-of-pocket employment costs (base salary, payroll taxes and out-of-pocket medical benefits) for the individuals performing the services (based on the actual time expended by such individuals in performing the services), (b) costs of materials, (c) the actual out-of-pocket third-party expenses reasonably incurred by Atmel in providing the services, and (d) direct supervisory and management expenses incurred by Atmel in providing the services. On the Effective Date, we paid $0.4 million to Atmel and was applied against certain designated services.

On the Effective Date Displays entered into an FLT (Fine Line Technology) Patent License Agreement (the “CIT Patent License Agreement”), an FLT (Fine Line Technology) Intellectual Property License Agreement (the “CIT IP License Agreement”) and a Manufacturing and Technology Transfer Agreement (the “Manufacturing Agreement”) with CIT Technology Ltd. (“CIT”).

Through the CIT Patent License Agreement, CIT licensed to Displays a non-sublicensable, worldwide, royalty-bearing license under its fine line technology (“FLT”) patents to make or have made, use, offer for sale, sell, and import licensed FLT products (the “Licensed Products”), which are defined as capacitive touch sensors comprising fine lines of copper metal printed on flexible plastic film. In consideration for this license, Displays agreed to pay an annual royalty fee during the initial five year term of the license (the “Initial License Term”) of the greater of $1.65 million or 1.67% of the total net sales (as defined in the CIT Patent License Agreement) of the Licensed Products during the Initial License Term. Displays has the right to renew the license for a term of 10 years. If Displays exercises this right, the annual royalty fee will consist of 1.67% of the total net sales of the Licensed Products until it reaches a total of $8.25 million, at which time no further annual royalty fees will be due. Further, the total royalty fees payable for the initial 5 year term and the subsequent 10 year term is capped at $30 million. Upon execution of the CIT Patent License Agreement, Displays paid a non-refundable, non-returnable prepayment of minimum annual royalty fees of $4.67 million (the “CIT Royalty Prepayment”). The CIT Royalty Prepayment will be applied to the annual royalty fees Displays owes under the CIT Patent License Agreement. If, during the Initial License Term, Displays’ cash balances as of the quarter end immediately prior to the date of the royalty period to which an unpaid annual royalty relates is less than $30 million, Displays may pay the annual royalty fee with a secured promissory note. If Displays decides to pay the annual royalty fee with a secured promissory note, the security interest will be subordinate to the security interest held by the Investors, as discussed in Note 6. CIT has agreed that it will not enter into a license agreement for the licensed patents as they relate to the Licensed Products that is effective prior to the second anniversary of the Effective Date.

Through the CIT IP License Agreement, CIT licensed to Displays a non-sublicensable, worldwide, royalty-free license to the intellectual property necessary to make or have made, use, offer for sale, sell, and import the Licensed Products. The term of the CIT IP License Agreement is co-extensive with the term of the CIT Patent License Agreement. CIT has agreed that it will not enter into a license agreement for the licensed intellectual property as it relates to the Licensed Products that is effective prior to the second anniversary of the Effective Date.

The Manufacturing Agreement which hashad a term of six months, where Displays has agreed that for a period of 16 consecutive weeks it will order, on a weekly basis, 11,500 linear meters of coated film manufactured by CIT at a cost of $7.90 per linear meter (the “Initial Purchase Order”). Following this order, CIT will use all reasonable efforts to procure production materials formeter. The agreement had been completed and the coated film based on 11,500 linear meters per week for the remainder of the term. If Displays requires a lower volume of coated film, it has agreed to purchase all of CIT’s inventory of materials at cost,process was transferred to the extent the inventory represents the unused quantity of such materials by reference to the six month forecast. Displays extended the term of the Manufacturing Agreement to October 31, 2015. Any requirement for monthly quantities different from those set out in the Initial Purchase Order will be subject to CIT’s prior written agreement.

As described in Note 6, the derivative liability is related to warrants to purchase 1,151,121 shares of common stock issued by the Company in connection with our Convertible Note of $15.0 million in April 22,2015, which included a down-round protection on the warrants. The original exercise price of these warrants were $9.63 per share and they expire in April 2020. With the additional $0.5 million in Convertible Note issued in November 2015, the Company, through its wholly owned subsidiary, Uni-Pixel Displays, Inc. (“Displays”), exercised its right to terminate that certain Manufacturing Facility Installation and Supply Agreement dated April 15, 2013 (the “Supply Agreement”), whichoriginal Warrant was entered into by Displays and Eastman Kodak Company (“Kodak”). The termadjusted for an additional 38,371 shares of the Supply Agreement was to end on December 31, 2017.