Check-Cap Ltd.
Check-Cap Building
29 Abba Hushi Avenue
P.O. Box 1271
Isfiya, 3009000
Israel
_____________________
PROXY STATEMENT
ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING OF SHAREHOLDERS
This Proxy Statement is being furnished in connection with the solicitation of proxies on behalf of the board of directors of Check-Cap Ltd. (“we,” “us,” “our,” “Check-Cap” or the “Company”) to be voted at an Annual General Meeting of Shareholders (the “Meeting”), and at any adjournment thereof, pursuant to the accompanying Notice of Annual General Meeting of Shareholders. The Meeting will be held on Monday, December 18, 2023 at 2:00 p.m. (Israel time) at the offices of Check-Cap’s Israeli legal counsel, FISCHER (FBC & Co.), located at 146 Menachem Begin Rd., Tel Aviv 6492103, Israel.
Purpose of the Annual General Meeting
At the Meeting, shareholders will be asked to consider and vote on the following proposals:
| 1. | to approve, pursuant to Section 320 of the Israeli Companies Law 5759-1999 (the “Companies Law”), the merger of Capstone Merger Ltd., an Israeli company (“Israeli Merger Sub”) and a wholly-owned subsidiary of Capstone Dental Pubco, Inc., a Delaware corporation (“New Parent”) with and into Check-Cap, with Check-Cap surviving and becoming a wholly-owned subsidiary of New Parent, including approval of: (x) the Business Combination Agreement, dated as of August 16, 2023, by and among New Parent, Keystone Dental Holdings, Inc., a Delaware corporation (“Keystone”), Check-Cap, U.S. Merger Sub (as defined below) and Israeli Merger Sub (the “Business Combination Agreement”), pursuant to which, Capstone Merger Sub Corp., a Delaware corporation (“U.S. Merger Sub”, and, together with Israeli Merger Sub, the “Merger Subs”), and wholly-owned subsidiary of New Parent, will merge (the “U.S. Merger”) with and into Keystone, with Keystone surviving as a wholly-owned subsidiary of New Parent, and Israeli Merger Sub will merge (the “Israeli Merger,” and collectively with the U.S. Merger and the other transactions described in the Business Combination Agreement, the “Business Combination”) with and into Check-Cap, with Check-Cap surviving (which we refer to for the periods at and after the effective time of the Israeli Merger as the “Israeli Surviving Company”), and each of U.S. Merger Sub and Israeli Merger Sub will cease to exist, and (y) all other transactions and arrangements to which Check-Cap is a party contemplated by the Business Combination Agreement, a copy of which was attached as Exhibit 99.1 to the Company’s Form 6-K furnished to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) on August 17, 2023 (we refer to this proposal collectively as the “Business Combination Proposal”). If the Israeli Merger is completed, you will be entitled to receive one share of common stock, par value $0.01 per share, of New Parent (which we refer to as Parent Common Stock) in exchange for each ordinary share, par value NIS 48.00 per share, of Check-Cap (which we refer to as an Ordinary Share) that you hold as of immediately prior to the effective time of the Israeli Merger (as may be adjusted if Proposal 4 is approved at the Meeting and a reverse share split of the Company’s ordinary shares is implemented); |
| 2. | to ratify and approve the reappointment of Brightman Almagor Zohar & Co., Certified Public Accountants, a firm in the Deloitte Global Network, as our independent auditor for the year ending December 31, 2023 and for such additional period until our next annual general meeting of shareholders; |
| 3. | to approve and restate the Company’s Compensation Policy for Executive Officers and Directors; |
| 4. | to authorize our Board of Directors to determine to effect a reverse share split of the Company’s ordinary shares within a range of 1 for 2 to 1 for 5, the exact ratio to be determined by our Board of Directors, to be effective on a date to be determined by our Board of Directors and announced by the Company, and to approve the amendment of our Articles of Association to reflect any such reverse share split (if implemented); |
| 5. | to elect five directors as members of the Company’s board of directors (the “Check-Cap Board”) out of the following ten director nominees proposed for election at the Meeting, each to serve until our next annual general meeting of shareholders and until their respective successors are duly elected and qualified: Steven Hanley, Clara Ezed, Dr. Mary Jo Gorman, XiangQian (XQ) Lin, Yuval Yanai (collectively, the “Company Director Nominees”), Idan Ben Shitrit, Avital Shafran, Jordan Lipton, William Vozzolo and Lilian Malczewski (collectively, the “Shareholder Director Nominees” and together with the Company Director Nominees, the “Director Nominees”) (we refer to this proposal collectively as the “Director Election Proposal”); |
| 6. | to approve the cash remuneration to be paid to the Director Nominees who are elected to serve as directors at the Meeting under Proposal 5; and |
| 7. | to approve the Company’s entry into indemnification and exculpation agreements and to provide directors’ and officers’ liability insurance coverage to a Shareholder Director Nominee who is elected to serve at the Meeting under Proposal 5 (if any). |
In addition, at the Meeting, representatives of our management will be available to review and discuss with shareholders the Company’s financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2022.
We are not aware of any other matters that will come before the Meeting. If any other matters properly come before the Meeting, the persons designated as proxies intend to vote on such matters in accordance with the judgment and recommendation of the Check-Cap Board.
Recommendation of the Board of Directors
OUR BOARD OF DIRECTORS RECOMMENDS THAT YOU VOTE “FOR” THE APPROVAL OF THE BUSINESS COMBINATION PROPOSAL, “FOR” THE ELECTION OF EACH OF THE COMPANY DIRECTOR NOMINEES NOMINATED IN PROPOSAL 5, “AGAINST” THE ELECTION OF EACH OF THE SHAREHOLDER DIRECTOR NOMINEES NOMINATED IN PROPOSAL 5, AND “FOR” ALL OTHER PROPOSALS, OTHER THAN PROPOSAL 7 WITH RESPECT TO WHICH THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS IS NOT EXPRESSING AN OPINION.
Who Can Vote
You are entitled to notice of, and to vote in person or by proxy at, the Meeting, if you are a holder of record of our ordinary shares as of the close of business on November 10, 2023. You are also entitled to notice of the Meeting and to vote at the Meeting if you held ordinary shares through a bank, broker or other nominee that is one of our shareholders of record at the close of business on November 10, 2023, or which appeared in the participant listing of a securities depository on that date. See below “How You Can Vote.”
How You Can Vote
| • | Voting in Person. If you are a shareholder of record, i.e., your shares are registered directly in your name with our transfer agent, American Stock Transfer & Trust Company LLC, you may attend and vote in person at the Meeting. If you are a beneficial owner of shares registered in the name of your broker, bank, trustee or nominee (i.e., your shares are held in “street name”), you are also invited to attend the Meeting; however, to vote in person at the Meeting as a beneficial owner, you must first obtain a “legal proxy” from your broker, bank, trustee or nominee that holds your shares giving you the right to vote the shares at the Meeting. |
| • | Voting by mailing your Proxy. If you are a shareholder of record, these proxy materials are being sent directly to you by our transfer agent. You may submit your proxy by completing, signing and mailing the enclosed proxy card that was mailed to you in the enclosed, postage-paid envelope. If your ordinary shares are held in “street name,” these proxy materials are being forwarded to you by the broker, trustee or nominee or an agent hired by the broker, trustee or nominee. Please follow the voting instructions provided to you by your broker, trustee or nominee. Proxies must be received by our transfer agent or at our registered office in Israel no later than forty-eight (48) hours prior to the designated time for the Meeting. Proxies received by our transfer agent or at our registered office in Israel during the forty-eight (48) hours preceding the designated time for the Meeting will be presented to the Chairman of the Meeting and, at his discretion, may be voted as specified in the instructions included in such proxies. |
| • | Voting by Internet or mobile. If you are a shareholder of record, you can submit a proxy over the Internet by logging on to the website listed on the enclosed proxy card, entering your control number located on the enclosed proxy card and submitting a proxy by following the on-screen prompts. You may also access Internet voting via your smartphone or tablet by scanning the QR image that appears on your proxy card. If you hold shares in “street name,” you may vote those shares by accessing the Internet website address specified in the instructions provided by your broker, bank, trustee or nominee. Submitting an Internet or mobile proxy will not affect your right to vote at the Meeting should you decide to attend the Meeting. |
Change or Revocation of Proxy
If you are a shareholder of record, you may change your vote at any time prior to the exercise of authority granted in the proxy by delivering a written notice of revocation to our Chief Financial Officer, by granting a new proxy bearing a later date, or by voting again via the Internet or your smartphone or tablet, or by attending the Meeting and voting in person. Attendance at the Meeting will not cause your previously granted proxy to be revoked unless you specifically so request.
If your shares are held in “street name,” you may change your vote by submitting new voting instructions to your broker, bank, trustee or nominee or, if you have obtained a legal proxy from your broker, bank, trustee or nominee giving you the right to vote your shares, by attending the Meeting and voting in person.
Quorum
The presence, in person or by proxy, of two or more shareholders holding or representing, in the aggregate, at least twenty-five percent (25%) of our company’s voting rights will constitute a quorum at the Meeting. No business will be considered or determined at the Meeting unless the requisite quorum is present within half an hour from the time designated for the Meeting. If within half an hour from the time designated for the Meeting a quorum is not present, the Meeting will stand adjourned to the day, time and place as the Chairman of the Meeting shall determine. At least two shareholders present, in person or by proxy, will constitute a quorum at the adjourned meeting.
Abstentions and broker non-votes will be counted towards the quorum. Broker non-votes occur for a particular proposal when brokers that hold their customers’ shares in street name sign and submit proxies for such shares (in which case they are considered present for purposes of determining presence of a quorum at the Meeting) but do not have the discretionary authority to vote on such particular proposal. This occurs when brokers have not received any voting instructions from their customers, in which case the brokers, as the holders of record, are permitted to vote on “routine” matters, but not on non-routine matters. The proposals described in this Proxy Statement are non-routine matters except for Proposal 2 (relating to the appointment of Check-Cap’s independent registered public accounting firm); therefore, it is important that you vote your shares, either by proxy or in person at the Meeting.
Unsigned or unreturned proxies, including those not returned by banks, brokers, or other record holders, will not be counted for quorum or voting purposes.
Vote Required for Approval of the Proposals
Your vote is very important, regardless of the number of ordinary shares that you own. Each ordinary share entitles the holder to one vote.
Proposal 1 - the Business Combination Proposal: The affirmative vote of the holders of a majority of the ordinary shares represented at the Meeting, in person or by proxy, and entitled to vote and voting on the matter, is required to approve the Business Combination Proposal, excluding abstentions and broker non-votes and excluding any ordinary shares that are held by (a) New Parent, Keystone, Israeli Merger Sub or by any person holding directly or indirectly 25% or more of the voting power or the right to appoint 25% or more of the directors of New Parent, Keystone or Israeli Merger Sub, (b) a person or entity acting on behalf of New Parent, Keystone or Israeli Merger Sub or a person or entity described in clause (a) above, or (c) a family member of an individual contemplated by either of clause (a) or (b) above, or an entity controlled by New Parent, Keystone, Israeli Merger Sub or any of the foregoing (each, a “New Parent Affiliate”). Each shareholder voting on Proposal 1 is required to indicate on the proxy card or, if voting in person at the Meeting, inform us prior to voting on the matter at the Meeting, whether or not the shareholder is a New Parent Affiliate. Otherwise, the shareholder’s vote will not be counted for the purposes of the proposal.
Proposals 2, 3, 4, 6 and 7: The affirmative vote of the holders of a majority of the ordinary shares represented at the Meeting, in person or by proxy, and entitled to vote and voting on the matter, is required to approve each of Proposals 2, 3, 4, 6 and 7.
In addition to the foregoing majority requirement, the approval of Proposal 3 is also subject to the fulfillment of one of the following additional voting requirements (the “Special Majority”): (i) the shares voting in favor of the proposal (excluding abstentions) include at least a majority of the shares voted by shareholders who are not controlling shareholders and shareholders who do not have a personal interest in the proposal, or (ii) the total number of shares voted against the proposal by shareholders who are not controlling shareholders and shareholders who do not have a personal interest in the proposal does not exceed two-percent (2%) of our outstanding voting rights.
We are unaware of any shareholder that would be deemed to be a controlling shareholder of the Company (within the meaning of Israeli law) for purposes of the calculation of the Special Majority. A shareholder who signs and returns a proxy card will be deemed to be confirming that such shareholder, and any related party of such shareholder, is not a controlling shareholder for purposes of Proposal 3. If you believe that you, or a related party of yours, may be deemed to be a controlling shareholder and you wish to participate in the vote on Proposal 3, you should contact Ms. Mira Rosenzweig, our Chief Financial Officer (mira.rosenzweig@check-cap.com or +972-4-8303415).
Each shareholder voting on Proposal 3 is required to indicate on the proxy card or, if voting in person at the Meeting, inform us prior to voting on the matter at the Meeting, whether or not the shareholder has a personal interest in Proposal 3. Otherwise, the shareholder’s vote will not be counted for the purposes of the proposal. Under the Companies Law, a “personal interest” of a shareholder in an act or transaction of a company (i) includes a personal interest of (a) any spouse, sibling, parent, grandparent or descendant of the shareholder, any descendant, sibling or parent of a spouse of the shareholder and the spouse of any of the foregoing; and (b) a company with respect to which the shareholder (or any of the foregoing relatives of the shareholder) serves as a director or chief executive officer, owns at least 5% of the outstanding shares or voting rights or has the right to appoint one or more directors or the chief executive officer; and (ii) excludes a personal interest arising solely from the ownership of shares. Under the Companies Law, in the case of a person voting by proxy, “personal interest” includes the personal interest of either the proxy holder or the shareholder granting the proxy, whether or not the proxy holder has discretion how to vote.
Proposal 5 - the Director Election Proposal: Each Director Nominee shall be voted on separately. Five out of the ten Director Nominees shall be elected by the affirmative vote of the holders of the majority of the ordinary shares represented at the Meeting, in person or by proxy, entitled to vote and voting on the matter, by way of a plurality of votes cast (i.e., the five Director Nominees who receive an affirmative majority vote and who also receive the largest number of ”FOR” votes will be elected). If you mark a vote with respect to less than five Director Nominees in Proposal 5, your shares will only be voted FOR those Director Nominees you have so marked. If you vote for more than five Director Nominees, all of your votes on Proposal 5 will be invalid and will not be counted.
In tabulating the voting results for the proposal, shares that constitute broker non-votes and abstentions are not considered votes cast on the proposal, and will have no effect on the vote. Unsigned or unreturned proxies, including those not returned by banks, brokers, or other record holders, will not be counted for voting purposes. Therefore, it is important for a shareholder that holds ordinary shares through a bank or broker to instruct its bank or broker how to vote its shares if the shareholder wants its shares to count towards the vote tally for the proposal.
Cost of Soliciting Votes for the Meeting
We will bear the cost of soliciting proxies from our shareholders. Proxies will be solicited by mail and may also be solicited in person, by telephone or electronic communication, by our directors, officers and employees. We will reimburse brokerage houses and other custodians, nominees and fiduciaries for their expenses in accordance with the regulations of the SEC concerning the sending of proxies and proxy material to the beneficial owners of our shares. In addition, we have engaged Alliance Advisors, LLC, to assist in the solicitation of proxies and provide related advice and informational support, for services fees, plus customary disbursements, which are not expected to exceed $145,000 in total.
BENEFICIAL OWNERSHIP
OF ORDINARY SHARES BY CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS
The following table sets forth information with respect to the beneficial ownership of Check-Cap’s ordinary shares as of November 15, 2023, by (i) each person or entity known to Check-Cap to beneficially own more than 5% of Check-Cap’s outstanding ordinary shares; (ii) each of Check-Cap’s current executive officers and directors individually; and (iii) all of Check-Cap’s current executive officers and directors as a group.
The percentage of beneficial ownership of Check-Cap’s ordinary shares is based on 5,850,364 ordinary shares, NIS 48.00 par value per share outstanding as of November 15, 2023. Beneficial ownership is determined in accordance with the rules of the SEC and generally includes voting power or investment power with respect to securities. All ordinary shares subject to options currently exercisable or exercisable into ordinary shares within 60 days of November 15, 2023, and underlying RSUs that shall vest within 60 days of November 15, 2023, are deemed to be outstanding and beneficially owned by the shareholder holding such options or RSUs for the purpose of computing the number of shares beneficially owned by such shareholder. Such shares are also deemed outstanding for purposes of computing the percentage ownership of the person holding the option or RSU. They are not, however, deemed to be outstanding and beneficially owned for the purpose of computing the percentage ownership of any other shareholder.
This table is based upon publicly available information and information supplied by officers and directors and is believed to be accurate. Except as indicated in footnotes to this table, Check-Cap believes that the shareholders named in this table have sole voting and investment power with respect to all shares shown to be beneficially owned by them, based on information available to Check-Cap or provided to Check-Cap by such shareholders. Unless otherwise noted below, each shareholder’s address is: c/o 29 Abba Hushi Avenue, P.O. Box 1271, Isfiya, 3009000, Mount Carmel, Israel.
| | Ordinary Shares Beneficially Owned | |
| | Number | | | Percent | |
5% or Greater Shareholders | | | | | | |
Vijay Ramanathan (1) | | | 360,000 | | | | 6.1 | %* |
Symetryx Corporation (2) | | | 300,864 | | | | 5.1 | %* |
Directors and Executive Officers | | | | | | | | |
Alex Ovadia (3) | | | 25,452 | | | | ** |
|
Mira Rosenzweig (4) | | | 4,854 | | | | ** |
|
Boaz Shpigelman (5) | | | 5,783 | | | | ** |
|
Steven Hanley (6) | | | 7,075 | | | | ** |
|
Clara Ezed (7) | | | 7,031 | | | | ** |
|
Mary Jo Gorman (8) | | | 7,069 | | | | ** |
|
XiangQian (XQ) Lin (9) | | | 7,972 | | | | * |
|
Yuval Yanai (10) | | | 7,075 | | | | ** |
|
All directors and executive officers as a group (8 persons) (11) | | | |
| | | 1.2 | % |
* | Following the consummation of the Business Combination, the shareholder will own less than 1% of New Parent’s outstanding Common Stock.
|
** | Represents beneficial ownership of less than 1% of Check-Cap’s outstanding ordinary shares. |
(1) | Based solely upon, and qualified in its entirety with reference to, Schedule 13G filed with the SEC on September 22, 2023. The address of the reporting person is 20 Adelaide St E, Suite 1105, Toronto, ON M5C 2T6, Canada.
|
(2) | Based solely upon, and qualified in its entirety with reference to, Schedule 13D filed with the SEC on September 29, 2023, as amended on October 30, 2023 and November 14, 2023. The address of the reporting person is 2828 Bathurst Street, Suite 400, Toronto, Canada M6B3A7.
|
(3) | Includes (i) 752 outstanding ordinary shares, and (ii) 24,700 ordinary shares subject to options currently exercisable or options and/or RSUs that will become exercisable or vested within 60 days of the date of this table.
|
(4) | Includes (i) 797 outstanding ordinary shares, and (ii) 4,057 ordinary shares subject to options currently exercisable or options and/or RSUs that will become exercisable or vested within 60 days of the date of this table.
|
(5) | Includes (i) 1,228 outstanding ordinary shares, and (ii) 4,555 ordinary shares subject to options currently exercisable or options and/or RSUs that will become exercisable or vested within 60 days of the date of this table.
|
(6) | Includes (i) 255 outstanding ordinary shares, and (ii) 6,820 ordinary shares subject to options currently exercisable or options and/or RSUs that will become exercisable or vested within 60 days of the date of this table.
|
(7) | Includes (i) 211 outstanding ordinary shares, and (ii) 6,820 ordinary shares subject to options currently exercisable or options and/or RSUs that will become exercisable or vested within 60 days of the date of this table.
|
(8) | Includes (i) 249 outstanding ordinary shares, and (ii) 6,820 ordinary shares subject to options currently exercisable or options and/or RSUs that will become exercisable or vested within 60 days of the date of this table.
|
(9) | Includes (i) 950 outstanding ordinary shares, and (ii) 7,022 ordinary shares subject to options currently exercisable or options and/or RSUs that will become exercisable or vested within 60 days of the date of this table.
|
(10) | Includes (i) 255 outstanding ordinary shares, and (ii) 6,820 ordinary shares subject to options currently exercisable or options and/or RSUs that will become exercisable or vested within 60 days of the date of this table.
|
(11) | See footnotes (3)-(10). |
As of November 15, 2023, based upon information provided to us by Check-Cap’s transfer agent in the United States and other information reasonably available to Check-Cap, Check-Cap had 51 holders of record of Check-Cap’s ordinary shares in the United States. Such holders of record held, as of that date, 99.89% of Check-Cap’s outstanding ordinary shares. The number of record holders is not representative of the number of beneficial holders of Check-Cap’s ordinary shares, as 99.83% of Check-Cap’s outstanding ordinary shares are recorded in the name of Cede & Co. as nominee for the Depository Trust Company, in whose name all shares held in “street name” are held in the United States.
None of Check-Cap’s shareholders have voting rights different from the voting rights of other shareholders. To the best of Check-Cap’s knowledge, Check-Cap’s ordinary shares are not owned or controlled, directly or indirectly, by another corporation or by any government. Check-Cap is not aware of any arrangement that may, at a subsequent date, result in a change of control of Check-Cap.
