Revenue was $28.2 million for the three months ended June 30, 2013, compared to $23.7 million for the three months ended June 30, 2012. The increase in revenue of $4.6 million, or 19%, was primarily due to a $3.4 million, or 26%, increase in procedure revenue, a $48,000, or 1%, increase in system revenue and a $1.1 million, or 46%, increase in service revenue.
The $3.4 million increase in procedure revenue was attributable to an increase in the number of MAKOplasty procedures performed during the three months ended June 30, 2013 to 3,274 as compared to 2,590 during the three months ended June 30, 2012. The 26% increase in MAKOplasty procedures performed was primarily due to the continued adoption of MAKOplasty, driven by the growth of our commercial installed base of RIO systems and relatively consistent average monthly utilization per commercial site.
The $48,000 increase in system revenue was attributable to the recognition of $8.2 million of revenue from nine commercial unit sales of our RIO system, including one international commercial sale, five of which included MAKOplasty THA applications, and three MAKOplasty THA application sales to existing customers during the three months ended June 30, 2013, as compared to the recognition of $8.2 million of revenue from nine commercial unit sales of our RIO system, including one international commercial sale, seven of which included MAKOplasty THA applications, and two MAKOplasty THA application sales to existing customers during the three months ended June 30, 2012. System revenue for the three months ended June 30, 2013 was reduced by $1.1 million for the deferral of system revenue primarily related to our service obligation for maintenance, as compared to the deferral of $1.4 million during the three months ended June 30, 2012. Revenues deferred for the service obligation will be recognized in service revenue over the period maintenance services are performed, which is generally twelve months. In addition to the nine commercial unit sales of our RIO system recognized during the three months ended June 30, 2013, we had one international commercial unit sale of our RIO system, including a MAKOplasty THA application, for which we deferred revenue recognition as all revenue recognition criteria consistent with the Company’s revenue recognition policy had not been satisfied as of June 30, 2013.
Table of Contents
The $1.1 million increase in service revenue was attributable to an increase in customer sites under maintenance contracts as our installed base of RIO systems increases.
Revenue was $53.0 million for the six months ended June 30, 2013, compared to $43.3 million for the six months ended June 30, 2012. The increase in revenue of $9.7 million, or 22%, was primarily due to a $6.6 million, or 27%, increase in procedure revenue, a $676,000, or 5%, increase in system revenue and a $2.4 million, or 51%, increase in service revenue.
The $6.6 million increase in procedure revenue was attributable to an increase in the number of MAKOplasty procedures performed during the six months ended June 30, 2013 to 6,262 as compared to 4,887 during the six months ended June 30, 2012. The 28% increase in MAKOplasty procedures performed was primarily due to the continued adoption of MAKOplasty, driven by the growth of our commercial installed base of RIO systems and relatively consistent average monthly utilization per commercial site.
The $676,000 increase in system revenue was attributable to the recognition of $14.7 million of revenue from fourteen commercial unit sales of our RIO system, including one international commercial sale, ten of which included MAKOplasty THA applications, four MAKOplasty THA application sales to existing customers, and recognition of two previously deferred international commercial RIO system sales during the six months ended June 30, 2013, as compared to the recognition of $14.1 million of revenue from fourteen commercial unit sales of our RIO system, including one international commercial sale, eleven of which included MAKOplasty THA applications, and eleven MAKOplasty THA application sales to existing customers during the six months ended June 30, 2012. System revenue for the six months ended June 30, 2013 was reduced by $1.8 million for the deferral of system revenue primarily related to our service obligation for maintenance, as compared to the deferral of $2.1 million during the six months ended June 30, 2012. Revenues deferred for the service obligation will be recognized in service revenue over the period maintenance services are performed, which is generally twelve months. In addition to the fourteen commercial unit sales of our RIO system recognized during the six months ended June 30, 2013, we had one international commercial unit sale of our RIO system, including a MAKOplasty THA application, for which we deferred revenue recognition as all revenue recognition criteria consistent with the Company’s revenue recognition policy had not been satisfied as of June 30, 2013.
The $2.4 million increase in service revenue was attributable to an increase in customer sites under maintenance contracts as our installed base of RIO systems increases.
We expect our revenue to continue to increase in future periods as the number of MAKOplasty procedures performed increases and the installed base of RIO systems covered under maintenance contracts increases.