To Check-Cap’s knowledge, other than as disclosed in the table above, Check-Cap’s other filings with the SEC and this Proxy Statement, there has been no significant change in the percentage ownership held by any major shareholder since January 1, 2020.
Board Diversity Matrix
The table below provides certain information with respect to the diversity of our Board of Directors as of the date hereof.
Country of Principal Executive Offices | Israel |
Foreign Private Issuer: | Yes |
Disclosure Prohibited Under Home Country Law | No |
Total Number of Directors | 5 |
| Female | Male | Non-Binary | Did Not Disclose Gender |
Part I: Gender Identity | | | | |
Directors | 2 | 2 | - | 1 |
Part II: Demographic Background |
Underrepresented Individual in Home Country Jurisdiction | 1 |
LGBTQ+ | - |
Did Not Disclose Demographic Background | 3 |
Executive Officer Compensation
For information regarding the compensation incurred by us in relation to our five most highly compensated office holders (within the meaning of the Companies Law) for the year ended December 31, 2022, see “Item 6B. Directors, Senior Management and Employees — Compensation of Directors and Executive Officers” of our annual report on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2022, filed with the SEC on March 31, 2023.
If you have questions about this Proxy Statement or the Meeting, please contact Alliance Advisors, LLC, our proxy solicitor:
Alliance Advisors, LLC
1-833-970-2875
1-973-604-4443 (International)
CHEK@allianceadvisors.com
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page Number
The following questions and answers are intended to briefly address some commonly asked questions regarding the Business Combination, the Business Combination Agreement, the shares of New Parent Common Stock to be issued pursuant to the Business Combination and the Meeting. These questions and answers may not address all questions that may be important to you as a shareholder of Check-Cap. Please refer to the exhibits to this Proxy Statement and the documents referred to in the accompanying prospectus filed by New Parent with the SEC as part of a registration statement on Form S-4 on November 13, 2023 in connection with the transactions contemplated under the Business Combination Agreement (the “New Parent Prospectus”), a copy of which is attached to this proxy statement as Annex A, which you should read carefully and in their entirety.
Q: Why am I receiving this Proxy Statement?
A: Check-Cap is soliciting proxies for an Annual General Meeting of Shareholders of the Company, which we refer to as the Meeting, which will be held at the offices of Check-Cap’s Israeli legal counsel, FISCHER (FBC & Co.), located at 146 Menachem Begin Rd., Tel Aviv 6492103, Israel. You are receiving this Proxy Statement because you owned ordinary shares of the Company, par value NIS 48.00 per share, which we refer to as Ordinary Shares, on November 10, 2023, which is the record date for the Meeting, and such ownership entitles you to vote at the Meeting. By use of a proxy, you can vote your shares whether or not you attend the Meeting. This Proxy Statement describes the matters on which we would like you to vote: (i) the approval of the Business Combination Proposal; (ii) the ratification and approval of the reappointment of Brightman Almagor Zohar & Co., Certified Public Accountants, a firm in the Deloitte Global Network, for the year ending December 31, 2023 and for such additional period until our next annual general meeting of shareholders; (iii) the approval and restatement of the Company’s Compensation Policy for Executive Officers and Directors; (iv) the authorization of our Board of Directors to determine to effect a reverse share split of the Company’s ordinary shares within a range of 1 for 2 to 1 for 5, the exact ratio to be determined by the Board of Directors, to be effective on a date to be determined by our Board of Directors and announced by the Company, and to approve the amendment of our Articles of Association to reflect any such reverse share split (if implemented), (v) the election of five directors as members of the Check-Cap Board under the Director Election Proposal, (vi) the approval of the cash remuneration to be paid to the Director Nominees who are elected to serve as directors at the Meeting; and (vii) the approval of the Company’s entry into indemnification and exculpation agreements and to provide directors’ and officers’ liability insurance coverage to any Shareholder Director Nominee who is elected to serve at the Meeting, and provides information on these matters so that you can make an informed decision. This Proxy Statement also references various disclosures that appear in the New Parent Prospectus and that do not appear (or that appear more briefly) in this Proxy Statement. It is important that you carefully review the New Parent Prospectus, which contains, among other important matters, information concerning New Parent, Keystone, Keystone’s business, the Merger, the Business Combination Agreement and your prospective rights as a shareholder of New Parent following the Merger.
Q: What am I being asked to vote on?
A: You are being asked to vote on the approval of (i) the Business Combination Proposal; (ii) the ratification and approval of the reappointment of Brightman Almagor Zohar & Co., Certified Public Accountants, a firm in the Deloitte Global Network, for the year ending December 31, 2023 and for such additional period until our next annual general meeting of shareholders; (iii) the approval and restatement of the Company’s Compensation Policy for Executive Officers and Directors; (iv) the approval of a reverse share split of the Company’s ordinary shares within a range of 1 for 2 to 1 for 5, the exact ratio to be determined by further action of the Board of Directors and announced by the Company, and to amend our Articles of Association accordingly; (v) the election of five directors as members of the Check-Cap Board under the Director Election Proposal; (vi) the approval of the cash remuneration to be paid to the Director Nominees who are elected to serve as directors at the Meeting; and (vii) the approval of the Company’s entry into indemnification and exculpation agreements and to provide directors’ and officers’ liability insurance coverage to any Shareholder Director Nominee who is elected to serve at the Meeting.
Q: Who is Keystone?
A: Following the date of the closing of the Business Combination (the “Closing”), the sole business and operations of New Parent will be the business and operations of Keystone Dental, Inc. (which we refer to as Keystone Dental), a wholly-owned subsidiary of Keystone, and its subsidiaries, and New Parent will continue to run and operate such business and operations. Keystone is a global commercial stage medical technology company focused on providing end-to-end solutions for dental practitioners and tooth replacement procedures. Its comprehensive portfolio of tooth replacement solutions is comprised of implants, prosthetic solutions, biomaterial solutions and digital dentistry capabilities. Keystone develops and offers technologies it believes are effective and advanced technologies for dental practitioners, dental laboratories and patients at an attractive price, driving significant value to both practitioners and patients. Keystone believes its products offer strong value proposition for dental practitioners through its innovative products with high quality manufacturing and design at various pricing options. Keystone has premium and high touch customer service with an experienced direct sales force and third-party distributors, simplifying a complex procedure through the digitalization of workflow for multiple clinical indications. Based on Keystone’s estimates, it believes its digital capabilities for dental practices have the potential to reduce the number of office visits and decrease patient chair time per procedure. Keystone’s various brands, including Genesis, Prima, Paltop, Molaris, Dyna, Osteon and Nexus iOS, are widely known amongst dental practitioners. For more information, see the section entitled “Information about Keystone– Keystone Business” in the New Parent Prospectus.
Q: What are the approval requirements at the Meeting?
A: All holders of record of Check-Cap ordinary shares as of the close of business on November 10, 2023, the record date for the Meeting, will be entitled to vote at the Meeting. Each holder of Check-Cap ordinary shares will be entitled to cast one vote on each matter properly brought before the Meeting for each Check-Cap ordinary share that such holder owned of record as of the record date.
Proposal 1 - the Business Combination Proposal: The approval of the Business Combination Proposal requires the affirmative vote of the holders of a majority of the Check-Cap ordinary shares present, in person or by proxy, and entitled to vote and voting on the matter at the Meeting, excluding abstentions and broker non-votes (and other invalid votes) and excluding any Check-Cap ordinary shares that are held by (a) New Parent, Keystone, Israeli Merger Sub or by any person holding directly or indirectly 25% or more of the voting power or the right to appoint 25% or more of the directors of New Parent, Keystone or Israeli Merger Sub, (b) a person or entity acting on behalf of New Parent, Keystone or Israeli Merger Sub or a person or entity described in clause (a) above, or (c) a family member of an individual contemplated by either of clause (a) or (b) above, or an entity controlled by New Parent, Keystone, Israeli Merger Sub or any of the foregoing. Each shareholder voting on Proposal 1 is required to indicate on the proxy card or, if voting in person at the Meeting, inform us prior to voting on the matter at the Meeting, whether or not the shareholder is a New Parent Affiliate. Otherwise, the shareholder’s vote will not be counted for the purposes of the proposal.
Proposals 2, 3, 4, 6 and 7: The approval of each of Proposals 2, 3, 4, 6 and 7 requires the affirmative vote of the holders of a majority of the ordinary shares represented at the Meeting, in person or by proxy, and entitled to vote and voting on the matter.
In addition to the foregoing majority requirement, the approval of Proposal 3 is also subject to the fulfillment of the Special Majority (see above “Vote Required for Approval of the Proposals”). Each shareholder voting on Proposal 3 is required to indicate on the proxy card or, if voting in person at the Meeting, inform us prior to voting on the matter at the Meeting, whether or not the shareholder has a personal interest in Proposal 3. Otherwise, the shareholder’s vote will not be counted for the purposes of the proposal.
Proposal 5 - the Director Election Proposal: Each Director Nominee shall be voted on separately. Five out of the ten Director Nominees shall be elected by the affirmative vote of the holders of the majority of the ordinary shares represented at the Meeting, in person or by proxy, entitled to vote and voting on the matter, by way of a plurality of votes cast (i.e., the five Director Nominees who receive an affirmative majority vote and who also receive the largest number of ”FOR” votes will be elected). If you mark a vote with respect to less than five Director Nominees in Proposal 5, your shares will only be voted FOR those Director Nominees you have so marked. If you vote for more than five Director Nominees, all of your votes on Proposal 5 will be invalid and will not be counted.
Q: Is consummation of the Business Combination contingent upon any future approval by the holders of New Parent Common Stock?
A: Following the execution of the Business Combination Agreement, Keystone obtained all approvals and consents of the holders of its capital stock necessary to effect the U.S. Merger, the Business Combination and the other transactions contemplated by the Business Combination Agreement. No further approvals by the holders of Keystone capital stock are required to consummate the Business Combination or the other transactions contemplated by the Business Combination Agreement other than those already obtained.
Q: Has the board of directors of each of Keystone and Check-Cap approved the Business Combination?
A: Yes. The board of directors of each Keystone and Check-Cap have approved the Business Combination and recommended that the stockholders of Keystone and the shareholders of Check-Cap, respectively, vote in favor of the Business Combination, vote to adopt the Business Combination Agreement and approve the Business Combination and related transactions. As noted above, Keystone has already obtained all approvals and consents of the holders of its capital stock necessary to effect the Business Combination and the other transactions contemplated by the Business Combination Agreement.
Q: Did the Check-Cap Board obtain a third-party valuation or fairness opinion in determining whether or not to proceed with the Business Combination?
A: Yes. In considering the Business Combination, the Check-Cap Board engaged Ladenburg Thalmann & Co. Inc. (which we refer to as Ladenburg) as its financial advisor. Ladenburg evaluated the fairness of the Business Combination, from a financial point of view, to the holders of Check-Cap ordinary shares, and provided a written opinion to the Check-Cap Board. The full text of the written opinion of Ladenburg is attached as Annex B to the New Parent Prospectus, and a summary of the opinion is set forth in “The Business Combination–Opinion of Check-Cap’s Financial Advisors—Fairness Opinion of Ladenburg” below.
In addition, the Check-Cap Board engaged Variance Economic Consulting Ltd. (which we refer to as Variance) as an additional financial advisor. Variance evaluated the fairness of the Exchange Ratio (as defined below), from a financial point of view, to the holders of Check-Cap ordinary shares, and provided a written opinion to the Check-Cap Board. The full text of the written opinion of Variance is attached as Annex C to the New Parent Prospectus, and a summary of the opinion is set forth in “The Business Combination—Opinion of Check-Cap’s Financial Advisors—Fairness Opinion of Variance” below.
Q: What are the conditions to the consummation of the Business Combination?
A: In addition to approval of the Business Combination by Check-Cap shareholders as described above, completion of the Business Combination is subject to the satisfaction of a number of other conditions, including (among others): authorization for listing of New Parent Common Stock on the Nasdaq Capital Market; the effectiveness of the Registration Statement of which the New Parent Prospectus forms a part; the accuracy of representations and warranties under the Business Combination Agreement (subject to certain materiality exceptions); the absence of a material adverse effect on Keystone or Check-Cap; Keystone’s and Check-Cap’s performance of their respective obligations under the Business Combination Agreement; the receipt of a “no-action” letter from the Israel Securities Authority (which we refer to as the ISA), which was obtained on November 6, 2023; the receipt of certain tax rulings from the Israel Tax Authority (which we refer to as the ITA); the termination of any stockholders agreements, voting agreements, registration rights agreements, co-sale agreements and any other similar contracts between Keystone and any holders of Keystone capital stock; the Registration Rights Agreement pursuant to which New Parent will provide certain Keystone stockholders certain registration rights with respect to the shares of New Parent Common Stock shall have been executed by the parties; New Parent shall have delivered an undertaking of New Parent, and Check-Cap shall have delivered a notice, in each case to be submitted to the Israel Innovation Authority; Check-Cap taken all actions necessary to terminate the employment of substantially all of the Check-Cap employees and terminate the consulting relationship with substantially all of the independent contractors of Check-Cap; and the Israeli District Court shall have approved a distribution by Check-Cap in the amount of $21.3 million (including an amount for the redemption of all of the redeemable Check-Cap warrants), subject to and following the Closing. In addition, under the Companies Law, a minimum of 50 days must elapse from the date of the filing of the merger proposal by both merging companies with the Israeli Companies Registrar before the Israeli Merger can become effective, and the Israeli Merger may not be effective until the expiration of 30 days from the date of the approval of the Israeli Merger by Check-Cap’s shareholders. The Business Combination Agreement provides that the consummation of the Israeli Merger and the consummation of the U.S. Merger will occur on the closing date; as such, the two mergers are conditioned upon each other. For more information, see “The Business Combination Agreement– Conditions to Closing” in the accompanying New Parent Prospectus.
Q: When is the Business Combination expected to be consummated?
A: Subject to the satisfaction or waiver of the closing conditions described under the section entitled “The Business Combination Agreement—Conditions to Closing” in the accompanying New Parent Prospectus, including the approval of the Business Combination by Check-Cap shareholders at the Meeting, Keystone and Check-Cap expect that the Business Combination will be consummated in January 2024. However, it is possible that factors outside the control of both companies could result in the Business Combination being consummated at a different time or not at all. In addition, under the Companies Law, a minimum of 50 days must elapse from the date of the filing of the merger proposal by both merging companies with the Israeli Companies Registrar before the Israeli Merger can become effective, and the Israeli Merger may not be effective until the expiration of 30 days from the date of the approval of the Israeli Merger by Check-Cap’s shareholders.
Q: What happens if the Business Combination is not consummated?
A: If the Business Combination is not approved by Check-Cap shareholders, or if the Business Combination is not consummated for any other reason, neither the Keystone equityholders nor the Check-Cap equityholders will receive shares of New Parent Common Stock in exchange for their Keystone or Check-Cap equity, as applicable. In addition, in certain instances of termination by Keystone or Check-Cap of the Business Combination Agreement such terminating party will be required to pay the other party a termination fee, in such amount and in accordance with the Business Combination Agreement. In addition, if the Business Combination is not approved by Check-Cap shareholders, or if the Business Combination is not consummated, Check-Cap will remain a public reporting company and Check-Cap shareholders will continue to hold equity in Check-Cap. For more information, see “The Business Combination Agreement—Termination” in the accompanying New Parent Prospectus.
Q: What will Check-Cap shareholders, optionholders, holders of RSUs and warrantholders receive in the Business Combination?
A: Upon consummation of the Israeli Merger, each holder of Check-Cap ordinary shares will receive one share of New Parent Common Stock in exchange for each Check-Cap ordinary share that is issued and outstanding immediately prior to the effective time of the Israeli Merger (as may be adjusted if Proposal 4 is approved at the Meeting and a reverse share split of the Company’s ordinary shares is implemented). Each option to purchase Check-Cap ordinary shares (whether vested or unvested) that is outstanding and unexercised immediately prior to the effective time of the Israeli Merger will automatically expire and cease to exist as of immediately prior to the effective time of the Israeli Merger without any assumption or conversion, and no consideration will be delivered in respect thereof. Each restricted stock unit award representing the right to receive a Check-Cap ordinary share under the Check-Cap stock plans (a “Check-Cap RSU”) that is outstanding and fully vested immediately prior to the effective time of the Israeli Merger but has not been settled in Check-Cap ordinary shares (“Check-Cap Vested RSU”) will be canceled and will automatically convert into and represent the right to receive from New Parent one share of New Parent Common Stock in exchange for each Check-Cap ordinary share underlying such Check-Cap Vested RSU.
Each Check-Cap RSU that is outstanding and unvested immediately prior to the effective time of the Israeli Merger will automatically expire and cease to exist as of immediately prior to the effective time of the Israeli Merger without any assumption or conversion, and no consideration will be delivered in respect thereof. Each of the certain warrants issued pursuant to the certain Check-Cap Credit Line Agreement dated as of August 20, 2014 (“Check-Cap CLA Warrant”) that is outstanding and unexercised immediately prior to the effective time of the Israeli Merger will automatically expire with no consideration delivered in respect thereof. Finally, certain warrants to purchase Check-Cap ordinary shares may be exercised by the holders thereof following the effective time of the Israeli Merger or, for a period of thirty days following the effective time of the Israeli Merger, redeemed at the election of the holders thereof for cash in an amount determined based on the Black-Scholes valuation model pursuant to the terms of such warrants (the warrants containing such redemption feature, the “Check-Cap Registered Direct Warrants and Check-Cap Placement Agent Warrants”). As the Check-Cap Registered Direct Warrants and Check-Cap Placement Agent Warrants are “out of the money” relative to the current per share valuation of Check-Cap, it is expected that they will be redeemed in full and the calculation of net cash (as determined in accordance with the Business Combination Agreement) includes a reduction for the aggregate cost of the expected redemptions of such Check-Cap Registered Direct Warrants and Check-Cap Placement Agent Warrants. If any Check-Cap Registered Direct Warrant or Check-Cap Placement Agent Warrant is not redeemed by the end of such thirty-day period, the warrantholder will have the right to receive, upon exercise of such warrant, that number of shares of New Parent Common Stock that could have been acquired if such warrant had been exercised for ordinary shares of Check-Cap prior to the effective time of the Israeli Merger (as may be adjusted if Proposal 4 is approved at the Meeting and a reverse share split of the Company’s ordinary shares is implemented), and an allocable portion of any distributions with respect to the sale of Check-Cap’s legacy assets, as further described herein. There can be no assurance that any such sale or distributions will occur.
Q: Do any of the directors or executive officers of Keystone or Check-Cap have any interests in the Business Combination that may be different from, or in addition to, those of Keystone’s stockholders of Check-Cap’s shareholders?
A: In considering the Business Combination, you should be aware that the directors and executive officers of Keystone and Check-Cap may have interests in the Business Combination that may be different from, or in addition to, those of Keystone’s stockholders and Check-Cap’s shareholders generally. The board of directors of each of Keystone and Check-Cap were aware of and considered these interests among other matters, in evaluating and approving the Business Combination Agreement and the Business Combination, and in recommending that the Keystone stockholders or Check-Cap shareholders (as applicable) vote to adopt the Business Combination Agreement and approve the Business Combination. These interests include post-Business Combination roles at New Parent, as following the closing of the Business Combination it is expected that Melker Nilsson will serve as Chief Executive Officer of New Parent and Amnon Tamir will serve as Chief Financial Officer of New Parent. It is also expected that Uri Geiger will serve as chairman of the board of directors of New Parent, each of Melker Nilsson, Erin Enright, Howard Zauberman, Shmuel Rubinstein, Stanley Stern and Sheryl Conley will serve as a member of, and Michael Tuckman will serve as an observer on, the board of directors of New Parent, and two of the current members of the Check-Cap Board will serve as members of the board of directors of New Parent. Messrs. Nilsson, Tamir and Stern will also each receive a one-time transaction bonus, and Messrs. Nilsson’s and Tamir’s respective annual base salaries and annual bonus targets will be increased. Finally, the Business Combination Agreement requires that the organizational documents of New Parent contain provisions no less favorable with respect to exculpation, indemnification, advancement or expense reimbursement than are set forth in the organizational documents of Keystone and Check-Cap, and the parties will purchase a “tail” directors’ and officers’ liability insurance policy that will provide coverage to Keystone’s and Check-Cap’s executive officers and directors with respect to matters occurring prior to the closing until the seventh anniversary of the closing. For more information, see “The Business Combination – Interests of Check-Cap’s Directors and Executive Officers in the Business Combination”.
Q: What are the material Israeli tax consequences to Keystone and Check-Cap securityholders of the Business Combination?
A: Generally, the exchange of Keystone securities and Check-Cap securities for the Business Combination consideration should be treated as a sale and subject to Israeli tax both for Israeli and non-Israeli resident securityholders. However, certain relief and/or exemptions may be available under Israeli law or under applicable tax treaties. In addition, Keystone and Check-Cap have filed applications for various tax rulings with the Israel Tax Authority relating to the consideration to be received in the Business Combination. Obtaining such tax rulings is a condition to the closing of the Business Combination; however, if one or more tax rulings is not received, the parties may determine to waive the condition and proceed to closing. In such an event, the relief sought under such rulings, which include tax exemptions or deferrals to Keystone and Check-Cap securityholders, will not have been obtained, and the Business Combination could be taxable to certain of such securityholders.
Tax matters are complicated, and the tax consequences of the Business Combination to Check-Cap securityholders and Keystone securityholders will depend on their particular situation. You are encouraged to consult your tax advisors regarding the specific tax consequences of the Business Combination applicable to you.
For more information, see “The Business Combination – Material Israeli Tax Consequences of the Business Combination” in the New Parent Prospectus.
Q: What are the material U.S. federal income tax consequences of the Israeli Merger to U.S. holders of Check-Cap ordinary shares?
A: The Business Combination should constitute an integrated transaction that qualifies as a tax-deferred exchange under Section 351(a) of the Code. Assuming such qualification, and subject to the application of the passive foreign investment company (“PFIC”) rules, U.S. holders (as defined in the New Parent Prospectus under the section entitled “The Business Combination – Material U.S. Federal Income Tax Considerations for Holders of Check-Cap Securities”) of Check-Cap ordinary shares should not recognize any gain or loss on such exchange.
For additional discussion of the U.S. federal income tax consequences of the Israeli Merger, including the PFIC rules, see the section entitled “The Business Combination – Material U.S. Federal Income Tax for Holders of Check-Cap Securities” in the New Parent Prospectus.
Q: Do I have appraisal rights if I object to the Business Combination?
A: Appraisal rights are not available to holders of Check-Cap ordinary shares in connection with the Business Combination and the transactions contemplated thereby. Keystone stockholders are entitled to statutory appraisal rights in connection with the Business Combination under Section 262 of the Delaware General Corporation Law (the “DGCL”). For more information about such rights, please see the provisions of Section 262 of the DGCL and the section entitled “Appraisal Rights” in the New Parent Prospectus.
Q: What will happen to Check-Cap’s ordinary shares following the Business Combination?
A: As a result of the Business Combination, Check-Cap will no longer be a publicly held company, and all shares of Check-Cap will be owned by New Parent. Following the consummation of the Business Combination, Check-Cap ordinary shares will be delisted from Nasdaq and deregistered under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), and Check-Cap will no longer be required to file reports with the SEC in respect of Check-Cap ordinary shares.
Q: What equity stake will current Keystone stockholders and Check-Cap shareholders have in New Parent following the Business Combination?
A: Following the Closing, current Keystone equityholders will own approximately 85% of the issued and outstanding shares of Common Stock of New Parent on a fully diluted basis and current Check-Cap equityholders will own approximately 15% of the issued and outstanding shares of Common Stock of New Parent on a fully diluted basis. Entities affiliated with Accelmed Partners, L.P. (“Accelmed”), currently the principal stockholder of Keystone, will own approximately 60% of the issued and outstanding shares of New Parent Common Stock. These percentages are subject to a net cash adjustment, such that if Check-Cap’s net cash (as determined in accordance with the Business Combination Agreement) as of the close of business on the last business day prior to the anticipated closing date is $1.0 million lower or higher than the net cash target of $22.3 million, there will be a linear adjustment to Check-Cap’s equityholders’ ownership in New Parent. Following the Closing it is expected that Accelmed will own approximately 60% of the issued and outstanding shares of New Parent Common Stock. Accordingly, Accelmed will have substantial influence over the outcome of a corporate action requiring stockholder approval, including the election of directors, any approval of a merger, consolidation or sale of all or substantially all of New Parent’s assets or any other significant corporate transaction, even if the outcome sought by such stockholders is not in the interest of New Parent’s other stockholders. In addition, the significant concentration of stock ownership may adversely affect the value of New Parent Common Stock due to a resulting lack of liquidity of New Parent Common Stock or a perception among investors that conflicts of interest may exist or arise. For more information, see “Risk Factors – Risks Related to the Business Combination – Ownership of New Parent’s Common Stock will be highly concentrated after consummation of the Business Combination” in the New Parent Prospectus.
Q: Who will be the officers and directors of New Parent following the Closing?
A: The Business Combination Agreement provides that, immediately following the Closing, Melker Nilsson will serve as Chief Executive Officer of New Parent and Amnon Tamir will serve as Chief Financial Officer of New Parent. The board of directors of New Parent will be comprised of those individuals designated by Keystone, provided, however, that Check-Cap shall have the right to designate (x) one (1) initial director of New Parent if the New Parent board of directors as of immediately following the effective time of the U.S. Merger will have up to seven (7) members, and (y) two (2) initial directors of New Parent if the New Parent board of directors as of immediately following the effective time of the U.S. Merger will have more than seven (7) members. For more information, see “The Business Combination – Governance of New Parent Following the Business Combination” below.
Q: What is the reverse share split and why is it necessary?
A: In connection with merger transactions like the Business Combination, Nasdaq rules requires New Parent to comply with the initial listing standards of the applicable Nasdaq market to continue to be listed on such market following the Business Combination. The Nasdaq Capital Market’s initial listing standards require a company to have, among other things, a $4.00 per share minimum bid price. Because Check-Cap’s current price per share is less than $4.00, a reverse share split may be necessary to meet the minimum bid listing requirement.
Q: Who can help answer any other questions I have?
A: If you have additional questions about the proposals for the Meeting or need additional copies of this Proxy Statement, please contact Alex Ovadia, the Chief Executive Officer of Check-Cap, at alex.ovadia@check-cap.com.
CAUTIONARY STATEMENT REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS
This Proxy Statement, including information set forth or incorporated by reference in this document, contains statements that constitute forward-looking information statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These forward-looking statements include statements regarding whether shares of New Parent Common Stock will be listed for trading on Nasdaq, whether the agenda item at the Meeting will be approved, and assumptions and results related to financial results, forecasts, clinical trials, and regulatory authorizations. Words such as “will,” “expect,” “anticipate,” “plan,” “believe,” “design,” “may,” “future,” “estimate,” “predict,” “objective,” “goal,” or variations thereof and variations of such words and similar expressions are intended to identify such forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements are based on Check-Cap’s current knowledge and its present beliefs and expectations regarding possible future events and are subject to risks, uncertainties, and assumptions. Actual results and the timing of events could differ materially from those anticipated in these forward-looking statements as a result of several factors including, but not limited to, the expected timing and likelihood of completion of the proposed Business Combination, the occurrence of any event, change, or other circumstance that could result in the termination of the Business Combination Agreement, receipt and timing of any required governmental or regulatory approvals relating to the registration and listing of New Parent’s Common Stock or otherwise relating to the Business Combination, the anticipated amount needed to finance New Parent’s future operations, unexpected results of clinical trials, delays or denial in regulatory approval process, or additional competition in the market.
In light of the significant uncertainties inherent in the forward-looking statements contained herein, readers should not place undue reliance on forward-looking statements. We cannot guarantee any future results, including with respect to the Business Combination. The statements made in this Proxy Statement represent our views as of the date of this Proxy Statement, and it should not be assumed that the statements made herein remain accurate as of any future date. Moreover, we assume no obligation to update forward-looking statements or update the reasons that actual results could differ materially from those anticipated in forward-looking statements, except as otherwise required by law.
RISK FACTORS
In addition to the other information included in this Proxy Statement, including the matters addressed under the caption titled “Cautionary Statement Regarding Forward-Looking Statements”, you should consider carefully the risk factors set forth in the accompanying New Parent Prospectus in determining how to vote at the Meeting.
THE BUSINESS COMBINATION
(Item 1 on the Proxy Card)
The description in this Proxy Statement of the Business Combination and the other transactions contemplated by the Business Combination Agreement is subject to, and is qualified in its entirety by reference to, the Business Combination Agreement, which is the legal document governing the Business Combination. A copy of the Business Combination Agreement is attached as Annex A to the New Parent Prospectus. We also furnished a copy of the Business Combination Agreement as Exhibit 99.1 to the Report of Foreign Private Issuer on Form 6-K that we furnished to the SEC on August 17, 2023, and we urge that you read it carefully in its entirety.
The Parties
New Parent was formed solely for the purpose of effectuating the Business Combination. Upon the closing of the Business Combination, New Parent will become the parent entity of both Keystone and Check-Cap. New Parent was incorporated as a Delaware corporation on July 31, 2023. New Parent has no material assets and does not operate any business. To date, New Parent has not conducted any activities other than those incidental to its formation, the execution of the Business Combination Agreement and the preparation of applicable filings under U.S. securities laws and regulatory filings made in connection with the Business Combination.
The principal executive offices of New Parent are located at 154 Middlesex Turnpike, Burlington, Massachusetts 01803.
Keystone was incorporated in the State of Delaware in 2008. Keystone is a global commercial stage medical technology company focused on providing end-to-end solutions for dental practitioners and tooth replacement procedures. Its comprehensive portfolio of tooth replacement solutions is comprised of implants, prosthetic solutions, biomaterial solutions and digital dentistry capabilities. Keystone develops and offers advanced technologies for dental practitioners, dental laboratories and patients at an attractive price, driving significant value to both practitioners and patients. Keystone believes its products offer strong value proposition for dental practitioners through its innovative products with high quality manufacturing and design at various pricing options. Keystone has premium and high touch customer service with an experienced direct sales force and third-party distributors, simplifying a complex procedure through the digitalization of workflow for multiple clinical indications. Based on Keystone’s estimates, it believes its digital capabilities for dental practices have the potential to reduce the number of office visits and decrease patient chair time per procedure. Keystone’s various brands, including Genesis, Prima, Paltop, Molaris, Dyna, and Nexus iOS, are widely known amongst dental practitioners.
The principal executive offices of Keystone are located at 154 Middlesex Turnpike, Burlington, Massachusetts 01803.
Check-Cap was formed under the laws of the State of Israel in 2009. Check-Cap is a clinical stage medical diagnostics company aiming to redefine colorectal cancer (CRC) screening through the introduction of C-Scan®, a screening test designed to detect polyps before they may transform into cancer to enable early intervention and cancer prevention. Check-Cap has generated significant losses to date, and it expects to continue to generate losses as it continues to explore strategic alternatives focused on maximizing stockholder value.
The principal executive offices of Check-Cap are located at 29 Abba Hushi Avenue, Isfiya, 3009000, Israel.
U.S. Merger Sub is a wholly-owned subsidiary of New Parent formed solely for the purpose of effectuating the Business Combination. U.S. Merger Sub was incorporated as a Delaware corporation on July 31, 2023. U.S. Merger Sub has no material assets and does not operate any business. To date, U.S. Merger Sub has not conducted any activities other than those incidental to its formation and the execution of the Business Combination Agreement. After the consummation of the Business Combination, it will cease to exist.
The principal executive offices of U.S. Merger Sub are located at 154 Middlesex Turnpike, Burlington, Massachusetts 01803.
Israeli Merger Sub is a wholly-owned subsidiary of New Parent formed solely for the purpose of effectuating the Business Combination. Israeli Merger Sub was organized as a company under the laws of the State of Israel on July 30, 2023. Israeli Merger Sub has no material assets and does not operate any business. To date, Israeli Merger Sub has not conducted any activities other than those incidental to its formation and the execution of the Business Combination Agreement. After the consummation of the Business Combination, it will cease to exist.
The mailing address of Israeli Merger Sub’s registered office is 98 Yigal Alon Street, Tel Aviv 67891, Israel.
In accordance with the Business Combination Agreement, U.S. Merger Sub will merge with and into Keystone pursuant to the U.S. Merger, with Keystone surviving as a wholly-owned subsidiary of New Parent, and Israeli Merger Sub will merge with and into Check-Cap pursuant to the Israeli Merger, with Check-Cap surviving as a wholly-owned subsidiary of New Parent. Check-Cap, as a wholly owned subsidiary of New Parent, will maintain a registered office in the State of Israel. The U.S. Merger will become effective upon the filing of a certificate of merger with the Secretary of State of the State of Delaware executed in accordance with, and in such form as is required by, the relevant provisions of the DGCL, and the Israeli Merger will become effective upon the issuance by the Israeli Companies Registrar of the Certificate of Merger for the Israeli Merger in accordance with Section 323(5) of the Companies Law.
Background of the Business Combination
Overview
Check-Cap is a clinical stage medical diagnostics company engaged in the development of C-Scan®, a screening test to detect polyps before they may transform into colorectal cancer (CRC). Check-Cap’s Board and executive management regularly review Check-Cap’s operating and strategic plans, both near-term and long-term, in an effort to enhance shareholder value. This review has included consideration of equity financings and strategic transactions, and engaging in discussions with potential strategic partners and investors.
In March 2023, Check-Cap announced that its most recent efficacy results from its calibration studies did not meet the goal in order to proceed to the powered portion of the U.S. pivotal study for C-Scan, its main product. In June 2023, after further review of additional data and interaction with the FDA on a revised pivotal study protocol together with consideration of the anticipated time and investment necessary to further develop the technology, Check-Cap’s Board determined to pursue strategic options. At such time, Check-Cap’s Board also approved a reduction in its workforce by approximately 90 percent, to reduce its cash burn. In light of these developments, Check-Cap discontinued the calibration studies and determined not to commence the powered portion of its U.S. pivotal study, and to concentrate its resources on its essential research activities and strategic alternatives.
Following the March 2023 announcement regarding the efficacy results from its calibration studies, Check-Cap’s Board commenced a review of strategic alternatives. As part of that review, Check-Cap’s Board considered and evaluated options for enhancing shareholder value. Recognizing that in light of the C-Scan calibration studies’ internal assessment, enhancing shareholder value as a stand-alone entity would be extremely challenging and uncertain, Check-Cap’s Board determined to explore various suitable alternatives, including but not limited to a business combination transaction.
Accordingly, during the second and third quarters of 2023, Check-Cap’s Board conducted a number of discussions with several potential targets concerning an acquisition of, combination with, or investment in, another company or technology, which, upon consummation, would provide Check-Cap with new, active operations. The Check-Cap Board also established a strategic transaction sub-committee comprised of four board members (Mr. Steven Hanley, the Check-Cap Board Chairman, as well as Ms. Clara Ezed, Dr. Mary Jo Gorman, and Mr. Yuval Yanai), which consulted with Check-Cap’s Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer when appropriate. As part of this initiative, Check-Cap’s Board also began working with Ladenburg as its primary financial advisor to assist the Check-Cap Board in, among other things, identifying and evaluating potential targets. Over the course of this process, Check-Cap’s Board, together with its financial advisor, contacted a total of 150 potential target companies for a proposed merger or acquisition, which were identified based on certain key characteristics that Check-Cap’s Board sought in a target company: (i) favorable technology in an investment-attractive space; (ii) management with strong records in initial public offerings and merger transactions; (iii) investors and/or strategic partners that have the experience and capability of developing products and bringing them to market; and (iv) the potential for achieving a significant return on investment for Check-Cap’s shareholders over the next two to three years based on multiple inflection points and with little remaining regulatory risk to limit the downside of the investment. In general, the potential target companies were private companies at various stages of development that operate in the medical device, pharma or biotechnology industries, similar to the industry in which Check-Cap had operated, and for which Check-Cap’ Board had the optimal experience for selection and evaluation.
The following chronology sets forth a summary of the material events leading up to the execution of the Business Combination Agreement with Keystone. In addition, throughout the chronology of developments described below, prior to and in between formal Check-Cap Board meetings, the Chairman of the Check-Cap Board, Mr. Hanley and the other members of the strategic transaction sub-committee, updated all of Check-Cap’s Board members on a frequent basis as to the nature and extent of such developments. During this time, Mr. Hanley and Mr. Yanai also continued to engage from time to time in preliminary discussions with third parties concerning potential transactions, although, ultimately, no such discussions advanced beyond preliminary stages. No alternative transaction was identified that was believed by the Check-Cap Board, based on the criteria identified above, to be as attractive to Check-Cap and its shareholders as the proposed transaction with Keystone.
Evaluation of Check-Cap’s Technology and Action Plan
In May 2022, Check-Cap initiated the first part of the U.S. pivotal study of C-Scan, which focused on device calibration and enhancement of C-Scan algorithms among the average risk U.S. population. In parallel, to support the calibration portion of the U.S. pivotal study, Check-Cap continued enrolling average risk patients in its study in Israel. Throughout the study, until March 2023, Check-Cap enrolled more than 300 average risk patients as part of its Israeli study, but only 17 average risk patients in the first part of its U.S. pivotal study. The slower than expected U.S. site recruitment pace was primarily due to state licensing requirements associated with the X-ray technology with a radioactive source within Check-Cap’s C-Scan capsule. While prior C-Scan trial performance was based on an enriched population (i.e., subjects with known polyps), the later calibration studies’ target was intended to optimize the C-Scan device for the average risk population prior to commencing the powered portion of the U.S. pivotal study, which aimed to demonstrate C-Scan performance in a statistically significant manner for average risk subjects. The initiation of the powered portion of the U.S. pivotal study was dependent upon successful completion of the Israeli calibration study, as well as the calibration portion of the U.S. pivotal study.
In March 2023, Check-Cap announced that its most recent efficacy results from its calibration studies did not meet the goal in order to proceed to the powered portion of the U.S. pivotal study. Though additional data was expected for additional subjects for C-Scan as well as the corresponding colonoscopy, the time to obtain this data was determined to be longer than expected in the original plan. Consequently, the Check-Cap Board requested that management prepare and present to the Check-Cap Board a plan of action intended to evaluate technology viability. In addition, the Check-Cap Board and management determined to review the most currently available data from past and committed subjects, and to consult with several medical experts to determine if updating algorithms or making other modifications to the study parameters could make the technology viable.
On March 13, 2023, the Check-Cap Board held a meeting in which the Chief Executive Officer of Check-Cap, Mr. Ovadia, advised the Check-Cap Board that following the Check-Cap Board’s request that management present an action plan, management had conducted internal discussions and assessments and prepared three proposed recommendations: (i) Plan A – C-Scan performance validation, to provide a possible path to quantitative validation of C-Scan performance; (ii) Plan B — pivots derived from C-Scan technology, to provide several options to expand Check-Cap’s product portfolio based on its existing intellectual property; and (iii) combined plan – an intermediate option combining aspects of both plans. Following discussion, the Check-Cap Board determined that the potential C-Scan technology pivots relating to other gastro-intestinal applications did not have sufficient clinical evidence to suggest that they were worthy of the necessary substantial investment. The product differentiation and patient and physician benefit were not sufficiently supported to determine that such option would be viable. Accordingly, both Plan B and the combined plan were determined to be too high a risk with insufficient data for investment. It was further determined that it would be appropriate to conduct additional analysis on the existing data and conduct a limited number of additional studies and to retrieve the additional colonoscopy data on past subjects to make a determination if such data would allow Check-Cap to achieve a new end point which would be acceptable to the FDA and still be commercially viable and cost effective. Plan A also involved the continuation of the C-Scan algorithm development relating to the post processing of the data with the goal of improving the results in a manner that would make the product viable. Based on the foregoing considerations, the Check-Cap Board determined to pursue Plan A.
On the same day, a call was held between several members of the Check-Cap Board and management and Ms. Janice Hogan of Hogan Lovells, Check-Cap’s regulatory advisor, to obtain feedback from Ms. Hogan on possible endpoints for C-Scan that could be acceptable to the FDA and their implications. During this call, Mr. Ovadia informed Ms. Hogan that following internal evaluation of results from calibration clinical studies to date, Check-Cap had concluded that C-Scan would likely not achieve the efficacy performance that was previously agreed with the FDA. Ms. Hogan discussed several possible options for Check-Cap to approach the FDA, but was uncertain if these approaches would be successful.
In addition to several internal discussions led by Dr. Mary Jo Gorman, on March 14, 2023, the Check-Cap Board held a meeting with Dr. Jeff Kreikemeier, a private U.S. gastroenterologist who was recruited as a consultant to Check-Cap, regarding the changes proposed to the U.S. pivotal study endpoints. Dr. Kreikemeier provided advice and feedback on the latest practices and the impact of detection of certain polyps sizes on the future use of C-Scan, as well as his understanding of the upcoming technology, including blood biopsies and new stool tests.
On March 15, 2023, Check-Cap’s Board held a meeting in which Dr. Aasma Shaukat and Dr. Seth Gross of New York University, Coordinating Principal Investigator (CPI) and Principal Investigator (PI) for the U.S. pivotal study, respectively, provided their input regarding Check-Cap’s potential plans, as presented to the Check-Cap Board at the meeting held on March 13, 2023. Dr. Shaukat and Dr. Gross commented primarily on the impact of proposed changes to the endpoints for the U.S. pivotal study that were being considered.
On March 21, 2023, Check-Cap announced in an update to its shareholders that following its internal assessment of the clinical data collected from its calibration studies, Check-Cap had determined that the efficacy results did not meet their goal in order to proceed to the powered portion of the U.S. pivotal study. As a result, Check-Cap adopted a plan of action (Plan A) that included conducting additional clinical data analysis and approaching the FDA to make amendments to the U.S. pivotal study protocol that were expected to be part of an IDE supplemental submission to the FDA, and which would be subject to FDA approval. In addition, Check-Cap planned to continue conducting its calibration studies, albeit at a slower pace, to collect additional clinical data and also to implement a cost reduction plan, in order to extend its cash runway. In addition, Check-Cap announced that the initiation of the powered portion of the U.S. pivotal study that was expected in mid-2023 was being postponed. Check-Cap also targeted achieving formal feedback from the FDA to better understand alternative approval options while continuing to enroll subjects both in Israel and the United States, though also at a slower pace. These efforts would continue as additional strategic options for Check-Cap were developed.