Cost of Revenue and Gross Profit
Cost of revenue was $11.4 million for the three months ended June 30, 2013, compared to $6.4 million for the three months ended June 30, 2012. The increase in cost of revenue of $5.1 million, or 80%, was primarily due to an increase in MAKOplasty procedures performed during the three months ended June 30, 2013 as compared to the three months ended June 30, 2012 and a $4.1 million inventory valuation adjustment for excess hip implant inventory as discussed below during the three months ended June 30, 2013.
During the six months ended June 30, 2013, we increased our inventory reserve by $4.4 million, or $(0.09) per basic and diluted share, of which $4.1 million was incurred in the second quarter of 2013, for excess hip implant inventory related to our RESTORIS Trinity Cup and RESTORIS Metafix Femoral Stem implant system and our RESTORIS Z implant system. The valuation adjustment was primarily due to the greater than anticipated adoption of our RESTORIS PST Cup and Tapered Femoral Stem hip implant system, or RESTORIS PST implant system, which we commercially launched in October 2012, as a percent of total THA procedures. In the second quarter of 2013, over 75% of our THA procedure volume was performed with our RESTORIS PST implant system and we expect that it will continue to grow in the future as a percentage of total THA procedures. The inventory valuation adjustment was charged to cost of revenue – procedures in the condensed statement of operations. Depending on demand for our products, technical obsolescence and new product introductions, future valuation adjustments of our inventory may occur.
21
Table of Contents
Cost of revenue was $18.0 million for the six months ended June 30, 2013, compared to $11.9 million for the six months ended June 30, 2012. The increase in cost of revenue of $6.1 million, or 52%, was primarily due to an increase in MAKOplasty procedures performed and a $4.4 million inventory valuation adjustment for excess hip implant inventory as discussed above during the six months ended June 30, 2013 as compared to the six months ended June 30, 2012.
We expect our cost of revenue to continue to increase in future periods as the number of MAKOplasty procedures performed increases and the installed base of RIO systems covered under maintenance contracts increases.
Gross profit for the three months ended June 30, 2013 was $16.8 million compared to a gross profit of $17.3 million for the three months ended June 30, 2012. Total gross margin for the three months ended June 30, 2013 was 59%, including a 51% margin on procedure revenue, a 62% margin on system revenue and an 91% margin on service revenue compared to a gross margin of 73% for the three months ended June 30, 2012, including a 76% margin on procedure revenue, a 66% margin on system revenue and a 82% margin on service revenue. The decrease in margin on procedure revenue was primarily attributable to the $4.1 million inventory valuation adjustment for excess hip implant inventory as discussed above. The margin on system revenue for the three months ended June 30, 2013 was relatively consistent with the margin on RIO system revenue for the three months ended June 30, 2012. The increase in margin on service revenue was primarily attributable to the timing of preventive maintenance costs.
Gross profit for the six months ended June 30, 2013 was $35.1 million compared to a gross profit of $31.5 million for the six months ended June 30, 2012. Total gross margin for the six months ended June 30, 2013 was 66%, including a 63% margin on procedure revenue, a 62% margin on system revenue and an 89% margin on service revenue compared to a gross margin of 73% for the six months ended June 30, 2012, including a 77% margin on procedure revenue, a 63% margin on system revenue and a 82% margin on service revenue. The decrease in margin on procedure revenue was primarily attributable to the $4.4 million inventory valuation adjustment for excess hip implant inventory as discussed above. The margin on system revenue for the six months ended June 30, 2013 was consistent with the margin on RIO system revenue for the six months ended June 30, 2012. The increase in margin on service revenue was primarily attributable to the timing of preventive maintenance costs.
Selling, General and Administrative
Selling, general and administrative expense for the three and six months ended June 30, 2013 were $21.8 million and $42.0 million, respectively, compared to $18.8 million and $38.2 million for the three and six months ended June 30, 2012. The increase of $3.1 million, or 16%, for the three months ended June 30, 2013 and $3.8 million, or 10%, for the six months ended June 30, 2013, was primarily due to the impact of the new medical device excise tax, which became effective January 1, 2013, and an increase in legal costs associated with asserting our intellectual property rights. Selling, general and administrative expense for the three and six months ended June 30, 2013 was also impacted by an asset impairment charge for excess hip implant instruments as discussed below. Selling, general and administrative expense for the three and six months ended June 30, 2013 included $2.3 million and $4.7 million, respectively, of stock-based compensation expense compared to $2.8 million and $5.0 million for the three and six months ended June 30, 2012. We expect our selling, general and administrative expenses to continue to increase due to our planned increase in the number of activities necessary to support the sales and marketing efforts associated with the growing commercialization of our products. In addition, we expect to incur additional costs associated with securing and protecting our intellectual property rights as necessary to support our current and future product offerings.