Reverse Triangular Merger Transaction
On April 6, 2023, Check-Cap’s Board held a meeting in which it considered three primary strategic options for Check-Cap: (i) continued investment in the development of C-Scan; (ii) liquidation and distribution of Check-Cap’s cash to its shareholders; and (iii) a reverse triangular merger transaction, which was understood to be the most common “reverse merger” structure, and the structure most likely to enable Check-Cap to maintain its Nasdaq listing and to achieve maximum valuation for Check-Cap in a potential business combination transaction. The Check-Cap Board discussed Check-Cap’s strategic options and potential reverse merger scenarios with David Strupp, a managing partner at Ladenburg. Mr. Strupp stated that in recent transactions conducted by Ladenburg, the average value for a public company in a reverse triangular merger was between $12-13 million above the cash value, which premium would not be achievable in a liquidation scenario. Mr. Strupp stated that he expected Ladenburg to receive numerous competitive bids for a reverse triangular merger with Check-Cap. Mr. Strupp noted that the then current market environment was hostile for initial public offerings and that challenges in using a SPAC structure had made the value of a reverse triangular merger higher at that time. Mr. Strupp described the timeline and process for a reverse triangular merger.
On April 11, 2023, Check-Cap’s Board held a meeting to continue the discussion following the presentation by Mr. Strupp of Ladenburg at the meeting of the Check-Cap Board held on April 6, 2023, regarding Check-Cap’s strategic alternatives to create the highest shareholder value, including the possibility of liquidating and returning cash to the shareholders, as well as an analysis of options related to a merger with another company. In addition, the Board discussed the engagement proposal submitted by Ladenburg. Members of the Check-Cap Board expressed their opinion that Ladenburg is a very experienced firm and has a strong reputation in merger transactions, and several Board members stated that they had a positive experience with Ladenburg and particularly with Mr. Strupp. Following discussion, the Check-Cap Board agreed that Check-Cap would research and make contact with other potential advisors, in order to obtain additional perspectives regarding Ladenburg’s proposal as compared to other options.
On April 18, 2023, Check-Cap’s Board held a meeting to discuss and approve the engagement of an investment bank to provide advisory services to Check-Cap in a potential transaction being explored by the Board as an alternative to the C-Scan technology, if such technology was ultimately determined by the Board not to be viable. Mr. Hanley stated that the Check-Cap Board was continuing to explore its options to create the highest shareholder value by understanding potential strategic transactions, including a potential reverse triangular merger with Check-Cap. Mr. Hanley and Mr. Yanai stated that they had approached several investment banks regarding the provision of advisory services to Check-Cap and presented the proposals they received from such investment banks. After reviewing these proposals, and each advisors’ estimated pricing and experience with reverse merger transactions, it was determined that Ladenburg had a higher level of experience with this particular type of transaction, and offered the best value and the highest likelihood for success, to assure the optimal outcome to shareholders. After discussion, the Check-Cap Board approved the engagement of Ladenburg.
On April 24, 2023, the Check-Cap Board held a meeting during which Mr. Ovadia, the CEO, reviewed the latest data from incoming results from previously completed patients. In addition, Mr. Ovadia reported that management was working closely with Ms. Hogan to formally present alternative approaches to the FDA through the FDA’s interactive Sprint methodology (available for companies with Breakthrough Device designation). The Sprint methodology permits qualified companies to ask questions and request feedback from the FDA within a pre-determined response time of 45 days. As part of this process, Check-Cap sought FDA guidance with respect to several alternative approaches with respect to both technology and study design (which would, among other things, allow for the recruitment of additional subjects). Check-Cap also wanted the FDA’s view on the proposed overall sample size of the study, which would have a large impact on timing and cost, as well as feedback on the FDA’s openness to increasing the size of the polyps targeted in the endpoint, which would make it easier for the device to achieve its endpoint with the current design. Check-Cap formally submitted a Sprint request to the FDA in late April 2023 with an expected response in early June. The Check-Cap Board also continued to work in parallel with regulatory experts to determine whether additional data and FDA insight might provide a path forward for investment or at least increase the value of Check-Cap’s assets for monetization if further investment was not determined to be best for Check-Cap’s shareholders.
In parallel to these activities, Check-Cap commenced a bidding process led by its financial advisor, Ladenburg. By early May, Ladenburg had contacted over 150 companies which fit the Check-Cap Board’s criteria for a target company, and by May 16, 2023, Check-Cap had received 42 formal non-binding proposals; these proposals contained, among other things, proposed transaction structures, as well as estimates of each such companies’ valuations, and the percentage ownership that the current Check-Cap shareholders would own in the combined company as a result of the proposed transaction.
On May 18, 2023, the Check-Cap strategic transaction sub-committee held a meeting and discussed the key issues, timing and obligations related to a potential strategic transaction by Check-Cap, including a reverse triangular merger. Mr. Hanley advised the Check-Cap sub-committee that over 40 proposals had been received, and that Check-Cap was working with Ladenburg to review and analyze these proposals.
On May 23, 2023, the subcommittee met to discuss the pros and cons of each of the proposals received. Among other things, the sub-committee considered the commercial potential, market size, regulatory risk, valuation, financial strength, management and board experience to determine which of these companies offered the best fit for a potential transaction with Check-Cap. After extensive discussions, the sub-committee identified six companies with which it determined to enter into further discussions and diligence and directed Ladenburg to arrange for presentations to be obtained from each of these six companies.
On May 30 and May 31, 2023 and June 1, 2023, the Check-Cap strategic transaction sub-committee met with and received presentations from each of these six participants, including Keystone. These presentations were from top management at each of the six companies and included financial forecasts, business and scientific reviews and justification on valuation and reasons for the reverse merger. No negotiations were undertaken with any of these companies during this time period.
On June 1, 2023, the Check-Cap sub-committee held another meeting to review Ladenburg’s analysis of the six reverse triangular merger candidates interviewed by the sub-committee. The members of the Check-Cap sub-committee expressed that all companies have viable products; however, the sub-committee concurred that the most promising candidates were four companies, including Keystone. Among other things, members of the sub-committee noted that these candidates have minimized their FDA regulatory and commercial risk, while maintaining a good cash position and a strong management team.
On June 3, 2023, Check-Cap received formal written feedback from the FDA regarding the proposed alternative approaches submitted by Check-Cap as part of the Sprint process. In its response, the FDA indicated, among other things, concern that increasing the size of the polyp to 10 mm and greater would not reflect the target population for which it is intended. In addition, the FDA stated that “the proposed lower bound sensitivity performance goal of .58 for polyps of at least 6 mm is not sensitive enough to allow C-Scan to be used prior to colonoscopy in patients who are otherwise good candidates for colonoscopy”. Further, the FDA provided feedback that the studies’ positive predictive value and negative predictive value should represent the intended use population and not the age enriched population, which was not a material issue but could impact the marketing of the product. Lastly, the FDA rejected Check-Cap’s proposal to use a 1-sided 95% confidence interval hypothesis test and recommended that the performance goal be compared to the lower limit of the two-sided confidence interval; a 1-sided 95% confidence interval method would have reduced the number of subjects needed in the pivotal study. The FDA feedback validated the Check-Cap Board’s view that there would be a high level of risk in achieving the performance goal with the C-Scan system. The feedback also confirmed that regardless of system performance, there would be a significant increase in pivotal study execution timing and cost for the system to achieve FDA approval. The Check-Cap Board’s view of the FDA’s feedback was that the current design and algorithm were not performing at a level to achieve the required higher performance and therefore additional capital, time, and research were needed with a high level of risk to achieve the goal. In addition, the higher sensitivity goal would further increase the size and cost of a future proposed pivotal study. On June 5, 2023, Check-Cap’s management held a conference call with the FDA to confirm the FDA’s position.
On June 6, 2023, Check-Cap announced that after further review of additional data and interaction with the FDA on a revised pivotal study protocol, together with the anticipated time and investment necessary to further develop the technology, the Check-Cap Board had determined that it was appropriate to pursue strategic options. In addition, the Check-Cap Board approved a reduction in Check-Cap’s workforce by approximately 90 percent, to reduce its cash burn, after which Check-Cap expected to have eight to nine remaining employees. In light of these developments, Check-Cap discontinued the calibration studies and did not commence the powered portion of its U.S. pivotal study and concentrated its resources on its essential research activities and strategic alternatives.
Subsequently, at the direction of the sub-committee, Ladenburg prepared and delivered non-binding term sheets to each of the four companies, including Keystone, identified at the June 1 sub-committee meeting.
By June 12, 2023, Check-Cap had received a counter-term sheet from each of the four companies, including Keystone. Between June 12 and June 15, 2023 representatives of Check-Cap and such companies, including Keystone, exchanged drafts of non-binding term sheets. While the proposed changes differed from term sheet to term sheet, they primarily focused on relative valuations, net cash requirements and other closing conditions, and the treatment of legacy assets. Check-Cap did not receive any non-binding offers from the four companies after receipt of the draft term sheets, other than the final non-binding term sheet ultimately entered into with Keystone.
During this time, the Check-Cap strategic transaction sub-committee held several diligence meetings with physicians and healthcare contacts to understand the value propositions of the top four companies, including analysis of the regulatory and market adoption risks associated with these companies, each of which were either commercial or pre-commercial medtech companies. The sub-committee also evaluated the experience and track record of the management of the prospective companies.
At a meeting held on June 15, 2023, the Check-Cap strategic transaction sub-committee, with the help of Ladenburg, voted and ranked the remaining four companies based on management quality, commercial opportunity, regulatory risk, financial strength and liabilities, substantiated valuation, financial risks, public readiness related to company structure and accounting practices. Two of the companies presented significant regulatory and commercial risks requiring near-term FDA approval and the uncertainty of a successful commercial launch. Another company indicated some level of execution risk regarding its newly expanded product pipeline into previously failed markets and a potential liability risk requiring a large sum of debt to be paid upon the consummation of a merger. Each of these companies had significant financing risks related to the need to raise a significant amount of capital and provided little visibility on the ability to raise the required capital. During the evaluation process, the sub-committee, assisted by its advisors, had performed due diligence regarding Keystone and had obtained a strong degree of comfort regarding Keystone’s business prospects and valuation. The sub-committee was also satisfied that the valuation ascribed to Check-Cap in the Keystone term sheet (in excess of its net cash) was a good result for Check-Cap’s shareholders. Based on these factors, as well as the high quality of management, experienced and successful board of directors, limited regulatory risk, high quality investment base, commercial momentum and public company readiness, Keystone was unanimously chosen as the preferred strategic partner, and Check-Cap’s advisors were directed to finalize negotiations of a non-binding term sheet with Keystone.
In its initial proposal, submitted on May 18, 2023, Keystone had valued Check-Cap at a $5 million premium to its estimated net cash at closing of the transaction (with net cash estimated to be approximately $25 million), and had valued Keystone at $200 million based on its valuation in its prior rounds of funding, as well as publicly traded comparable multiples, IPO valuations and precedent M&A transactions. In its June 2, 2023 counter-proposal, Check-Cap proposed a $10 million premium to cash (with net cash assumed to be approximately $20 million), as well as additional value to be payable to the Check-Cap shareholders upon the disposition of Check-Cap’s legacy assets, and a Keystone valuation of $180 million. On June 9, Keystone responded to the Check-Cap proposal, which added a minimum cash at closing requirement of $18 million, removed the additional payment to Check-Cap shareholders upon the disposition of legacy assets, and increased the Keystone valuation to $185 million.
The parties exchanged drafts of the term sheet between June 15 and 20. As part of the negotiations leading up to the final term sheet, Keystone agreed to remove the closing condition that Check-Cap have a minimum amount of net cash at closing and agreed to a mechanism pursuant to which Check-Cap shareholders would receive additional consideration upon a disposition of the Check-Cap legacy assets; valuation of such legacy assets was not discussed between the parties during these negotiations. As part of these negotiations, Check-Cap agreed to add closing conditions relating to obtaining certain Israeli tax rulings. Negotiation of the term sheet also addressed, among other things, calculation of the fully-diluted equity of Check-Cap and calculation of Check-Cap’s closing net cash.
At a meeting with the sub-committee on June 20, 2023, Mr. Hanley presented the term sheet provided by Keystone and Check-Cap’s proposed counteroffer. A discussion ensued, following which the sub-committee agreed on the principal terms for a response to the offer and agreed to have Ladenburg send a non-binding and non-signed response. After further discussions with Keystone leadership, on June 21, 2023, Check-Cap and Keystone entered into a non-binding term sheet.
On June 23, 2023, key members of Keystone management, its Board and advisors met with their respective counterparties from Check-Cap to kick off the definitive agreement negotiations. This included action plans for due diligence for both parties, disclosures and consideration of tax and structure of the transaction. Thereafter, representatives of Check-Cap and Keystone continued conducting business, tax and legal diligence on each other, including a review of the Keystone intellectual property portfolio.
On July 13, 2023, Greenberg Traurig, LLP (“GT”), Check-Cap’s U.S. counsel, delivered an initial draft of the Business Combination Agreement to Goldfarb Gross Seligman (“GGS”) and Stevens & Lee (“SL”), Keystone’s Israeli and U.S. counsel, respectively. The terms of the initial draft of the Business Combination Agreement generally aligned with the terms of the term sheet entered into with Keystone and also provided that the business combination transaction would be structured as a “double dummy” transaction pursuant to which (a) Israeli Merger Sub would merge with and into Check-Cap, as a result of which Check-Cap would be the surviving company and become a direct, wholly owned subsidiary of New Parent, and (b) U.S. Merger Sub would merge with and into Keystone, as a result of which Keystone would be the surviving company and become a direct, wholly owned subsidiary of New Parent.
On July 21, 2023, representatives of GGS sent representatives of GT and FISCHER (FBC & Co.) (“FBC”), Check-Cap’s Israeli counsel, a revised draft of the Business Combination Agreement. Among other changes, the revised draft of the Business Combination Agreement, reflected the following additional or modified material terms from the initial draft of the Business Combination Agreement that GT sent to GGS on July 13, 2023: (a) the calculation of net cash for purposes of adjusting the equity value attributed to Check-Cap, (b) the parties would commit to obtain certain additional Israeli tax rulings and the obtaining of such tax rulings would be a condition for Closing, (c) modification of the scope of certain representations and warranties made by Check-Cap and Keystone, (d) modification of the timing of Keystone’s obligation to deliver the written consent of its stockholders approving the Business Combination, and inclusion of the ability of Keystone’s board to make a change in recommendation, and (e) Check-Cap would commit to obtain the approval of Israeli courts to distribute a dividend to New Parent at Closing, and the obtaining of such approval would be a condition for Closing.
Thereafter, through the signing of the Business Combination Agreement on August 16, 2023, representatives of Check-Cap and Keystone held multiple calls to discuss the terms of the Business Combination and the provisions of the Business Combination Agreement. GT and GGS, in collaboration with FBC and SL, exchanged multiple updated drafts of the Business Combination Agreement and certain related documents and agreements during this period. Negotiations centered on, among other things, the scope of the representations and warranties, the scope of the definition of “material adverse effect”, interim operating covenants, closing conditions, treatment of transaction expenses, treatment of outstanding securities and the mechanics of payment of consideration in connection with the Mergers given the cross-border implications. Over the same period, the representatives for Check-Cap and Keystone held numerous conference calls and reached agreement on outstanding business issues, including, among others: (i) the ability of Keystone’s Board to make a change in recommendation; (ii) the termination fees payable by each of Check-Cap and Keystone in connection with the potential termination of the Business Combination Agreement; (iii) the scope and components of Check-Cap’s closing net cash at Closing for purposes of adjusting the equity value attributed to Check-Cap; (iv) the terms and conditions under which Check-Cap may undertake a sale of its legacy assets to third parties prior to the Closing, and the distribution of the proceeds of any such sale to Check-Cap’ legacy equity holders; (v) Keystone’s obligation to amend the Keystone 2021 SPA; and (vi) the overall suite of representations, warranties and covenants to be provided by each party under the Business Combination Agreement. The parties worked through each other’s concerns around these issues and achieved a reasonable balance that respected the needs of both Check-Cap and Keystone shareholders. For further information related to the final resolution of items (i) through (vi), please see the section entitled “The Business Combination Agreement.” In addition, as part of these continuing negotiations, and as a result of the continuing due diligence process described above, the parties agreed to make further adjustments to the valuations ascribed to the parties in the transaction, including an increase (to $17.4 million) in the premium ascribed to Check-Cap in excess of its net cash at closing. As a result of these adjustments, the Check-Cap valuation was increased to $39.7 million (assuming net cash of $22.3 million) at closing, and the Keystone valuation was increased to $225 million. These adjustments, which were made in consultation with Ladenburg and were subsequently confirmed in the fairness opinions delivered by Ladenburg and Variance, as described below, resulted in an increased ownership split of 0.1% for the Check-Cap shareholders in the post-closing combined company.
On July 26, 2023, representatives of GGS sent representatives of GT initial drafts of the form of Keystone Lock-Up Agreement and Check-Cap Lock-Up Agreement. On July 27, 2023, representatives of SL sent representatives of GT an initial draft of the form of Registration Rights Agreement. On August 1, 2023, representatives of GT sent representatives of GGS and SL an initial draft of the Keystone Stockholder Support Agreement. Between July 26, 2023 and August 15, 2023, representatives of GT, GGS and SL exchanged multiple drafts of the ancillary agreements generally reflecting updates to the negotiated terms of the Business Combination Agreement, with no material discussions or negotiations between the parties regarding the ancillary agreements. For further information related to these agreements, please see the section entitled “The Business Combination Agreement — Ancillary Agreements.”
During this period, Keystone, Check-Cap and their advisors, including GT, FBC and GGS, continued to conduct due diligence of Check-Cap and Keystone, based on materials made available in the parties’ virtual data rooms and diligence sessions with management and advisors, including due diligence of material contracts, corporate matters, real estate, regulatory matters, and financial, tax and accounting matters. Also during this period, Check-Cap, Keystone and their advisors held weekly calls to discuss the status of the Business Combination, including the Business Combination Agreement and related ancillary agreements, the preparation of the registration statement of which the New Parent Prospectus forms a part and the due diligence process.
On July 18, 2023, Symetryx Corporation, a self-described family office based in Toronto, Canada, issued a press release in which it announced a non-binding proposal to acquire Check-Cap at a price of $4.35 per share in cash. As stated in the press release, the non-binding proposal was contingent upon a number of conditions, including completion of satisfactory due diligence, obtaining satisfactory financing arrangements, entering into a satisfactory purchase and sale agreement and filing and completion of all regulatory matters. The press release further stated that “Symetryx may require additional conditions to complete [their] non-binding proposal that [they] will determine [their] sole discretion.” Symetryx also stated in its press release that it owned less than 5% of Check-Cap’s shares, but that it believed it was the largest Check-Cap shareholder.
On July 25, 2023, Symetryx issued another press release, in which it announced that it was increasing the cash purchase price per share of Check-Cap in its non-binding proposal from $4.35 per share to $4.60 per share in cash. In this press release, Symetryx reiterated that its non-binding proposal was contingent upon a number of conditions. Other than these press releases, Check-Cap did not receive a written proposal directly from Symetryx.
In response to the Symetryx press releases, Check-Cap requested that Keystone release Check-Cap from the exclusivity provisions in the term sheet between the parties, to enable Check-Cap to respond to unsolicited third-party proposals such as the one made by Symetryx, and on July 27, 2023, Keystone agreed to permit Check-Cap to do so.
On August 1, 2023, Steve Hanley, the board chairman, received an email from the chief executive officer of a private company, which attached a letter in which such company expressed interest in exploring a potential business combination transaction with Check-Cap. The letter, which valued Check-Cap at “more than $30 million,” described a non-binding stock-for-stock transaction subject to several conditions, including a due diligence review and Check-Cap having minimum working capital of $32 million.
On August 2, 2023, David Strupp of Ladenburg had a phone conversation with the chief executive officer of the private company, and thereafter Check-Cap sent to the private company a non-disclosure agreement (which was substantially similar to the non-disclosure agreements utilized in the auction process described above) after the execution of which the parties would be able to exchange non-public information. On this call, the chief executive officer of the private company disclosed that it and/or its affiliates were shareholders in Check-Cap. Further, Symetryx’s website indicates that it is a shareholder in the private company.
On August 8, 2023, following negotiation of a standard engagement letter between Check-Cap’s sub-committee and Variance, the Check-Cap subcommittee engaged Variance to provide an additional independent opinion on the fairness of the Exchange Ratio, from a financial point of view, to the Check-Cap shareholders in connection with the business combination.
On August 9, 2023, Check-Cap received the private company’s proposed revisions to the non-disclosure agreement, which, among other things added an exclusivity provision, and deleted several other provisions, which were present in almost all of the other non-disclosure agreements previously entered into with potential transaction partners.
On August 10, 2023, Mr. Hanley, the Board Chairman, sent an email to Symetryx proposing a conversation. Symetryx did not respond to this email.
On August 10, 2023, Mr. Hanley contacted the chief executive officer of the private company, proposing a non-confidential conversation between Mr. Hanley, Mr. Yanai and the chief executive officer of the private company. The parties spoke later that day and exchanged preliminary non-confidential information about each other.
On August 11, 2023, Mr. Hanley sent to the chief executive officer of the private company an email explaining that additional information, including Check-Cap’s estimated cash at closing, would be provided once a non-disclosure agreement between the parties was in place, and requesting that the private company provide an updated proposal which, given that a stock deal was being proposed, would need to describe the relative ownership ratios between the parties, as well as information regarding the private company. The email attached a process letter prepared by Ladenburg, which was substantially similar to the process letter utilized in the auction process, seeking substantially the same information that had been requested from other potential transaction partners. Mr. Hanley requested that the private company provide its updated proposal, as well as its responses to the process letter, by noon ET on August 15, 2023.
Between August 11, 2023 and August 14, 2023, counsel for the respective parties negotiated the terms of the proposed non-disclosure agreement, which was executed on August 14, 2023. Later that day, two phone calls were held between representatives of each of the two companies.
On August 15, 2023, Mr. Hanley sent another email to the chief executive officer of the private company, reiterating the need for an updated proposal which would take into account the information provided by Check-Cap, and also include the information previously requested from the private company. No such proposal was received by Check-Cap from the private company.
On August 14, 2023 and August 15, 2023, representatives of Check-Cap, Keystone, GGS, GT and FBC held videoconference calls to discuss material terms in the draft Business Combination Agreement that remained subject to further discussion between Check-Cap and Keystone. On these calls, among other things, the parties discussed: (i) the treatment of Check-Cap’s outstanding warrants, (ii) the termination fees payable by each of Check-Cap and Keystone in connection with a potential termination of the Business Combination Agreement and (iii) the terms and conditions with respect to Check-Cap’s obligation to declare a dividend at Closing.
On August 15, 2023, Check-Cap’s Board met via teleconference, with all but one board members present. Also in attendance were representatives of Ladenburg, Variance, GT and FBC. At the meeting, the Check-Cap board discussed both the Symetryx non-binding offer, and the letter and subsequent dialogue with the private company. Regarding the Symetryx proposal, the board noted that the proposal was non-binding and highly conditional (including an apparent need for financing), and further noted that the revised cash purchase price of $4.60 per share was significantly less than the value ascribed to Check-Cap in the proposed Keystone transaction. Regarding the letter from the private company, the board noted that the approximately $30 million valuation was less than the cash amount held by Check-Cap as reflected in its publicly available information at the time the letter was sent and that in the absence of an updated proposal, the board assumed that the valuation would be further adjusted downward based on Check-Cap’s estimated cash at closing. It was also noted that no information had been provided by the private company to support its valuation, and that the private company operated in an industry that was outside of the medical technology industry with which Check-Cap and its board members had the most familiarity. Lastly, members of the board expressed their concern that further delay could result in the loss of the Keystone opportunity. Taking all of these items into account, the board determined that entering into the transaction with Keystone, which was substantially fully-negotiated at this time, was preferable to waiting for further feedback from either Symetryx or the private company.
At the meeting, a representative of FBC reviewed with the directors their fiduciary duties under Israeli law generally and how those fiduciary duties applied in the context of considering the Business Combination and provided an overview of the proposed board resolutions for approving the Israeli Merger, the Business Combination Agreement and the transactions to which Check-Cap is a party. Ladenburg presented to the Board the estimated per share value to Check-Cap’s shareholders in the event of the liquidation of Check-Cap as compared to the per share value to Check-Cap’s shareholders in the Business Combination, which demonstrated an increased value to the shareholders in the Business Combination. Check-Cap’s Board and GT then reported on the contemplated timing of the Business Combination and a representative of GT reviewed the terms of the Business Combination Agreement and the other transaction documents with Check-Cap’s Board. At the meeting, members of Check-Cap’s Board discussed among themselves the key terms of the Business Combination. Representatives of Ladenburg and Variance reviewed with Check-Cap’s Board their respective financial analyses, and rendered their respective oral opinions, which were subsequently confirmed by delivery of their respective written opinions, dated August 15, 2023, to the Board that, as of such date, and based upon and subject to the factors and assumptions set forth in their respective opinions, the Exchange Ratio is fair, from a financial point of view, to the Check-Cap shareholders. For a detailed discussion of Ladenburg’s opinion and Variance’s opinion, see “— Opinion of Check-Cap’s Financial Advisors — Fairness Opinion of Ladenburg” and “— Opinion of Check-Cap’s Financial Advisors — Fairness Opinion of Variance,” respectively. Following discussions, including discussing the advantages and risks of the proposed transaction (which are more fully described below under the caption “— Our Reasons for Approving the Business Combination”), Check-Cap’s Board voted unanimously (with one director absent) to approve and declare advisable the Business Combination Agreement and the ancillary transaction agreements and the transactions contemplated thereby, subject to final negotiations, and the submission of the business combination to the approval of the Check-Cap shareholders.
On August 16, 2023, the Business Combination Agreement and ancillary agreements were executed by the parties thereto.
After the market close on August 16, 2023, Check-Cap and Keystone issued a joint press release announcing the execution of the Business Combination Agreement, and Check-Cap filed with the SEC a Current Report on Form 6-K disclosing the execution of the Business Combination Agreement and related matters. During the morning of August 17, 2023, representatives of Check-Cap and Keystone conducted an investor conference call to announce the Business Combination.
On August 17, 2023, Keystone delivered to Check-Cap a copy of the written consent of Keystone stockholders adopting the Business Combination Agreement and approving the Business Combination, including the U.S. Merger.
Since August 16, 2023, Check-Cap and Keystone, along with their respective counsel and advisors, have worked jointly on the preparation of the registration statement of which the New Parent Prospectus forms a part.
The parties have continued and expect to continue regular discussions regarding the timing to consummate the Business Combination and necessary preparation in connection therewith.
On September 29, 2023, Symetryx delivered a letter to Check-Cap in which it demanded that Check-Cap convene an extraordinary general meeting of its shareholders, the purpose of which would be to dismiss all five current members of the Check-Cap Board and to appoint in their stead five director nominees as proposed by Symetryx. On the same date, Symetryx filed a Schedule 13D with the SEC, which indicated that Symetryx beneficially owned approximately 5.1% of Check-Cap’s outstanding shares.
On October 5, 2023, Check-Cap received a letter from the private company referred to above, responding to the process letter sent to the private company on August 11, 2023. On October 10, 2023, Ladenburg (on behalf of Check-Cap) responded to the private company, advising the private company that in order for the Check-Cap Board to evaluate the viability of the transaction proposed by the private company, and to determine whether such proposal could be deemed to be a “Superior Offer” pursuant to the Business Combination Agreement, Check-Cap required significant additional information, as detailed in the October 10th letter. On October 16, 2023, Ladenburg again contacted the private company, reiterating Check-Cap’s prior request for the additional information described in the October 10th letter. As of the date of this Proxy Statement, no further response, and no additional information, had been received by Check-Cap from the private company.
On October 19, 2023, Check-Cap responded to the Symetryx letter described above, and advised Symetryx that following review of the Symetryx demand letter and in consultation with its legal advisors, Check-Cap had determined to reject Symetryx’s demands for the convening of an extraordinary general meeting. On October 24, 2023, Symetryx’s Israeli counsel responded to Check-Cap’s October 19th letter, advising Check-Cap that Symetryx intended to facilitate a self-convened meeting under applicable Israeli law, and sought information and cooperation from Check-Cap in order to convene such a meeting. On October 25, 2023, Check-Cap responded to this letter, rejecting Symetryx’s claims and assertions but offered, without derogating from Check-Cap’s position, and subject to receipt of independent evidence of Symetryx’s ownership of Check-Cap’s ordinary shares, to include Symetryx’s proposal for director elections in the agenda for the extraordinary general meeting to be called to approve the transactions contemplated by the Business Combination Agreement. On October 26, 2023, Symetryx’s Israeli counsel responded to Check-Cap’s October 25th letter, rejecting Check-Cap’s offer and reiterated its request that Check-Cap provide information and cooperation in order for Symetryx to self-convene such an extraordinary general meeting.
On October 30, 2023, Symetryx filed an Amendment No. 1 to Schedule 13D with the SEC, together with, as an exhibit thereto, a notice to convene an extraordinary general meeting of Check-Cap’s shareholders for December 4, 2023 at 4:00 p.m. (Israel time), the purpose of which is to dismiss all five current members of the Check-Cap Board and to appoint in their stead five director nominees as proposed by Symetryx and to approve the entry into indemnification and exculpation agreements and provide directors’ and officers’ liability insurance coverage to all new director nominees. On October 31, 2023, Symetryx filed with the Haifa District Court (Economic Department) a motion for provisional and temporary relief, to instruct Check-Cap to provide Symetryx with all necessary information to self-convene an extraordinary general meeting of Check-Cap’s shareholders, to cooperate with Symetryx to convene the meeting and to refrain from taking any action outside the ordinary course of business until the results of the self-convened extraordinary meeting have been obtained.
On November 1, 2023, Check-Cap filed a notice to convene an extraordinary general meeting of shareholders on December 4, 2023, at 2:00 p.m. (Israel time), the purpose of which is to consider and approve the Business Combination Proposal and to elect five directors to the Check-Cap Board out of ten director nominees, including the five current members of the Check-Cap Board and the five director nominees as proposed by Symetryx.
On November 6, 2023, Symetryx filed with the Haifa District Court (Economic Department) a claim against Check-Cap and its directors, to instruct Check-Cap to comply with the resolutions that shall be adopted at the extraordinary general meeting convened by Symetryx on December 4, 2023, to declare that the Check-Cap directors breached their fiduciary duties towards Check-Cap and Symetryx, as a shareholder of Check-Cap, and to instruct the defendants, jointly and severally, to indemnify Symetryx for its expenses incurred in connection with convening the extraordinary general meeting, estimated at NIS 793,200 (approximately $191,446). Check-Cap has until January 29, 2024 to file its statement of defense (which date may be subject to extension, from time to time, by governmental order due to the current security situation in Israel).
On November 9, 2023, Check-Cap filed with the Haifa District Court (Economic Department) its response to Symetryx’s motion for provisional and temporary relief, in which Check-Cap requested that the court reject the motion on the grounds, among others: that under Israeli law and established Israeli case law, a board of directors cannot be compelled to convene, and a shareholder cannot self-convene, an extraordinary meeting of shareholders for the purpose of the election of directors, as this decision is within the sole discretion of the board of directors; that Symetryx did not present valid evidence of its holdings in Check-Cap to legally entitle Symetryx to request that the board of directors convene, or to self-convene, an extraordinary shareholders meeting; and that Symetryx failed to disclose to Check-Cap’s shareholders, Check-Cap or the Court its affiliation with the other private company referred to above, contrary to the requirements of applicable law and Check-Cap’s articles of association, and that the sole purpose of the requested extraordinary shareholder meeting is to obstruct the Keystone transaction in order to pursue a transaction with such other affiliated private company.
On November 12, 2023, Check-Cap and Symetryx reached a settlement under which Symetryx will cancel the extraordinary shareholders meeting that it purported to self-convene and Check-Cap will convert the extraordinary shareholder meeting it convened to an annual general meeting of shareholders to be held on December 18, 2023, the agenda for which will include the Business Combination Proposal, the election of five directors to the Check-Cap Board out of ten director nominees, including five nominees proposed by Check-Cap and the five director nominees proposed by Symetryx, and other proposals in connection with an annual shareholder meeting. The parties further agreed that once the Check-Cap annual shareholder meeting has been convened, the pending legal proceedings filed by Symetryx will be fully and finally denied in their entirety without costs.
Recommendation of the Check-Cap Board
At a meeting held on August 15, 2023, the Check-Cap Board unanimously (with one director absent) (i) determined that the Israeli Merger and the other transactions to which Check-Cap is a party, are fair to, advisable and in the best interests of Check-Cap and its shareholders, (ii) approved and declared advisable the Business Combination Proposal, (iii) determined that considering the financial position of the merging entities in the Israeli Merger, no reasonable concern exists that, as a result of the Israeli Merger, the Israeli Surviving Company will be unable to fulfill the obligations of Check-Cap to its creditors, and (iv) determined to recommend, upon the terms and subject to the conditions set forth in the Business Combination Agreement, that the Check-Cap shareholders vote to approve the Check-Cap Transaction Matters.
Our Reasons for Approving the Business Combination
At its August 15, 2023 meeting, the Check-Cap Board unanimously (with one director absent who did not vote, abstain or hold a personal interest in the outcome of vote) determined that the Business Combination Proposal were fair to, and in the best interests of, Check-Cap and its shareholders. Consequently, the Check-Cap Board approved the Business Combination Proposal and determined to recommend that the Check-Cap shareholders approve the Business Combination Proposal.
Leading up to such approval, a special committee of independent members of the Check-Cap Board and its financial advisor, Ladenburg, undertook a comprehensive and thorough process to review and analyze potential strategic transaction opportunities and merger candidates to identify an opportunity or merger partner that would, in the Check-Cap Board’s view, create the most value for the Check-Cap shareholders. In the course of its evaluation of the Business Combination Agreement and Business Combination with Keystone, the special committee held numerous meetings, consulted with Check-Cap’s senior management, Check-Cap’s outside legal counsel and Check-Cap’s financial advisors, and reviewed and assessed a significant amount of information, and considered a number of factors. This information was shared on a regular basis with all members of the Check-Cap Board to enable the Check-Cap Board to be fully informed to reach its final decisions. The information and factors considered in the evaluation included the following:
| • | the Check-Cap Board’s belief that a “go it alone” scenario was not without significant risk and dilution to the Check-Cap shareholders, taking into account Check-Cap’s business, operational and financial prospects, including the most recent efficacy results from Check-Cap’s calibration studies not meeting the goal in order to proceed to the powered portion of the U.S. pivotal study, the likelihood of success in conducting a pivotal study and obtaining FDA approval, and the need to raise significant additional financing for future clinical and commercial development of Check-Cap; |
| • | the Check-Cap Board’s belief, given the risks associated with clinical development and, in particular, that deriving value from C-Scan would require a favorable future decision by the FDA with respect to the design of the powered portion of Check-Cap’s U.S. pivotal study, and based in part on the judgement, advice and analysis of Check-Cap advisors with respect to the potential strategic, financial and operational benefits of the Business Combination (which judgement was informed in part by the business, technical, financial and legal due diligence investigation performed by Check-Cap over several weeks with respect to Keystone), that Keystone’s commercial stage medical technology focused on providing end-to-end solutions for dental practitioners and tooth replacement procedures, along with the experience of its management and other personnel, would create more value for Check-Cap shareholders in the long term than Check-Cap could create as an independent stand-alone company; |
| • | the Check-Cap Board’s consideration of the valuation and business prospects of all other strategic transaction candidates involved in a comprehensive and thorough strategic review process that Check-Cap’s board and its financial advisors undertook, and Check-Cap Board’s collective view, in consultation with its financial advisors, that Keystone was the most attractive candidate for Check-Cap due to, among other things, Keystone being a commercial stage revenue generating medical device company, backing from a syndicate of reputable investors, experienced management team, and the sizeable potential market opportunity and growth potential for Keystone’s end-to-end solutions for dental practitioners and tooth replacement procedures, thereby providing existing Check-Cap shareholders a significant opportunity to participate in the potential growth of the combined company following the Business Combination; |
| • | Check-Cap Board’s belief that, as a result of arm’s length negotiations with Keystone and its representatives, it negotiated the most favorable Exchange Ratio for Check-Cap shareholders that Keystone was willing to agree to, and that the terms of the Business Combination Agreement include the most favorable terms to Check-Cap in the aggregate to which Keystone was willing to agree; |
| • | the Check-Cap Board’s consideration that New Parent will be led by an experienced senior management team from Keystone; |
| • | the potential for obtaining a superior offer from an alternative party and the risk of losing the proposed transaction with Keystone; |
| • | the likelihood that the Business Combination would be consummated; |
| • | the Check-Cap Board’s consideration of the financial analysis of Ladenburg and the oral opinion of Ladenburg orally delivered to the Check-Cap Board on August 15, 2023 (subsequently confirmed in writing on August 15, 2023), to the effect that, as of the date of such opinion, and based upon and subject to the various assumptions made, procedures followed, matters considered and limitations and qualifications on the scope of the review undertaken by Ladenburg, as set forth in its draft written opinion, the Exchange Ratio is fair, from a financial point of view, to the Check-Cap shareholders; |
| • | the Check-Cap Board’s consideration of the financial analysis of Variance and the opinion of Variance orally delivered to the Check-Cap Board on August 15, 2023 (subsequently confirmed in writing on August 15, 2023), to the effect that, as of the date of such opinion, and based upon and subject to the various assumptions made, procedures followed, matters considered and limitations and qualifications on the scope of the review undertaken by Variance, as set forth in its draft written opinion, the Exchange Ratio is fair, from a financial point of view, to the Check-Cap shareholders; and |
| • | the fact that the shares of New Parent Common Stock serving as Business Combination consideration are being registered with the SEC under both the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Securities Act”), and the Exchange Act and that New Parent intends to apply for listing of such shares on Nasdaq, which, taken together, should provide the vast majority of Check-Cap’s shareholders with a continued opportunity for liquidity. |
The Check-Cap Board also considered the recent results of operations and financial conditions of Check-Cap, including:
| • | the lack of sufficient capital to complete the powered portion of the Check-Cap U.S. pivotal study based on a proposed amended study protocol design, as well as the challenge of raising sufficient capital to complete the study under terms that would be more favorable to Check-Cap shareholders than the Business Combination with Keystone; and |
| • | the issues likely to be involved with pursuing a voluntary liquidation and that a voluntary liquidation would likely result in significantly less value to Check-Cap’s shareholders than the proposed transaction with Keystone should Keystone be successful in the commercialization of its tooth replacement solutions. |
The Check-Cap Board also reviewed the terms of the Business Combination Agreement and associated transactions, including:
| • | the fact that the Exchange Ratio, which is expected to result in Check-Cap shareholders immediately prior to the Business Combination owning approximately 15% of New Parent immediately following the Business Combination, on a fully-diluted basis (subject to adjustment based on Check-Cap’s net cash at closing), is financially attractive in light of Check-Cap’s stand-alone value, recent stock price and strategic alternatives, and the potential value of Keystone following the Business Combination; |
| • | the rights of, and limitations on, Check-Cap and Keystone under the Business Combination Agreement to consider certain unsolicited acquisition proposals under certain circumstances, should such party receive a “superior offer”; |
| • | the support agreement, pursuant to which certain stockholders of Keystone have agreed, solely in their capacity as stockholders of Keystone, to vote all of their shares of Keystone common stock in favor of the approval of the Business Combination Agreement; |
| • | the Check-Cap Board’s belief that the terms of the Business Combination Agreement, including the parties’ representations, warranties and covenants, deal protection provisions and the conditions, are reasonable for a transaction of this nature; and |
| • | Check-Cap’s right to sell assets related to its C-Scan technology, subject to certain limitations, provided that the transaction is entered into prior to the closing of the Business Combination Agreement, and include cash proceeds from the sale of the C-Scan assets (received by Check-Cap at or prior to the Closing Date, or to which Check-Cap is contractually entitled as of the Closing Date to receive within 90 days following the Closing Date) as part of the Check-Cap net cash calculation or to the extent that the closing of the sale of the C-Scan assets shall occur following the Closing Date, such cash proceeds shall be distributed by Keystone to the legacy Check-Cap shareholders. |
The Check-Cap Board also considered a variety of risks and other countervailing factors related to the Business Combination, including:
| • | the possibility that Check-Cap’s shareholders may not approve the Business Combination; |
| • | the fact that the Exchange Ratio may be adjusted to the extent Check-Cap’s net cash at Closing is lesser or greater than the net cash target; |
| • | the $1.5 million termination fee (plus up to $1.5 million of expenses) payable by Check-Cap to Keystone upon the occurrence of certain events and the potential effect of such termination fee in deterring other potential acquirers from proposing an alternative transaction that may be more advantageous to Check-Cap shareholders; |
| • | the $4.0 million termination fee (plus up to $1.0 million of expenses) payable by Keystone to Check-Cap upon the occurrence of certain events and the likelihood the receipt of the termination fee from Keystone will only offset a portion of expenses incurred by Check-Cap in connection with the Business Combination; |
| • | the substantial expenses incurred and to be incurred by Check-Cap in connection with the Business Combination; |
| • | the possible volatility of the trading price of the Check-Cap ordinary shares resulting from the announcement of the Business Combination; |
| • | the risks that the Business Combination might not be consummated in a timely manner or at all and the potential effect of the public announcement of the Business Combination or failure to complete the Business Combination on the reputation of Check-Cap; |
| • | the strategic direction of New Parent following the Closing of the Business Combination; |
| • | the likelihood that Check-Cap shareholders may not receive any value for the C-Scan assets; |
| • | the likelihood of disruptive shareholder litigation following announcement of the Business Combination; |
| • | the fact that the proposed transaction might be taxable to Check-Cap’s Israeli shareholders upon consummation of the Israeli Merger, absent receipt of appropriate tax rulings. The receipt of such rulings is a condition to closing. See the section entitled “Business Combination — Material Israeli Tax Consequences of the Business Combination — Tax Rulings” beginning on page 45 of this Proxy Statement; |
| • | the risk that the Business Combination may not be completed despite the parties’ efforts or that the closing may be unduly delayed and the effects on Check-Cap as a standalone company because of such failure or delay, and that a more limited range of alternative strategic transactions may be available to Check-Cap in such an event and its likely inability to raise additional capital through the public or private sale of equity securities; and |
| • | the various other risks associated with the combined company and the Business Combination, including those described in the sections entitled “Risk Factors” in the New Parent Prospectus and “Cautionary Statement Regarding Forward-Looking Statements” in this Proxy Statement. |
The foregoing information and factors considered by the Check-Cap Board are not intended to be exhaustive but are believed to include all of the material factors considered by the Check-Cap Board. In view of the wide variety of factors considered in connection with its evaluation of the Business Combination and the complexity of these matters, the Check-Cap Board did not find it useful to attempt, and did not attempt, to quantify, rank or otherwise assign relative weights to these factors. In considering the factors described above, individual members of the Check-Cap Board may have given different weight to different factors. The Check-Cap Board conducted an overall analysis of the factors described above, including thorough discussions with, and questioning of, Check-Cap management team, members of the special committee and the legal and financial advisors of Check-Cap, and considered the factors overall to be favorable to, and to support, its determination.