During the six months ended June 30, 2013, we incurred asset impairments of $2.3 million, or $(0.05) per basic and diluted share, of which $2.0 million was incurred in the second quarter of 2013. The impairment charge was primarily related to excess hip implant instruments associated with our to our RESTORIS Trinity Cup and RESTORIS Metafix Femoral Stem implant system and our RESTORIS Z implant system. The impairment charge was primarily due to greater than anticipated adoption of our RESTORIS PST implant system as a percent of total THA procedures as discussed in “Cost of Revenue and Gross Profit” above. The $2.3 million impairment charge was charged to selling, general and administrative expense in the condensed statement of operations.
22
Table of Contents
Research and Development
Research and development expense for the three and six months ended June 30, 2013 was $5.6 million and $10.6 million, respectively, compared to $5.2 million and $10.1 million for the three and six months ended June 30, 2012. The increase of $389,000, or 7%, for the three months ended June 30, 2013 and $548,000, or 5%, for the six months ended June 30, 2013 were primarily due to an increase in research and development activities associated with on-going development of our RIO system and applications, our RESTORIS family of implant systems, and potential future products. We expect our research and development expense to increase as we continue to expand our research and development activities, including the support of existing products and the research and development of potential future products.
Depreciation and Amortization
Depreciation and amortization expense for the three and six months ended June 30, 2013 was $2.1 million and $4.1 million, respectively, compared to $1.8 million and $3.5 million for the three and six months ended June 30, 2012. The increase of $332,000, or 19%, for the three months ended June 30, 2013 and $692,000, or 20%, for the six months ended June 30, 2013 was primarily due to an increase in depreciation of property and equipment as a result of purchases made during 2012 and 2013 for implant instrumentation to support the growth in our installed base of RIO systems and purchases to support the growth in our business and the expansion of our training facilities in 2012 to support such growth.
Other income (expense), net
Other income (expense), net for the three and six months ended June 30, 2013 was $6.9 million of expense and $7.6 million of expense, respectively, compared to $33,000 of expense and $25,000 of revenue, respectively, for the three and six months ended June 30, 2012. The increase in expense of $6.9 million and $7.6 million for the three and six months ended June 30, 2013 was primarily due to non-cash expense recognized on the change in fair value of our Financing Commitment as discussed in Note 8 to the Financial Statements.
Income Taxes
No federal income taxes were recognized for the three and six months ended June 30, 2013 and 2012, due to net operating losses in each period. State and local income taxes for the three and six months ended June 30, 2013 was $0 and $15,000, respectively, compared to $14,000 and $39,000 for the three and six months ended June 30, 2012. Income taxes recognized to date have not been significant due to net operating losses we have incurred in each period since our inception. In addition, no deferred income taxes were recorded for the three and six months ended June 30, 2013 and 2012, as all income tax benefits were fully offset by a valuation allowance against our net deferred income tax assets.
Liquidity and Capital Resources
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
(in thousands) | | Six Months Ended June 30, |
| | 2013 | | 2012 | | Change | | % of Change |
Net cash used in operating activities | | $ | (7,224 | ) | $ | (22,083 | ) | $ | 14,859 | | | (67 | %) |
Net cash provided by (used in) investing activities | | | (35,965 | ) | | 15,234 | | | (51,199 | ) | | (336 | %) |
Net cash provided by financing activities | | | 1,401 | | | 2,848 | | | (1,447 | ) | | (51 | %) |
Net decrease in cash and cash equivalents | | $ | (41,788 | ) | $ | (4,001 | ) | $ | (37,787 | ) | | 944 | % |
We have incurred net losses and negative cash flow from operating activities for each period since our inception in November 2004. As of June 30, 2013, we had an accumulated deficit of $250.9 million and have financed our net losses principally through the sale of our equity securities.
23
Table of Contents
As of June 30, 2013, we had $62.9 million in cash, cash equivalents and available-for-sale investments. Our cash and investments classified as available-for-sale are held in a variety of interest bearing instruments, including notes and bonds from U.S. government agencies and certificates of deposit.