Agreements Related to the Business Combination
Registration Rights Agreement
In connection with the transactions contemplated by the Business Combination Agreement, New Parent will enter into a Registration Rights Agreement with Accelmed, AGP SPV 1, L.P., a Cayman Islands limited partnership (“AGP”) and Melker Nilsson, the Chief Executive Officer of New Parent. A copy of the Registration Rights Agreement is attached as Annex F to the New Parent Prospectus. The following summary of the Registration Rights Agreement does not purport to be complete and may not contain all of the information about the Registration Rights Agreement that is important to you and you are encouraged to read the Registration Rights Agreement carefully and in its entirety.
Demand Registration Rights
Subject to certain limitations, at any time following the execution of the Registration Rights Agreement, Accelmed and AGP may make up to three (3) demands for New Parent to register under the Securities Act registrable securities by delivering to New Parent a written notice of each such demand, provided that the total offering price reasonably expected under each registration is expected to exceed, in the aggregate, $20,000,000.
Piggyback Registration Rights
Subject to certain limitations, if, at any time following the execution of the Registration Rights Agreement, New Parent proposes for any reason to register shares of New Parent Common Stock under the Securities Act with respect to an offering of equity securities, or securities or other obligations exercisable or exchangeable for, or convertible into equity securities, for its own account or for the account of its stockholders, it must at each such time give written notice of such proposed filing to the holders of registrable securities as soon as practicable (but not less than ten (10) days before the anticipated filing date) and include in such registration all registrable securities with respect to which New Parent has received written requests for inclusion therein within five (5) business days after receipt of New Parent’s notice.
Expenses
All fees and expenses incidental to New Parent’s performance of or compliance with its obligations under the Registration Rights Agreement (excluding incremental selling expenses such as underwriting marketing costs, commissions, discounts and brokerage fees) will be borne by New Parent.
Indemnification
The Registration Rights Agreement also includes customary cross-indemnification provisions, under which New Parent is obligated to indemnify the holders of registrable securities, their officers, directors, stockholders, partners, members, affiliates and agents, and the holders’ control persons, in the event of material misstatements or omissions in the registration statement attributable to New Parent, and the holders of registrable securities are obligated to indemnify New Parent, its directors, officers, agents and New Parent’s control persons, for material misstatements or omissions attributable to them.
Support Agreement
Concurrently with the execution of the Business Combination Agreement, Accelmed and AGP entered into a Support Agreement with Keystone and Check-Cap. A copy of the Support Agreement is attached as Annex G to the New Parent Prospectus. The following summary of the Support Agreement does not purport to be complete and may not contain all of the information about the Support Agreement that is important to you and you are encouraged to read the Support Agreement carefully and in its entirety.
The Support Agreement generally provides, among other things, that Accelmed and AGP will vote all of the shares of common stock of Keystone they own in favor of the approval and adoption of the Business Combination Agreement and the transactions thereunder and against any action, agreement or transaction or proposal that would reasonably be expected to result in the failure of the transactions from being consummated, except in connection with the exercise of any of New Parent’s rights under the Business Combination Agreement.
Lock-up Agreements
Concurrently with the execution of the Business Combination Agreement, Accelmed, AGP, Melker Nilsson and certain directors and officers of Check-Cap entered into Lock-Up Agreements with New Parent. A copy of the form of Lock-Up Agreement is attached as Annex H to the New Parent Prospectus. The following summary of the Lock-Up Agreements does not purport to be complete and may not contain all of the information about the Lock-Up Agreements that is important to you and you are encouraged to read the Lock-Up Agreement carefully and in its entirety.
The Lock-Up Agreements generally provide that each of Accelmed, AGP, Melker Nilsson and the certain directors and officers of Check-Cap agreed to certain restrictions on transfers of any shares of New Parent’s Common Stock they own for a period of 180 days following the date of the Closing. Each of the securityholders party to the Lock-Up Agreements agreed that without the prior written consent of New Parent such securityholder will not (i) offer, pledge, sell, contract to sell, sell any option or contract to purchase, purchase any option or contract to sell, grant any option, right or warrant to purchase, or otherwise transfer or dispose of, directly or indirectly, any shares of New Parent Common Stock or any securities convertible into or exercisable or exchangeable for shares of New Parent Common Stock, whether then owned or thereafter acquired, or publicly disclose the intention to make such offer, sale, pledge, grant, transfer or disposition (other than as set forth in the Business Combination Agreement or pursuant to the Registration Rights Agreement), (ii) enter into any swap, short sale, hedge or other agreement that transfers, in whole or in part, any of the economic consequences of ownership of New Parent Common Stock or (iii) make any demand for, or exercise any right with respect to, the registration of any shares of New Parent Common Stock or any security convertible into or exercisable or exchangeable for shares of New Parent Common Stock (other than as set forth in the Business Combination Agreement or pursuant to the Registration Rights Agreement).
Consideration to be Received in the Business Combination
Upon consummation of the U.S. Merger, each holder of shares of Keystone common stock will receive, for each share of Keystone common stock, a number of shares of New Parent Common Stock calculated pursuant to an exchange ratio based on the respective per share valuations of Keystone and Check-Cap, subject to adjustment based on the amount of net cash (as determined pursuant to the Business Combination Agreement) that Check-Cap has as of the close of business on the last business day prior to the anticipated closing date (the “Exchange Ratio”). In addition, each option to purchase shares of Keystone common stock and each warrant to purchase shares of Keystone common stock issued by Keystone will be converted into an option or warrant to purchase shares of New Parent Common Stock issued by New Parent, as applicable, on substantially similar terms, subject to adjustment in the number of underlying shares and the exercise price in accordance with to the Exchange Ratio (subject to rounding down to the nearest whole number of shares).
Upon consummation of the Israeli Merger, each holder of Check-Cap ordinary shares will receive one share of New Parent Common Stock for each ordinary share of Check-Cap such stockholder held at the effective time of the Israeli Merger. Each option to purchase Check-Cap ordinary shares (whether vested or unvested) that is outstanding and unexercised immediately prior to the effective time of the Israeli Merger will automatically expire and cease to exist as of immediately prior to the effective time of the Israeli Merger without any assumption or conversion, and no consideration will be delivered in respect thereof. Each Check-Cap Vested RSU that is outstanding immediately prior to the effective time of the Israeli Merger will be canceled and automatically convert into and represent the right to receive from New Parent the same number of shares of New Parent Common Stock. Each Check-Cap RSU that is outstanding and unvested immediately prior to the effective time of the Israeli Merger will automatically expire and cease to exist as of immediately prior to the effective time of the Israeli Merger without any assumption or conversion, and no consideration will be delivered in respect thereof. Each Check-Cap CLA Warrant that is outstanding and unexercised immediately prior to the effective time of the Israeli Merger will automatically expire with no consideration delivered in respect thereof. Finally, the Check-Cap Registered Direct Warrants and Check-Cap Placement Agent Warrants may be exercised by the holders thereof following the effective time of the Israeli Merger or, for a period of thirty days following the effective time of the Israeli Merger, redeemed at the election of the holders thereof for cash in an amount determined based on the Black-Scholes valuation model pursuant to the terms of such warrants. As the Check-Cap Registered Direct Warrants and Check-Cap Placement Agent Warrants are “out of the money” relative to the per share valuation of Check-Cap, it is expected that they will be redeemed in full and the calculation of net cash (as determined in accordance with the Business Combination Agreement) includes a reduction for the aggregate cost of the expected redemptions of such Check-Cap Registered Direct Warrants and Check-Cap Placement Agent Warrants. If any Check-Cap Registered Direct Warrants and Check-Cap Placement Agent Warrants are not redeemed by the end of such thirty-day period, the warrant holder will have the right to receive, upon exercise of such warrant, that number of shares of New Parent Common Stock that could have been acquired if such warrant had been exercised for ordinary shares of Check-Cap prior to the effective time of the Israeli Merger, and an allocable portion of any distributions with respect to the sale of Check-Cap’s legacy assets, as further described herein. There can be no assurance that any such sale or distributions will occur.
Opinion of Check-Cap’s Financial Advisors
Fairness Opinion of Ladenburg
As stated above, pursuant to an engagement letter dated April 24, 2023 (the "Ladenburg Engagement Letter"), Check-Cap retained Ladenburg to act as its financial advisor in connection with a proposed business combination with an unaffiliated third party and to render an opinion to the Check-Cap Board as to the fairness of the Exchange Ratio, from a financial point of view, to the holders of Check-Cap ordinary shares. On August 15, 2023, at the request of the Check-Cap Board, Ladenburg rendered its oral Ladenburg Opinion to the Check-Cap Board, subsequently confirmed in writing, that as of the date of such Ladenburg Opinion and based upon the various assumptions and limitations set forth therein, and such other factors that Ladenburg deemed relevant, the Exchange Ratio (assumed, at the time, to be 2.6656) was fair, from a financial point of view, to the holders of Check-Cap ordinary shares.
The full text of the Ladenburg Opinion is attached as Annex B to the New Parent Prospectus and is incorporated by reference. The summary of the Ladenburg Opinion set forth herein is qualified by reference to the full text of the Ladenburg Opinion. Ladenburg provided its opinion for the benefit and use by the Check-Cap Board in its consideration of the financial terms of the Business Combination. The Ladenburg Opinion is not a recommendation to the Check-Cap Board whether or not to approve the Business Combination or to any holder of Check-Cap ordinary shares or any other person as to how to vote with respect to the proposed Business Combination or to take any other action in connection with the Business Combination or otherwise.
In connection with the Ladenburg Opinion, Ladenburg took into account an assessment of general economic, market and financial conditions as well as its experience in connection with similar transactions and securities valuations generally and, among other things:
| • | Reviewed the Business Combination Agreement; |
| • | Reviewed and analyzed certain publicly available financial and other information for each of Check-Cap and Keystone, respectively, including equity research on comparable companies, and certain other relevant financial and operating data furnished to Ladenburg by the Check-Cap Board and Keystone management, respectively; |
| • | Reviewed and analyzed certain financial terms of the Business Combination Agreement as compared to the publicly available financial terms of certain selected business combinations deemed relevant; |
| • | Discussed with certain members of the Check-Cap Board and Keystone management the historical and current business operations, financial condition and prospects of Check-Cap and Keystone, respectively; |
| • | Reviewed and analyzed certain operating results of Keystone as compared to operating results and the reported price and trading histories of certain publicly traded companies that Ladenburg deemed relevant; |
| • | Reviewed and analyzed certain financial terms of the Business Combination Agreement as compared to the publicly available financial terms of certain selected business combinations that we deemed relevant; |
| • | Reviewed and analyzed certain financial terms of completed initial public offerings for certain companies that Ladenburg deemed relevant;
|
| • | Reviewed certain pro forma financial effects of the Israeli Merger; |
| • | Reviewed and analyzed certain internal financial analyses, including the cash burn model over the next year, projections as to cost and expenses and whether concurrent capital raised would sufficiently cover select programs, reports, preliminary internal market opportunity assumptions and other information concerning Keystone as prepared by Keystone, which were further revised by Check-Cap and utilized as instructed by the Check-Cap Board; and |
| • | Reviewed and analyzed such other information and such other factors, and conducted such other financial studies, analyses and investigations, as Ladenburg deemed relevant for the purposes of rendering the Ladenburg Opinion. |
In conducting its review and arriving at its opinion, Ladenburg, with the consent of the Check-Cap Board, assumed and relied upon, without independent verification or investigation, the accuracy and completeness of all financial and other information provided to or discussed with Ladenburg by Check-Cap and Keystone, respectively (or their respective employees, representatives or affiliates), or which was publicly available or was otherwise made available to it by Check-Cap or Keystone, respectively. Ladenburg did not undertake any responsibility for the accuracy, completeness or reasonableness of, or independent verification of, such information. Ladenburg relied upon, without independent verification, the assessment of the Check-Cap Board and Keystone management as to the viability of, and risks associated with, the current and future products and services of Keystone (including without limitation, the development, testing and marketing of such products and services, the receipt of all necessary governmental and other regulatory approvals for the development, testing and marketing thereof, and the life and enforceability of all relevant patents and other intellectual and other property rights associated with such products and services). In addition, Ladenburg did not conduct, nor did it assume any obligation to conduct, any physical inspection of the properties or facilities of Check-Cap or Keystone. Ladenburg, with the Check-Cap Board’s consent, relied upon the assumption that all information provided to it by Check-Cap and Keystone was accurate and complete in all material respects. To the extent that such information included estimates and forecasts of future financial performance prepared by or reviewed with the Check-Cap Board or management of Keystone, as applicable, Ladenburg assumed such estimates and forecasts had been reasonably prepared on bases reflecting the best currently available estimates and judgements of the Check Cap Board or Keystone management.
In its opinion, Ladenburg expressly disclaimed any undertaking or obligation to advise any person of any change in any fact or matter affecting the Ladenburg Opinion of which it becomes aware after the date of the Ladenburg Opinion. For purposes of the Ladenburg Opinion, Ladenburg assumed there were no material changes in the assets, liabilities, financial condition, results of operations, business or prospects of Check-Cap or Keystone since the date of the last financial statements made available to it. Ladenburg did not obtain any independent evaluations, valuations or appraisals of the assets or liabilities of Check-Cap or Keystone, nor was Ladenburg furnished with such materials. In addition, Ladenburg did not evaluate the solvency or fair value of Check-Cap or Keystone under any state or federal laws relating to bankruptcy, insolvency or similar matters. The Ladenburg Opinion does not address any legal, tax or accounting matters related to the Israeli Merger, as to which it assumed that Check-Cap and the Check-Cap Board had received such advice from legal, regulatory, tax and accounting advisors as each had determined appropriate. The Ladenburg Opinion addresses only the fairness of the Exchange Ratio, from a financial point of view, to the holders of Check-Cap ordinary shares. Ladenburg expressed no view as to any other aspect or implication of the Israeli Merger or any other agreement or arrangement entered into in connection with the Israeli Merger. The Ladenburg Opinion was necessarily based upon financial, economic and market conditions and other circumstances as they existed and could be evaluated by Ladenburg on the date of the Ladenburg Opinion. Ladenburg cautioned that it should be understood that although subsequent developments may affect the Ladenburg Opinion, Ladenburg does not have any obligation to update, revise or reaffirm the Ladenburg Opinion and Ladenburg expressly disclaimed any responsibility to do so.
Ladenburg did not consider any potential legislative or regulatory changes currently being considered or recently enacted by the United States or any foreign government, or any domestic or foreign regulatory body, or any changes in accounting methods or generally accepted accounting principles that may be adopted by the SEC, the Financial Accounting Standards Board, or any similar foreign regulatory body or board. For purposes of rendering the Ladenburg Opinion, Ladenburg assumed in all respects material to its analysis, that the final form of the Business Combination Agreement will not differ from the draft that Ladenburg has reviewed, that the representations and warranties of each party contained in the Business Combination Agreement were true and correct, that each party would perform all of the standards of the covenants and agreements required to be performed by it under the Business Combination Agreement and that all conditions to the consummation of the Israeli Merger would be satisfied without waiver or amendment of any term or condition thereof. Ladenburg also assumed that all governmental, regulatory and other consents and approvals contemplated by the Business Combination Agreement or otherwise required for the transactions contemplated thereby would be obtained and that in the course of obtaining any of those consents no restrictions would be imposed or waivers made that would have an adverse effect on Check-Cap, Keystone or the contemplated benefits of the Israeli Merger and the other transactions contemplated under the Business Combination Agreement. Ladenburg assumed that the Israeli Merger would be consummated in a manner that complied with the applicable provisions of the Securities Act, the Exchange Act, and all other applicable federal and state statutes, rules and regulations.
The Ladenburg Opinion was intended for the benefit and use of the Check-Cap Board in its consideration of the financial terms of the Israeli Merger and, except as set forth in the Ladenburg Engagement Letter, could not be used for any other purpose or reproduced, disseminated, quoted or referred to at any time, in any manner or for any purpose without Ladenburg's prior written consent, except that Ladenburg agreed that the Ladenburg Opinion could be included in its entirety in any filing related to the Israeli Merger to be filed with the SEC and the proxy statement to be mailed to the holders of Check-Cap ordinary shares, including this Proxy Statement.
The Ladenburg Opinion does not constitute a recommendation to the Check-Cap Board of whether or not to approve the Business Combination Agreement, including the Israeli Merger or to any holder of Check-Cap ordinary shares or any other person as to how to vote with respect to the Israeli Merger or to take any other action in connection with the Israeli Merger or otherwise. The Ladenburg Opinion does not address Check-Cap's underlying business decision to proceed with the Israeli Merger or the relative merits of the Israeli Merger compared to other alternatives available to Check-Cap. Ladenburg expressed no opinion as to the prices or ranges of prices at which shares or the securities of any person, including Check-Cap, will trade at any time, including following the announcement or consummation of the Israeli Merger ,or as to the potential effects of volatility in the credit, financial, and stock markets on Check-Cap, Keystone or the transactions contemplated by the Business Combination Agreement. Ladenburg was not requested to opine as to, and the Ladenburg Opinion does not in any manner address, the fairness in amount or nature of compensation to any of the officers, directors or employees of any party to the Israeli Merger, or any class of such persons, relative to the compensation to be received by the holders of Check-Cap ordinary shares in connection with the Israeli Merger pursuant to the Business Combination Agreement. The Ladenburg Opinion was reviewed and approved by Ladenburg's fairness opinion committee.
Principal Financial Analyses
The following is a summary of the principal financial analyses performed by Ladenburg to arrive at the Ladenburg Opinion. Some of the summaries of financial analyses include information presented in tabular format. In order to fully understand the financial analyses, the tables must be read together with the text of each summary. The tables alone do not constitute a complete description of the financial analyses. Considering the data set forth in the tables without considering the full narrative description of the financial analyses, including the methodologies and assumptions underlying the analyses, could create a misleading or incomplete view of the financial analyses. Ladenburg performed certain procedures, including each of the financial analyses described below and reviewed with the Check-Cap Board the assumptions on which such analyses were based and other factors, including the historical and projected financial results of Check-Cap and Keystone.
Transaction Overview as of the Date of the Ladenburg Opinion
Based upon the estimated Exchange Ratio of 2.6656 at the time of the signing of the Business Combination Agreement, Ladenburg estimated that at the closing of the Israeli Merger and the other transactions contemplated under the Business Combination Agreement: (a) Keystone equity (common stock, options and warrants) holders as of immediately prior to the Israeli Merger would own approximately 85.0% of the fully-diluted shares of New Parent Common Stock at the closing of the Israeli Merger, and (b) the existing Check-Cap equity holders as of immediately prior to the Israeli Merger (excluding for this purpose certain out-of-the-money Check-Cap options) would own approximately 15.0% of the fully-diluted shares of New Parent Common Stock at the closing of the Israeli Merger.
Implied New Parent Valuation
Ladenburg derived an implied valuation for the combined company by adding the $225 million Keystone equity value (as negotiated in the transaction) to the $39.7 million Check-Cap valuation (as negotiated in the transaction) for a combined New Parent equity value of $264.7 million.