On May 7, 2012, we entered into a Facility Agreement with affiliates of Deerfield Management Company, L.P., or Deerfield, as amended on June 28, 2012, pursuant to which Deerfield agreed to loan us up to $50 million, subject to the terms and conditions set forth in the Facility Agreement. Under the terms of the agreement, we had the flexibility, but were not required, to draw down on the Facility Agreement in $10 million increments at any time until May 15, 2013. No funds were drawn under the Facility Agreement which expired on May 15, 2013. We were required to pay Deerfield a fee of $1.0 million if no funds were drawn under the Facility Agreement, which we paid in the second quarter of 2013.
Net Cash Used in Operating Activities
Net cash used in operating activities primarily reflects the net loss for those periods, which was reduced in part by non-cash items, such as depreciation and amortization, stock-based compensation, non-cash changes under the credit facility, and the inventory valuation adjustment and loss on asset impairment discussed in “Results of Operations for the three and six months ended June 30, 2013 and 2012” above. Net cash used in operating activities was also affected by changes in operating assets and liabilities. Included in changes in operating assets and liabilities for the six months ended June 30, 2013 are $2.9 million of increases to inventory necessitated by increased sales of implants and disposable products and the commercial launch of our RESTORIS PST implant system for use with our MAKOplasty THA application. Included in changes in operating assets and liabilities for the six months ended June 30, 2012 are $11.4 million of increases to inventory necessitated by the anticipated increased sales of implants and disposable products and the commercial launch of our MAKOplasty THA application, $2.7 million of increases to prepaid and other current assets and $4.7 million of decreases to accrued compensation and employee benefits. These were partially offset by $3.8 million of increases to accounts payable and $2.4 million of increases to deferred revenue primarily related to the first year warranty and maintenance services provided by MAKO.
Net Cash Provided by (Used in) Investing Activities
Net cash used by investing activities for the six months ended June 30, 2013 was primarily attributable to the purchase of investments of $42.9 million and purchases of property and equipment of $3.4 million primarily associated with implant instrumentation to support the commercialization of our total hip implant systems and computer equipment and software to support the growth in our business, which was partially offset by proceeds of $11.3 million from sales and maturities of investments. Net cash provided by investing activities for the six months ended June 30, 2012 was primarily attributable to proceeds of $22.3 million from sales and maturities of investments, which was partially offset by the purchase of investments of $3.2 million and purchases of property and equipment of $3.8 million primarily associated with implant instrumentation to support the commercialization of our total hip implant systems and the growth in our business.
Net Cash Provided by Financing Activities
Net cash provided by our financing activities for the six months ended June 30, 2013 and 2012 was primarily attributable to proceeds received under our employee stock purchase plan of $874,000 and $844,000, respectively, and to proceeds received on the exercise of stock options and warrants of $1.6 million and $2.2 million, respectively, which was partially offset by a $1.0 million cash payment to Deerfield under our credit facility for the six months ended June 30, 2013.
Operating Capital and Capital Expenditure Requirements
To date, we have not achieved profitability. We anticipate that we will continue to incur substantial net losses for approximately the next two years as we expand our sales and marketing capabilities in the orthopedic products market, continue to commercialize our RIO system and MAKOplasty applications, including our MAKOplasty THA application, and our implant systems, continue research and development of existing and future products, and continue development of the corporate infrastructure required to sell and market our products and support operations. We also expect to experience increased cash requirements for inventory and property and equipment in conjunction with the continued commercialization of our RIO system and implant systems, and introducing new and potential future applications including our MAKO-branded RESTORIS PST implant system, which we commercially released in October 2012.
24
Table of Contents
In executing our current business plan, we believe our cash, cash equivalents and investment balances as of June 30, 2013, and interest income we earn on these balances, will be sufficient to meet our anticipated cash requirements for at least the next twelve months. To the extent our available cash, cash equivalents and investment balances are insufficient to satisfy our operating requirements, we will need to seek additional sources of funds, including selling additional equity, debt or other securities, or modify our current business plan. The sale of additional equity or convertible debt securities may result in dilution to our current stockholders. If we raise additional funds through the issuance of debt securities, these securities may have rights senior to those of our common stock and could contain covenants that could restrict our operations and ability to issue dividends. We may also require additional capital beyond our currently forecasted amounts. Any required additional capital, whether forecasted or not, may not be available on reasonable terms, or at all. If we are unable to obtain additional financing, we may be required to reduce the scope of, delay or eliminate some or all of our planned research, development and commercialization activities, which could materially harm our business and results of operations.
Because of the numerous risks and uncertainties associated with the development of medical devices and the current economic situation, we are unable to estimate the exact amounts of capital outlays and operating expenditures necessary to complete the development of our products and successfully deliver commercial products to the market. Our future capital requirements will depend on many factors, including but not limited to the following:
| |
• | the revenue generated by sales of our current and future products; |
| |
• | the expenses we incur in selling and marketing our products and supporting our growth; |
| |
• | the costs and timing of domestic and foreign regulatory clearance or approvals for new products or upgrades or changes to our products; |
| |
• | the expenses we incur in complying with domestic or foreign regulatory requirements imposed on medical device companies; |
| |
• | the rate of progress, cost and success or failure of on-going development activities; |
| |
• | the emergence of competing or complementary technological developments; |
| |
• | the expenses we may incur in finding additional or alternate sources of supply for any single source suppliers in the event such suppliers are no longer able to fulfill our supply requirements; |
| |
• | the costs of filing, prosecuting, defending and enforcing any patent or license claims and other intellectual property rights, or participating in litigation related activities; |
| |
• | the terms and timing of any collaborative, licensing, or other arrangements that we may establish; |
| |
• | the impact of the United States healthcare reform legislation enacted in March 2010 on hospital spending, reimbursement, and the taxing of medical device companies; |
25
Table of Contents
| |
• | the acquisition of businesses, products and technologies; and |
| |
• | general economic conditions and interest rates. |
Contractual Obligations
At June 30, 2013, we were committed to make future purchases for inventory and other items that occur in the ordinary course of business under various purchase arrangements with fixed purchase provisions aggregating $7.3 million.
We have a contingent obligation to make one-time payments of up to $5.6 million in lieu of paying ongoing, periodic royalty payments under certain royalty bearing arrangements related to our intellectual property rights. If incurred, these contingent obligations would be recognized in the second half of 2014.
In June 2013, we entered into a License Agreement for certain exclusive intellectual property rights which requires minimum payments of approximately $1.0 million annually. The initial term of the License Agreement ends in June 2016 and may be renewed for additional periods.
Other than as described above and scheduled payments through June 30, 2013, there have been no significant changes in our contractual obligations during the six months ended June 30, 2013 as compared to the contractual obligations described in our Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2012.
Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements
We do not have any off-balance sheet arrangements.
ITEM 3. QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK.
There have been no material changes from the quantitative and qualitative disclosures about market risk disclosed in item 7A of Part II of our Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2012.
ITEM 4. CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES.
Disclosure Controls and Procedures.
In accordance with Rule 13a-15(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, or the Exchange Act, our management evaluated, with the participation of our chief executive officer and chief financial officer, or the Certifying Officers, the effectiveness of the design and operation of our disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Rule 13a-15(e) under the Exchange Act) as of June 30, 2013. Based upon their evaluation of these disclosure controls and procedures, our Certifying Officers concluded that the disclosure controls and procedures were effective as of June 30, 2013 to provide reasonable assurance that information required to be disclosed by us in the reports we file or submit under the Exchange Act is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time period specified in the rules and forms of the Securities and Exchange Commission, and to provide reasonable assurance that information required to be disclosed by us in the reports we file or submit under the Exchange Act is accumulated and communicated to our management, including our principal executive and principal financial officers, as appropriate, to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure.
We believe that a controls system, no matter how well designed and operated, is based in part upon certain assumptions about the likelihood of future events, and therefore can only provide reasonable, not absolute, assurance that the objectives of the controls system are met, and no evaluation of controls can provide absolute assurance that all control issues and instances of fraud, if any, within a company have been detected.
26
Table of Contents
Changes in Internal Control over Financial Reporting.
There have been no changes in our internal control over financial reporting during the quarter ended June 30, 2013 that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting.