Comparable Company Multiple Analysis
Based on its experience and professional judgment and using financial screening sources and databases to find companies that share similar business characteristics to Keystone within the MedTech industry, Ladenburg selected financial data of 12 publicly traded companies (referred to as the “Selected Publicly Traded Companies”). Each of the Selected Publicly Traded Companies is a revenue-generating company in the Dental and MedTech space developing similar implants and biomaterials that have a comparable growth and profitability profile to Keystone. Although the companies referred to below were used for comparison purposes, none of those companies were directly comparable to Keystone. In its evaluation, Ladenburg did not exercise any judgment or exclusionary practices to add or remove relevant companies that fit within such parameters. Accordingly, an analysis of the results of such a comparison was not purely mathematical but instead involved considerations and judgments concerning differences in historical and projected financial and operating characteristics of the selected companies below. The total enterprise values are based on closing stock prices on August 14, 2023. The Selected Publicly Traded Companies were:
| | Enterprise Value ($M) | | | 2024E Revenue ($M) | | | 2025E Revenue ($M) | | | EV / 2024E Revenue | | | EV / 2025E Revenue | |
Align Technology, Inc. | | $ | 26,689 | | | $ | 4,438 | | | $ | 4,944 | | | | 6.0 | x | | | 5.4 | x |
AxoGen, Inc. | | | 300 | | | | 175 | | | | 198 | | | | 1.7 | x | | | 1.5 | x |
DENTSPLY SIRONA Inc. | | | 10,082 | | | | 4141 | | | | 4288 | | | | 2.4 | x | | | 2.4 | x |
Envista Holdings Corporation | | | 6,333 | | | | 2794 | | | | 2945 | | | | 2.3 | x | | | 2.2 | x |
OrthoPediatrics Corp. | | | 815 | | | | 178 | | | | 211 | | | | 4.6 | x | | | 3.9 | x |
Paragon 28, Inc. | | | 1,237 | | | | 260 | | | | 310 | | | | 4.8 | x | | | 4.0 | x |
Pulmonx Corporation | | | 310 | | | | 77 | | | | 92 | | | | 4.0 | x | | | 3.4 | x |
SI-BONE, Inc. | | | 726 | | | | 158 | | | | 188 | | | | 4.6 | x | | | 3.9 | x |
Silk Road Medical, Inc | | | 670 | | | | 224 | | | | 264 | | | | 3.0 | x | | | 2.5 | x |
Straumann Holding AG | | | 25,434 | | | | 3,121 | | | | 3,475 | | | | 8.1 | x | | | 7.3 | x |
Treace Medical Concepts, Inc. | | | 993 | | | | 243 | | | | 293 | | | | 4.1 | x | | | 3.4 | x |
ZimVie Inc. | | | 799 | | | | 554 | | | | 854 | | | | 1.4 | x | | | 0.9 | x |
Ladenburg reviewed the enterprise value of each of the Selected Publicly Traded Companies as compared to forecasted 2024 and 2025 revenue estimates, as provided via consensus estimates using Ladenburg's financial screening sources and databases (CapitallQ and Bloomberg). Ladenburg divided both the 2024 and 2025 estimated revenue by the enterprise value of each company resulting in an Enterprise Value / Revenue multiple range of 0.9x to 8.1x. Ladenburg then utilized the 25th and 75th percentile of Enterprise Value / Revenue multiples to exclude potential outliers and provide a more representable sample of revenue multiples in its analysis. Using the 25th percentile and the 75th percentile of the Enterprise Value / Revenue multiples, Ladenburg then calculated a range of implied total equity values for the combined company by multiplying the projected Keystone revenue (as provided by management) in each year by the respective multiple for 2024 and 2025 and then adjusting for the combined company debt ($40.0 million) and the combined company cash ($30.3 million).
This results in a 2024 equity value range of $179.1 million to $376.0 million and a 2025 equity value range of $208.4 million to $382.9 million compared to the implied combined company valuation of $264.7 million.
Comparable M&A Transaction Multiple Analysis
Ladenburg reviewed the financial terms, to the extent the information was publicly available, of the 9 most recent merger transactions of companies that share similar business characteristics to Keystone within the MedTech industry (referred to as the "Selected Precedent M&A Transactions"). Although the Selected Precedent M&A Transactions were used for comparison purposes, none of the target companies were directly comparable to Keystone. In its evaluation, Ladenburg did not exercise any judgment or exclusionary practices to add or remove relevant companies that fit within such parameters. Accordingly, an analysis of the results of such a comparison was not purely mathematical, but instead involved considerations and judgments concerning differences in historical and projected financial and operating characteristics of the companies involved and other factors that could affect the merger value of such companies and Keystone to which they were being compared. Ladenburg reviewed the total enterprise values of the target companies (including downstream milestone payments). These transactions, including the date each was closed, were as follows:
Selected Precedent M&A Transactions
| | Target | | Acquirer | | Implied Enterprise Value ($mm) | | | EV / Revenue Multiple | |
Pending | | S.I.N. Implant System | | Henry Schein | | $ | 300.0 | | | | 4.9x | |
4/11/2023 | | Osstem Implant | | MBK Partners / Unison | | | 2,296.8 | | | | 2.7x | |
7/14/2021 | | Elos Medtech | | TA Associates | | | 222.9 | | | | 2.9x | |
4/1/2020 | | ExoCad | | Align Technology | | | 430.0 | | | | 6.8x | |
3/27/2018 | | DIO Corporation | | Dio Holdings | | | 758.5 | | | | 8.5x | |
2/21/2018 | | Zest Dental Solutions | | BC Partners | | | 593.0 | | | | 6.2x | |
9/20/2016 | | MIS Implants | | Dentsply Israel | | | 375.0 | | | | 4.7x | |
2/29/2016 | | Sirona Dental | | Dentsply | | | 5,826.5 | | | | 5.1x | |
12/11/2014 | | Nobel Biocare | | Danaher | | | 2,040.2 | | | | 2.8x | |
Ladenburg reviewed the enterprise value of each of the Selected Precedent M&A Transactions as compared to the last-twelve-month (LTM) revenue for each target as of the date of acquisition provided via Ladenburg's financial screening sources and databases (CapitallQ and Bloomberg). Ladenburg divided the LTM revenue by the enterprise value of each company at the time of acquisition resulting in an enterprise value/revenue multiple range of 2.7x to 8.5x. Ladenburg then utilized the 25th and 75th percentile of enterprise value/revenue multiples to exclude potential outliers and provide a more representable sample of revenue multiples in its analysis. Using the 25th percentile and the 75th percentile of the enterprise value/revenue multiples, Ladenburg then calculated a range of implied total equity values for the combined company by multiplying the projected Keystone revenue (as provided by management) in each year by a range of multiples and then discounting the implied enterprise value to account for the difference in time periods. Ladenburg then adjusted for the combined company debt ($40.0 million) and the combined company cash ($30.3 million). This results in a 2024 equity value range of $202.8 million to $441.9 million and a 2025 equity value range of $218.2 million to $474.6 million compared to the implied combined company valuation of $264.7 million.
Discounted Cash Flow Analysis
Ladenburg estimated a range of total enterprise values for Keystone based upon the present value of Keystone's estimated after-tax unlevered free cash flows, which are set forth in the section titled "The Business Combination — Check-Cap's Reasons for Approving the Business Combination" beginning on page 119 of the New Parent Prospectus. Ladenburg reviewed and analyzed the revenue and expense projections for Keystone as prepared by the Check-Cap Board.
The Check-Cap board considered certain assumptions that supported the market opportunity for Keystone’s Implants & Bio and Nexus programs. The revenue forecasts that were provided by Keystone, were modeled based on NORAM and the rest of world (RoW) sales, in the following manner: Keystone broke down its products into two segments: Implants and Biomaterials; and Nexus products. For NORAM, where Keystone currently has 46 direct sales representatives, Keystone took the average revenues per sales representative and multiplied by the number of representatives it plans to have in each of the next ten years, as follows:
Year: | | 2023 | | | 2024 | | | 2025 | | | 2026 | | | 2027 | | | 2028 | | | 2029 | | | 2030 | | | 2031 | | | 2032 | | | 2033 | |
Number: | | | 46 | | | | 47 | | | | 56 | | | | 62 | | | | 75 | | | | 89 | | | | 105 | | | | 124 | | | | 144 | | | | 161 | | | | 183 | |
The increase in the expected direct sales representatives directly correlates to Keystone’s expected revenue growth in North America, as the more direct sales representatives it has the more dental clinicians it can reach and, in turn, generate increased revenues. Keystone anticipates low double-digit growth in its Implant and Bio product lines, as those represent mature product lines, with the remaining growth expected to come from future innovation and increased focus on Keystone’s Nexus business to achieve the planned revenues. Potential limitations specific to basing revenue on this assumption include Keystone’s ability to attract, hire, and retain qualified talent based on the available candidate pool. Based on the maturity of its Implant and Bio product lines, as well as the maturity of the North American implant market, the Check-Cap board believes that projections based on historical average revenues per direct sales representative are helpful in analyzing Keystone’s business model. The expected average revenue per representative is expected to decline in Keystone’s Implants & Bio product lines since those are mature business models, while the expected average revenue per representative is expected to increase in Keystone’s Nexus product line, resulting in an expected overall increase per representative over the period of the plan. The limitations on assuming a historical average revenue direct sales representative include an assumption that Keystone’s customer base will continue to increase, competition in respect of the various product offerings and pricing pressures from competitors, and that past performance is not a guarantee of future results.
In ROW, where Keystone sells via distributors, Keystone took the average revenues per distributor and multiplied by the number of distributors it plans to have in each of the next ten years. In Israel and Australia, where Keystone sells directly (where revenues are much less material than in NORAM), Keystone used less objective assumptions regarding the expansion of sales. Revenues from sales in Israel are not material (representing less than 5.0% of Keystone’s overall revenues) and are expected to decline over the period of the plan, and the plan does not assume any revenue in Israel from sales of Nexus (although Keystone has obtained regulatory approval there). In respect of expected revenues from sales in Australia, the plan assumes low double-digit growth in the Nexus product line and higher growth rates with the introduction of Keystone’s implant products into the market during the fourth quarter of 2023, with approximate revenues projected to be as follows (AUS$, in millions):
Year: | | 2023 | | | 2024 | | | 2025 | | | 2026 | | | 2027 | | | 2028 | | | 2029 | | | 2030 | | | 2031 | | | 2032 | | | 2033 | |
Revenue: | | $ | 9.2 | | | $ | 13.3 | | | $ | 17.7 | | | $ | 21.8 | | | $ | 24.8 | | | $ | 27.8 | | | $ | 31.1 | | | $ | 35.2 | | | $ | 39.7 | | | $ | 44.7 | | | $ | 50.6 | |
In determining the potential market for the Keystone portfolio and projecting revenues, Keystone considered that it is a relatively small company compared to its competitors in Israel and Australia (in North America, Keystone estimates that its sales represent 3-4% of the market), and estimated that its penetration into the Israeli and Australian markets is relatively low, and that Keystone does not have any specific market potential reports for Israel and Australia as standalone countries. Based on its historical success in introducing new projects and gaining commercial acceptance, Keystone assumes that with its Implant and Bio product lines, Nexus products and customer-centric approach, Keystone will be able to grow sales and revenues in these regions. The yearly revenue assumptions were derived based on information provided by Keystone (which was reviewed and analyzed by Check-Cap), which included the potential market for the Keystone portfolio (the $11.3 billion tooth replacement market, which market opportunity includes Osteon’s full arch solution), and an analysis of the competitive landscape, which relied on Keystone’s analysis as described below under “Keystone Business — Competition”, and which took into account several key competitive factors, but which are dependent on Keystone’s continued ability to introduce innovative products and to grow its sales channels, in the United States and internationally. The yearly revenue assumptions provided by Keystone were reviewed and analyzed by Check-Cap (including discussions with Keystone personnel) through Check-Cap’s own due diligence, which was performed on the Israeli operations of Keystone, as well as through part of the legal and financial due diligence performed by Check-Cap’s advisors. Please see the section entitled “The Business Combination — Check-Cap’s Reasons for Approving the Business Combination” beginning on page 122 of the New Parent Prospectus for additional information on the revenue of the Keystone portfolio. The Check-Cap Board assumed a 28.0% corporate tax rate when calculating unlevered free cash flow.
In performing its discounted cash flow analysis, Ladenburg utilized discount rates ranging from 11.0% to 15.0%, which were selected based on the capital asset pricing model and the estimated weighted average cost of capital of the Selected Publicly Traded Companies, which was approximately 13.0%. Ladenburg then calculated a range of terminal values for Keystone by discounting the 2033 revenue of $365.9 million back to present values, resulting in a range of terminal values from $413.2 million to $599.3 million. Using a range of discount rates of 11.0% to 15.0%, Ladenburg then calculated a range of implied total equity values for Keystone after adjusting for the combined company debt ($40.0 million) and the combined company cash ($30.3 million) of $451.5 million to $655.2 million compared to the implied combined company valuation of $264.7 million.
The following table represents a summary of the Check-Cap prepared Keystone financial projections that were made available to Ladenburg and the Check-Cap board of directors.
Ladenburg has been advised that neither Check-Cap nor Keystone, as a matter of course, publicly discloses forecasts, internal projections as to future performance, revenues, earnings or other results of operations due to the inherent unpredictability and subjectivity of underlying assumptions and projections.
The financial projections set forth in the table of full year Keystone financial projections through 2033 below reflect numerous assumptions, including potential revenue opportunities, market acceptance of Keystone’s products, the timing of regulatory approval in certain markets, the ability to scale the production and distribution of Keystone’s products and services, general business, economic, market, regulatory and financial conditions and various other factors, all of which are difficult to predict and many of which are beyond the control of New Parent’s senior management. Keystone assumes that it will maintain the regulatory approvals it has already received and will obtain those approvals the applications for which are currently in process. Keystone currently holds approximately 20 FDA approvals, and it is not reliant on any one regulatory approval it currently holds for the continued success of its business. Failure to maintain any of its current regulatory approvals or obtain such new regulatory approvals may have an impact on Keystone’s projections, but it is impossible to determine at this time if the failure to maintain or obtain approvals may occur, or the impact any such failure or failures would have on the plan. As a manufacturing company, Keystone’s capital investment is correlated with the growth in Keystone’s revenue. With the projected increase in revenue, Keystone will be required to invest in equipment, machinery, tools, and potential expansion and renovation to its facilities in Israel, Irvine, and Melbourne in order to scale the production and distribution of its products. Additional factors that impact Keystone’s capital investment decisions include technological advancements, regulatory requirements and need to maintain and upgrade its production capabilities to remain efficient and competitive in the global market.
In respect of Keystone’s ability to scale the production and distribution of its products, the financial projections include assumed capital expenditures (including fit-out for new space and equipment to meet the expected increased demand in each location) for Keystone’s Israel, Irvine and Australia facilities to be expended over the course of the plan.
Check-Cap believes its projections are reasonable as they are based on Keystone’s historical financial data and detailed inputs from the management of Keystone. The following assumptions were made to create the original Keystone projections and further specify the changes that the Check-Cap board made to the projections provided by Keystone:
| • | | The forecast addresses Keystone’s commercial products, including its broad implant portfolio and biomaterials, as well as the revenue generated from Nexus iOS; |
| • | | Keystone modeled the revenue forecasts based on NORAM and the rest of the world (RoW) sales, which forecasts were accepted by the Check-Cap board; |
| • | | The Check-Cap board agreed with Keystone’s assumption that the revenue will continue growing relatively fast until 2033; |
| • | | Though projections extending past 2-3 years are highly uncertain and can be unreliable, the Check-Cap board believed, based on the performance of the Selected Publicly Traded Companies, and the assumption that Keystone would continue to develop and introduce innovative new products that would gain acceptance in existing and new markets, that Keystone’s consolidated revenues could reasonably be expected to average a 19.0% growth rate between the years of 2023 through 2027, while decreasing to average approximately 17% year over year from 2028 to 2033; |
| • | | Check-Cap modified the Keystone revenue model from assuming fixed prices beginning in 2028 to assume erosion in selling prices over time, due to entry of competitors and new competing technologies, resulting in an anticipated decrease by an average of 4.1% year after year until 2033; |
| • | | Check-Cap increased research and development expenses by 1.0% to 2.0% between the years of 2028 and 2033 to support the increase in revenues and the probability of future competition. The increase was based on the Check-Cap Board’s experience in other companies in the medical field, where the rate of spending on R&D is higher than what was contemplated by the Keystone model; |
| • | | COGS is based on a percentage of net sales dependent on either Implants & Biomaterials or Nexus that continuously increases throughout 2033. Specifically, COGS is separated between the Implant & Bio businesses and the Nexus business. In respect of the Implant & Bio businesses, COGS as a percentage of net sales (defined as revenue, for these purposes) decreases by approximately 0.5% per year under the assumptions of a price increase, increased buying power, and efficiencies in Keystone’s manufacturing process. In respect of the Nexus business, COGS as a percentage of net sales decreases significantly through the first half of the period of our plan as Keystone is expected to leverage its production capacity. During the second half of the period of the plan, Keystone expects modest year-over-year decreases in COGS for the same reasons as those described above for the Implant & Bio businesses. These assumptions are subject to the risks of freight and supply chain challenges, any substantial increase in the cost of materials, and that Keystone may be unable to implement efficiencies in its manufacturing processes; and |
| • | | Sales and marketing costs are calculated as a percentage of total revenue that continues to slightly decline throughout the forecasted period. In that regard, the percentage of revenues was not used to calculate the sales and marketing costs. Such costs increase as the number of direct sales representatives increase to drive the revenue over the period of the plan, and even though the calculated percentage of revenue decreases in absolute value, Keystone increases its sales and marketing costs in support of incremental headcount and marketing activities. The assumptions underlying such expected costs are subject to the risks of Keystone’s ability to attract, hire and retain qualified talent based on the available candidate pool and the launch of effective marketing campaigns. |
Years | | 2023 | | | 2024 | | | 2025 | | | 2026 | | | 2027 | | | 2028 | | | 2029 | | | 2030 | | | 2031 | | | 2032 | | | 2033 | |
Revenue | | $ | 70.7 | | | $ | 81.8 | | | $ | 99.1 | | | $ | 119.7 | | | $ | 144.3 | | | $ | 166.5 | | | $ | 196.0 | | | $ | 229.5 | | | $ | 269.9 | | | $ | 316.2 | | | $ | 365.9 | |
COGS and R&D(1) | | $ | 36.0 | | | $ | 39.7 | | | $ | 48.1 | | | $ | 57.4 | | | $ | 69.0 | | | $ | 80.1 | | | $ | 94.4 | | | $ | 112.4 | | | $ | 132.0 | | | $ | 153.9 | | | $ | 177.4 | |
Other Expenses(2) | | $ | 41.0 | | | $ | 42.1 | | | $ | 48.2 | | | $ | 54.9 | | | $ | 62.7 | | | $ | 70.6 | | | $ | 80.3 | | | $ | 90.9 | | | $ | 102.8 | | | $ | 112.7 | | | $ | 122.9 | |
EBITDA(3) | | $ | (6.3 | ) | | $ | (0.0 | ) | | $ | 2.8 | | | $ | 7.4 | | | $ | 12.6 | | | $ | 15.9 | | | $ | 21.3 | | | $ | 26.3 | | | $ | 35.0 | | | $ | 49.6 | | | $ | 65.5 | |
(Taxes) | | | — | | | | — | | | $ | 0.8 | | | $ | 2.1 | | | $ | 3.5 | | | $ | 4.4 | | | $ | 6.0 | | | $ | 7.4 | | | $ | 9.8 | | | $ | 13.9 | | | $ | 18.4 | |
Depreciation & Amortization | | $ | 1.1 | | | $ | 1.4 | | | $ | 1.9 | | | $ | 2.3 | | | $ | 2.5 | | | $ | 2.6 | | | $ | 2.7 | | | $ | 2.8 | | | $ | 2.6 | | | $ | 2.1 | | | $ | 1.8 | |
(Investments in Capex) | | $ | 1.2 | | | $ | 3.7 | | | $ | 4.8 | | | $ | 2.0 | | | $ | 1.8 | | | $ | 1.7 | | | $ | 1.3 | | | $ | 2.0 | | | $ | 1.5 | | | $ | 1.3 | | | $ | 2.8 | |
Unlevered Free Cash Flow(4) | | $ | (6.4 | ) | | $ | (2.3 | ) | | $ | (0.8 | ) | | $ | 5.7 | | | $ | 9.8 | | | $ | 12.3 | | | $ | 16.8 | | | $ | 19.7 | | | $ | 26.3 | | | $ | 36.5 | | | $ | 46.2 | |
(1) | Projected R&D amounts, which are currently equal to approximately 6% of revenues, are expected to increase during the period to 10% of projected revenues (based on management’s belief that this increase is necessary to maintain Keystone’s competitive advantage) and are assumed to average 8% of projected revenues over the course of the plan. Such amounts are subject to, among other things, revenue and gross profit growth, as well as the limitations in attracting, hiring and retaining members of our R&D department. |
(2) | Other Expenses include sales and marketing expenses, general and administrative expenses, and regulatory and quality assurance expenses. Sales and marketing costs are primarily driven by increased sales staff in North America, Israel and Australia, and incremental marketing spending to support growth. General and administrative costs include incremental staff and fees related to being a publicly-traded company, as well as the increase in staff over the course of the plan to support the growth of Keystone’s business. Regulatory and quality assurance costs are expected to remain stable over the course of the plan, as Keystone expects such items to remain stable. In the event that additional regulatory requirements become applicable, Keystone may need to increase (temporarily or permanently) its headcount to handle such requirements. |
(3) | EBITDA is a non-GAAP financial measure defined as the earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization. EBITDA is used as an alternate measure of cash profit generated by the company’s operations. The term EBITDA was used to assess the corporate profitability net of expenses and to evaluate a company’s operating performance. EBITDA is a variation of operating income that excludes non-cash expenses, which is the most directly comparable measure calculated in accordance with GAAP. This measure should not be considered as an alternative to operating income or other measures derived in accordance with GAAP. Each of Keystone, Check-Cap and New Parent believes the use of EBITDA provides an additional tool for investors and potential investors to use in evaluating its ongoing liquidity results and trends, but caution that EBITDA should not be considered in isolation from, or as a substitute for, financial information presented in compliance with GAAP.