27
Table of Contents
PART II
OTHER INFORMATION
ITEM 1. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS
In May 2012, two shareholder complaints were filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida against the Company and certain of its officers and directors as purported class actions on behalf of all purchasers of the Company’s common stock between January 9, 2012 and May 7, 2012. The cases were filed under the captionsJames H. Harrison, Jr. v. MAKO Surgical Corp. et al., No. 12-cv-60875 andBrian Parker v. MAKO Surgical Corp. et al., No. 12-cv-60954. The court consolidated theHarrisonandParkercomplaints under the captionIn re MAKO Surgical Corp. Securities Litigation, No. 12-60875-CIV-Cohn/Seltzer, and appointed Oklahoma Firefighters Pension and Retirement System and Baltimore County Employees’ Retirement System to serve as co-lead plaintiffs. In September 2012, the co-lead plaintiffs filed an amended complaint that expanded the proposed class period through July 9, 2012. The amended complaint alleged the Company, its Chief Executive Officer, President and Chairman, Maurice R. Ferré, M.D., and its Chief Financial Officer, Fritz L. LaPorte, violated federal securities laws by making misrepresentations and omissions during the proposed class period about the Company’s financial guidance for 2012 that artificially inflated the Company’s stock price. The amended complaint sought an unspecified amount of compensatory damages, interest, attorneys’ and expert fees, and costs. In October 2012, the Company, Dr. Ferré, and Mr. LaPorte filed a motion to dismiss the amended complaint in its entirety. On May 15, 2013, the court granted the motion to dismiss and found that the challenged statements in the amended complaint were not material misrepresentations or omissions but rather were forward-looking statements accompanied by meaningful cautionary language and thus not actionable. In its order, the court gave co-lead plaintiffs an opportunity to request leave to file a second amended complaint, which they declined. Accordingly, on June 14, 2013 the court closed the case and entered final judgment for the Company, Dr. Ferré and Mr. LaPorte. No appeal was filed and the time for filing an appeal has expired.
Additionally, in June and July 2012, four shareholder derivative complaints were filed against the Company, as nominal defendant, and its board of directors, as well as Dr. Ferré and, in two cases, Mr. LaPorte. Those complaints allege that the Company’s directors and certain officers violated their fiduciary duties, wasted corporate assets and were unjustly enriched by allowing the Company to make misrepresentations or omissions that exposed the Company to theHarrison andParker class actions and damaged the Company’s goodwill.
Two of the derivative actions were filed in the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit in and for Broward County, Florida and have been consolidated under the captionIn re MAKO Surgical Corporation Shareholder Derivative Litigation, No. 12-cv-16221. By order dated July 3, 2012, the court stayedIn re MAKO Surgical Corporation Shareholder Derivative Litigation pending a ruling on the motion to dismiss filed in theIn re MAKO Surgical Corp. Securities Litigation class action. On June 20, 2013, this case was voluntarily dismissed.
The two other derivative actions were filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida under the captionsTodd Deehl v. Ferré et al., No. 12-cv-61238 andRobert Bardagy v. Ferré et al., No. 12-cv-61380. On August 29, 2012, the court consolidated these two federal cases under the captionIn re MAKO Surgical Corp. Derivative Litig.¸ Case No. 12-61238-CIV-COHN-SELTZER and approved the filing of a consolidated complaint. The consolidated complaint alleged that the Company’s directors and two of its officers breached fiduciary duties, wasted corporate assets and were unjustly enriched by issuing, or allowing the issuance of, annual sales guidance for 2012 that they allegedly knew lacked any reasonable basis. The consolidated complaint sought an unspecified amount of damages, attorneys’ and expert fees, costs and corporate reforms to allegedly improve the Company’s corporate governance and internal procedures. On October 31, 2012, the Company and the individual defendants each filed motions to dismiss the consolidated complaint. On June 6, 2013, the court granted the Company’s motion to dismiss on the grounds that the plaintiff failed to comply with applicable law by serving a pre-suit demand on the Company’s board of directors or by adequately alleging that doing so would be futile. The court gave the plaintiff until June 27, 2013 to file a motion seeking leave to file a second amended complaint.
28
Table of Contents
On June 14, 2013, the plaintiff in the federal court derivative action made a demand on the Company to inspect its books and records. Because the Company believed the plaintiff had not stated a proper purpose for the requested inspection, it denied this inspection request.
On June 27, 2013, the plaintiff filed a motion requesting sixty additional days to file a motion for leave to amend the consolidated complaint, alleging the intent to pursue a legal action in Delaware or Florida in order to inspect the Company’s books and records for the purpose of establishing futility of a pre-suit demand. To date, Plaintiff has not filed any action regarding his purported inspection rights. On July 15, 2013, the Company and the individual defendants filed a motion opposing the plaintiff’s request for additional time. The court has not ruled on the motion.
In addition, on October 31, 2012, the Company’s board of directors appointed a demand review committee, consisting of two independent directors, to review, investigate, and prepare a report and recommendation to the full board regarding the claims raised in the consolidated federal derivative action, as well as a demand made on the board by two Company shareholders, Amy and Charles Miller, challenging the Company’s sales projections for 2012 and statements about its future financial outlook and demanding that the board of directors file suit on behalf of the Company. On November 19, 2012, upon recommendation of the demand review committee, the Company and the individual defendants filed a joint motion to stay the consolidated federal derivative action pending the completion of the demand review committee’s investigation. When the court dismissed the federal derivative action, it also denied the motion to stay as moot. The demand review committee has not yet completed its review, investigation and report.
ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS.
There have been no material changes in our risk factors from those disclosed in our Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2012.
ITEM 2. UNREGISTERED SALES OF EQUITY SECURITIES AND USE OF PROCEEDS.
| |
(c) | Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities |
The following table summarizes the repurchases of the Company’s common stock during the three month period ended June 30, 2013:
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Total Number of Shares Purchased(1) | | Average Price Paid per Share(1) | | Total Number of Shares Purchased as Part of Publicly Announced Plans or Programs | | Maximum Dollar Value of Shares that May Yet be Purchased Under the Plans or Programs | |
Period | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
April 1 to 30, 2013 | | | — | | $ | — | | | — | | $ | — | |
May 1 to 31, 2013 | | | 5,244 | | | 10.82 | | | — | | | — | |
June 1 to 30, 2013 | | | — | | | — | | | — | | | — | |
| | | 5,244 | | $ | 10.82 | | | — | | $ | — | |
| |
(1) | Represents the surrender of shares of common stock to the Company to satisfy the tax withholding obligations associated with the vesting of restricted stock. |
ITEM 3. DEFAULTS UPON SENIOR SECURITIES
None
ITEM 4. MINE SAFETY DISCLOSURES
Not applicable
29
Table of Contents
ITEM 5. OTHER INFORMATION.
Not applicable
ITEM 6. EXHIBITS.
| | |
Exhibit No. | | Description |
| | |
10.1 | | Employment Agreement between the Company and Ian. R. Dawson, effective May 31, 2013 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the Company’s Form 8-K as filed on June 4, 2013) |
10.2 | | First Amendment to Amended and Restated Employment Agreement between the Company and Ivan Delevic, effective May 31, 2013 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.3 to the Company’s Form 8-K as filed on June 4, 2013) |
31.1 | | Certification of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) of the Exchange Act |
31.2 | | Certification of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) of the Exchange Act |
32.1 | | Certification of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350 |
32.2 | | Certification of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350 |
101 | | The following materials from MAKO Surgical Corp.’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2013, formatted in XBRL (Extensible Business Reporting Language): (i) Condensed Balance Sheets, (ii) Condensed Statements of Operations, (iii) Condensed Statements of Cash Flows, and (iv) Notes to Condensed Financial Statements |
30
Table of Contents
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned thereunto duly authorized.
| | |
| MAKO Surgical Corp. |
| | |
Date: August 1, 2013 | By: | /s/ Fritz L. LaPorte |
| | Fritz L. LaPorte |
| | Senior Vice President of Finance and Administration, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer |
| | (Principal Financial Officer and Authorized Signatory) |
31
Table of Contents
EXHIBIT INDEX
| | |
Exhibit No. | | Description |
| | |
10.1 | | Employment Agreement between the Company and Ian. R. Dawson, effective May 31, 2013 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the Company’s Form 8-K as filed on June 4, 2013) |
10.2 | | First Amendment to Amended and Restated Employment Agreement between the Company and Ivan Delevic, effective May 31, 2013 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.3 to the Company’s Form 8-K as filed on June 4, 2013) |
31.1 | | Certification of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) of the Exchange Act |
31.2 | | Certification of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) of the Exchange Act |
32.1 | | Certification of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350 |
32.2 | | Certification of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350 |
101 | | The following materials from MAKO Surgical Corp.’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2013, formatted in XBRL (Extensible Business Reporting Language): (i) Condensed Balance Sheets, (ii) Condensed Statements of Operations, (iii) Condensed Statements of Cash Flows, and (iv) Notes to Condensed Financial Statements |
32