|
(4) | Unlevered free cash flow is a non-GAAP financial measure defined as net operating profit after tax (NOPAT), less capital expenditures, plus depreciation and amortization, and less change in net working capital. Unlevered Free Cash Flow is a non-GAAP financial measure as it excludes amounts included in cash flow from operations, the most directly comparable measure calculated in accordance with GAAP. This measure should not be considered as an alternative to cash flow from operations or other measures derived in accordance with GAAP. The term Unlevered Free Cash Flow is used in financial modeling to determine the enterprise value of a firm and conduct a discounted cash flow analysis to evaluate comparable companies in a similar manner. In the model above, Keystone’s Unlevered Free Cash Flow is calculated by taking NOPAT and subtracting out taxes, adding back Keystone’s depreciation and amortization costs and subtracting out its investments in capital expenditures. Keystone’s projected operating profit is based on expected revenue growth, margin expansion and operational efficiencies that could be limited by unforeseen market changes or operational challenges that could materially impact actual operating income. Ladenburg assumed a consistent effective tax rate for the forecasted period however, changes in tax laws, regulations or unanticipated tax obligations could lead to variations in actual tax expenses. The model assumes a consistent depreciation and amortization schedule based on the current assets but could be materially altered if there are any large acquisitions of depreciable assets or changes in depreciation methods in the future. Capital expenditures are based on planned investments or other expected maintenance requirements but is limited by any unexpected investments in the future. Additional limitations to Unlevered Free Cash Flow may include but are not limited to, unpredictable macroeconomic conditions, evolution of the competitive landscape and changes in industry regulations or standards. Each of Keystone, Check-Cap and New Parent believes the use of Unlevered Free Cash Flow provides an additional tool for investors and potential investors to use in evaluating its ongoing liquidity results and trends, but caution that unlevered free cash flow should not be considered in isolation from, or as a substitute for, financial information presented in compliance with GAAP. |
Keystone’s consolidated sales forecasts hinge on assumptions primarily based on the innovative “Nexus” product and Keystone’s Implants and Biomaterials revenue streams. While current revenues from “Nexus” are approximately 20% of total sales, anticipated growth is significant going out past 2-3 years. Keystone’s projections foresee a large ramp up in sales for “Nexus” for the next few years followed by moderation of the growth rate from 2028 onward. Meanwhile, Keystone foresees a continuous 14% growth rate for the Implants and Biomaterials product sales starting in 2027. These projections consider gradual market penetration, consumer adoption patterns in the dental care market and continual product enhancements due to ongoing research and development. In addition, several of the markets in which Keystone operates or intends to operate are mature markets. Achieving sustained growth rates in mature markets, especially in later years, can be challenging, but having experience in these mature markets can provide greater understanding of the factors, such as investment in research and development and growth of direct sales force, that in the past have contributed to the company’s success in these markets. Accordingly, Ladenburg believes that extending the projections to 10 years, while inherently uncertain and which can be unreliable (as described in the following paragraph), provides a reasonable basis for analyzing the factors influencing Keystone’s Unlevered Free Cash Flow.
The summary set forth above does not purport to be a complete description of all the analyses performed by Ladenburg. The preparation of a fairness opinion involves various determinations as to the most appropriate and relevant methods of financial analysis and the application of these methods to particular circumstances. Therefore, such an opinion is not readily susceptible to partial analysis or summary description. Ladenburg did not attribute any particular weight to any analysis or factor considered by it but rather made qualitative judgments as to the significance and relevance of each analysis and factor. Accordingly, notwithstanding the separate factors summarized above, Ladenburg believed, and advised the Check-Cap Board, that its analyses must be considered as a whole. Selecting portions of its analyses and the factors considered by it without considering all analyses and factors could create an incomplete view of the process underlying the Ladenburg Opinion. In performing its analyses, Ladenburg made numerous assumptions with respect to industry performance, business and economic conditions and other matters, many of which are beyond the control of Check-Cap and Keystone. These analyses performed by Ladenburg are not necessarily indicative of actual values or future results, which may be significantly more or less favorable than suggested by such analyses. In addition, analyses relating to the value of businesses do not purport to be appraisals or to reflect the prices at which businesses or securities may actually be sold. Accordingly, such analyses and estimates are inherently subject to uncertainty, being based upon numerous factors or events beyond the control of the parties or their respective advisors. In particular, projections extending past 2-3 years are highly uncertain and can be unreliable, especially when these projections contemplate significant growth rates in later years. None of Check-Cap, Keystone, Ladenburg or any other person assumes responsibility if future results are materially different from those projected. The analyses supplied by Ladenburg and the Ladenburg Opinion were among several factors taken into consideration by the Check-Cap Board in making its decision to enter into the Business Combination Agreement and should not be considered as determinative of such a decision.
Ladenburg was selected by the Check-Cap Board to render an opinion to the Check-Cap Board because Ladenburg is a nationally recognized investment banking firm and because, as part of its investment banking business, Ladenburg is regularly engaged in the valuation of businesses and their securities in connection with mergers, negotiated underwritings, secondary distributions of listed and unlisted securities, private placements and valuations for corporate and other purposes. In the ordinary course of its business, Ladenburg or certain of its affiliates, as well as investment funds in which it or its affiliates may have financial interests, may acquire, hold or sell long or short positions, or trade or otherwise effect transactions, in debt, equity, and other securities and financial instruments (including bank loans and other obligations) of, or investments in, Check-Cap, Keystone or any other party that may be involved in the Israeli Merger and/or their respective affiliates. Consistent with applicable legal and regulatory requirements, Ladenburg has adopted policies and procedures to establish and maintain the independence of its research department and personnel. As a result, Ladenburg's research analyst may hold views, make statements or investment recommendations and/or public research reports with respect to Check-Cap and the proposed Israeli Merger that may differ from the views of its investment banking personnel.
Ladenburg is acting as Check-Cap's financial advisor in connection with the Israeli Merger and received an upfront fee of $150,000, which is not contingent on the consummation of the Israeli Merger or creditable against any other fees to be received by Ladenburg. Ladenburg will receive an additional fee for its services pursuant to the terms of the Ladenburg Engagement Letter, which is contingent upon the consummation of the Israeli Merger. Ladenburg has received a separate fee for rendering the Ladenburg Opinion, which was not contingent on the consummation of the Israeli Merger. In addition, Check-Cap has agreed to reimburse Ladenburg for its expenses and indemnify it for certain liabilities that may arise out of its engagement. In the two years preceding the date of the Ladenburg Opinion, Ladenburg had not had a relationship with Check-Cap and had not received any fees from Check-Cap, except as described above. In the two years preceding the date of the Ladenburg Opinion, Ladenburg had not had a relationship with Keystone or any of its affiliates and had not received any fees from Keystone or any of its affiliates. Ladenburg and its affiliates may in the future seek to provide investment banking or financial advisory services to Check-Cap and Keystone and/or their respective affiliates and expect to receive fees for the rendering of these services.
Fairness Opinion of Variance
As stated above, pursuant to an engagement letter dated August 2, 2023 (the "Variance Engagement Letter"), Check-Cap requested Variance to act as its financial advisor in connection with a proposed business combination with an unaffiliated third party and to render an opinion to the Check-Cap Board as to the fairness of the Exchange Ratio, from a financial point of view, to the holders of Check-Cap ordinary shares. On August 15, 2023, at the request of the Check-Cap Board, Variance rendered its oral Variance Opinion to the Check-Cap Board, subsequently confirmed in writing, that as of the date of such Variance Opinion and based upon the various assumptions and limitations set forth therein, and such other factors deemed relevant, the Exchange Ratio (assumed, at the time, to be 2.6656) was fair, from a financial point of view, to the holders of Check-Cap ordinary shares.
The full text of the Variance Opinion is attached as Annex C to the New Parent Prospectus and is incorporated by reference. Check-Cap encourages its shareholders to read the Variance Opinion in its entirety for the assumptions made, procedures followed, other matters considered and limits of the review by Variance. The summary of the Variance Opinion set forth herein is qualified by reference to the full text of the Variance Opinion. Variance provided its opinion for the benefit and use by the Check-Cap Board in its consideration of the financial terms of the Business Combination. The Variance Opinion was not a recommendation to the Check-Cap Board whether or not to approve the Business Combination or to any holder of Check-Cap ordinary shares or any other person as to how to vote with respect to the Business Combination or to take any other action in connection with the Business Combination or otherwise.
In conducting its analysis and arriving at the Variance Opinion expressed herein, Variance among other things:
| • | reviewed audited financial statements of Keystone for fiscal years ended December 31, 2020-2022 and Q1 2023; |
| • | reviewed audited financial statements of Check-Cap for fiscal years ended December 31, 2020-2022 and the first six months ended June 30, 2023; |
| • | performed analysis of Check-Cap's financial strength and its ability to meet its financial obligations; |
| • | reviewed information provided to Variance by the managements of Check-Cap and Keystone; including certain financial forecasts and estimates, internal financial analyses, budgets, reports and other information (the "Forecasts"); |
| • | held discussions with various members of senior management of Check-Cap and Keystone concerning historical and current operations, financial conditions and prospects, including recent financial performance; |
| • | reviewed the recent share trading price history of Check-Cap; and |
| • | reviewed the Ladenburg Opinion presentation to the Check-Cap Board implied by Ladenburg related to the transaction. |
In addition, Variance conducted such other quantitative reviews, analyses and inquiries relating to Check-Cap and Keystone as it considered appropriate in rendering its opinion. The Variance Opinion includes a description of the methodology, the analysis and the main assumptions that were used to examine the fairness and reasonability of the Exchange Ratio. The Opinion relied on accepted methodologies, that include, inter alia, the following:
Estimation of Keystone’s fair value based on the Income Approach
The income approach utilizes a procedure generally known as the discounted cash flow (“DCF”) method of valuation. In estimating the projected future performance of Keystone, various assumptions were made by Variance based on Keystone’s forecast, discussions with Keystone’s management and Variance estimates. For fiscal years 2024 through 2027, these assumptions are based on the Keystone assumptions, and are similar to those presented below under “Management Approach.” For fiscal years 2028 through 2033, these assumptions utilize Keystone’s forecast, with adjustments made by Variance relating to depreciation and working capital.
The significant assumptions underlying Variance’s operating profit projections primarily relate to Keystone’s new, innovative product, “Nexus,” and are largely impacted by anticipated growing revenues to be generated by Nexus. Variance found it reasonable to assume significant growth rates beyond two to three years for the following key reasons:
| • | | Market Penetration and Consumer Adoption: Recognizing the competitive dynamics and consumer behavior in the dental care market, Variance’s assumptions account for the gradual market penetration of the Keystone product and the time it takes for consumers to adopt innovative dental solutions. Keystone’s revenue projections were modified on the basis that comparable companies grow at a rapid pace in the first few years of penetration until companies generally achieve their highest market share. Therefore, Variance deemed 2-3 years to be a less appropriate timeframe, and opted to use a longer period which considers the time it would take for the product to reach a steady state. |
| • | | Research and Development Cycles: As the product is still in early stages, it may involve ongoing research and development; accordingly, Variance’s assumptions consider the timeline for introducing enhancements and updates to maintain competitiveness and meet evolving consumer needs. |
| • | | Professional Endorsements and Partnerships: Keystone is seeking to establish partnerships with dental professionals and clinics to enhance market penetration. These efforts take time, and Variance’s assumptions reflect the phased impact on operating profit. |
In the DCF method, the value of the firm is obtained by discounting expected cash flows of the firm to present value by using the appropriate Weighted Average Cost of Capital (“WACC”). Two DCF analyses were performed by Variance, the first based on Keystone’s management’s forecast and the second, a more conservative approach.
Management Approach
All amounts in $ Million | | | H22023 | | | | 2024 | | | | 2025 | | | | 2026 | | | | 2027 | | | | 2028 | | | | 2029 | | | | 2030 | | | | 2031 | | | | 2032 | | | | 2033 | | | | 2034 | |
Operating Profit | | | (3.3 | ) | | | (0.0 | ) | | | 2.8 | | | | 7.4 | | | | 12.6 | | | | 19.2 | | | | 27.4 | | | | 37.6 | | | | 50.8 | | | | 68.6 | | | | 89.7 | | | | 92.4 | |
Income Taxes | | | 0.0 | | | | 0.0 | | | | 0.0 | | | | 0.0 | | | | 0.0 | | | | 0.0 | | | | 0.0 | | | | 0.0 | | | | 0.0 | | | | (3.1 | ) | | | (24.2 | ) | | | (24.9 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net Operating Profit after Taxes | | | (3.3 | ) | | | (0.0 | ) | | | 2.8 | | | | 7.4 | | | | 12.6 | | | | 19.2 | | | | 27.4 | | | | 37.6 | | | | 50.8 | | | | 65.5 | | | | 65.5 | | | | 67.4 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Depreciation | | | 0.7 | | | | 1.6 | | | | 2.0 | | | | 2.4 | | | | 2.9 | | | | 3.5 | | | | 4.2 | | | | 5.0 | | | | 6.0 | | | | 7.1 | | | | 8.4 | | | | 8.7 | |
Capital Expenditures | | | (0.7 | ) | | | (1.6 | ) | | | (2.0 | ) | | | (2.4 | ) | | | (2.9 | ) | | | (3.5 | ) | | | (4.2 | ) | | | (5.0 | ) | | | (6.0 | ) | | | (7.1 | ) | | | (8.4 | ) | | | (8.7 | ) |
WC Investment (Increase)/Decrease | | | 0.0 | | | | (1.2 | ) | | | (1.9 | ) | | | (2.3 | ) | | | (2.7 | ) | | | (3.2 | ) | | | (3.8 | ) | | | (4.5 | ) | | | (5.3 | ) | | | (6.2 | ) | | | (7.4 | ) | | | (1.4 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Available Cash Flow | | | (3.3 | ) | | | (1.2 | ) | | | 0.9 | | | | 5.2 | | | | 9.9 | | | | 16.0 | | | | 23.6 | | | | 33.1 | | | | 45.5 | | | | 59.3 | | | | 58.0 | | | | 66.1 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Residual Value | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 618.5 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
PV of Available Cash Flow | | | (3.1 | ) | | | (1.1 | ) | | | 0.7 | | | | 3.6 | | | | 6.0 | | | | 8.6 | | | | 11.1 | | | | 13.7 | | | | 16.5 | | | | 18.8 | | | | 16.2 | | | | 167.4 | |
Conservative Approach
All amounts in $ Million | | | H22023 | | | | 2024 | | | | 2025 | | | | 2026 | | | | 2027 | | | | 2028 | | | | 2029 | | | | 2030 | | | | 2031 | | | | 2032 | | | | 2033 | | | | 2034 | |
Operating Profit | | | (3.3 | ) | | | 0.0 | | | | 3.1 | | | | 7.5 | | | | 12.3 | | | | 18.1 | | | | 25.6 | | | | 34.6 | | | | 44.7 | | | | 55.4 | | | | 62.5 | | | | 64.4 | |
Income Taxes | | | 0.0 | | | | 0.0 | | | | 0.0 | | | | 0.0 | | | | 0.0 | | | | 0.0 | | | | 0.0 | | | | 0.0 | | | | 0.0 | | | | 0.0 | | | | (13.2 | ) | | | (17.4 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net Operating Profit after Taxes | | | (3.3 | ) | | | (0.0 | ) | | | 3.1 | | | | 7.5 | | | | 12.3 | | | | 18.1 | | | | 25.6 | | | | 34.6 | | | | 44.7 | | | | 55.4 | | | | 49.3 | | | | 47.0 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Depreciation | | | 0.7 | | | | 1.6 | | | | 1.9 | | | | 2.2 | | | | 2.6 | | | | 3.0 | | | | 3.6 | | | | 4.2 | | | | 4.8 | | | | 5.3 | | | | 5.7 | | | | 5.9 | |
Capital Expenditures | | | (0.7 | ) | | | (1.6 | ) | | | (1.9 | ) | | | (2.2 | ) | | | (2.6 | ) | | | (3.0 | ) | | | (3.6 | ) | | | (4.2 | ) | | | (4.8 | ) | | | (5.3 | ) | | | (5.7 | ) | | | (5.9 | ) |
WC Investment (Increase)/Decrease | | | (0.1 | ) | | | (1.0 | ) | | | (1.6 | ) | | | (1.8 | ) | | | (2.2 | ) | | | (2.7 | ) | | | (3.3 | ) | | | (3.6 | ) | | | (3.5 | ) | | | (3.1 | ) | | | (2.4 | ) | | | (1.0 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Available Cash Flow | | | (3.3 | ) | | | (1.0 | ) | | | 1.6 | | | | 5.7 | | | | 10.1 | | | | 15.4 | | | | 22.3 | | | | 31.0 | | | | 41.2 | | | | 52.3 | | | | 46.9 | | | | 46.0 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Residual Value | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 431.1 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
PV of Available Cash Flow | | | (3.2 | ) | | | (1.1 | ) | | | 1.3 | | | | 4.0 | | | | 6.3 | | | | 8.4 | | | | 10.6 | | | | 12.9 | | | | 15.0 | | | | 16.7 | | | | 13.1 | | | | 116.7 | |
The WACC was determined based on public competitors and was determined to be approximately 14%. As per the management approach, Variance determined an enterprise value of $258 million (rounded) and an equity value of $229 million (rounded). Per the conservative approach, Variance determined an enterprise value of $201 million (rounded) and an equity value of $171 million (rounded).
| | Management Approach | | | Conservative Approach | |
Fair Value of operations | | | 258 | | | | 201 | |
Non-operational assets | | | 11 | | | | 11 | |
Non-operational liabilities | | | (40 | ) | | | (40 | ) |
| | | | | | | | |
Equity Fair Value | | | 229 | | | | 171 | |
(1) Estimation of Keystone's fair value based on the Market Approach
Variance used the revenues multiple based on comparable companies to determine Keystone’s enterprise value. To select comparable companies, Variance searched comprehensive lists and directories of public companies within the health care industry. Variance’s search for comparable companies was based on various factors, including, but not limited to, industry similarity, financial risk, company size, geographic diversification, financial data and an actively traded stock price. There are no public companies within the dental industry with low revenues such as Keystone which Variance found suitable. Furthermore, because Keystone is not yet profitable, Variance applied a revenue multiple rather than an EBIT/EBITDA multiple. Variance determined that the following seven companies were appropriate for the multiple method.
| | Align Technology, Inc. | | | Henry Schein, Inc. | | | Apyx Medical Corporation | | | DENTSPLY SIRONA Inc. | | | Straumann Holding AG | | | Envista Holdings Corporation | | | ZimVie Inc. | | | Average | |
Ticker | | NasdaqGS: ALGN | | | NasdaqGS: HSIC | | | NasdaqGS: APYX | | | NasdaqGS: XRAY | | | SWX: STMN | | | NYSE: NVST | | | NasdaqGS: ZIMV | | | | |
Revenues LTM | | | 3,737 | | | | 12,528 | | | | 44 | | | | 3,936 | | | | 2,510 | | | | 2,582 | | | | 894 | | | | |
Revenues FY+1 | | | 3,941 | | | | 12,847 | | | | 60 | | | | 3,954 | | | | 2,750 | | | | 2,638 | | | | 850 | | | | |
Market Cap | | | 27,059 | | | | 10,624 | | | | 174 | | | | 8,503 | | | | 25,848 | | | | 5,540 | | | | 296 | | | | |
EV | | | 26,159 | | | | 13,382 | | | | 168 | | | | 10,483 | | | | 25,852 | | | | 6,420 | | | | 780 | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Revenue Ratio LTM | | | 7.00 | x | | | 1.07 | x | | | 3.79 | x | | | 2.66 | x | | | 10.30 | x | | | 2.49 | x | | | 0.87 | x | | | 4.03 | x |
Revenue Ratio FY+1 | | | 6.64 | x | | | 1.04 | x | | | 2.81 | x | | | 2.65 | x | | | 9.40 | x | | | 2.43 | x | | | 0.92 | x | | | 3.70 | x |
As per the multiple method, Variance determined revenue multiples of 4.03x and 3.70x which were applied to Keystone's revenue for the previous 12 months and for FY23 respectively. Variance determined enterprise values of $257 million and $261 million. After adjusting for financial assets and liabilities, Variance determined an equity value of $227 million (rounded) and $232 million (rounded), of which Variance took an average of $229.5 million.
| | LTM | | | 2023 | | Average |
Keystone Revenue | | | 63.7 | | | | 70.7 | | |
Revenues Multiple | | | 4.03 | x | | | 3.70 | x | |
Operating Value | | | 256.6 | | | | 261.4 | | |
Non-Operational assets, net | | | (29.5 | ) | | | (29.5 | ) | |
| | | | | | | | | |
Equity Value | | | 227.1 | | | | 232.0 | | 229.5 |
(2) Estimation of Keystone's fair value based on the Transaction Approach
In September 2021, Keystone received an investment of $25 million at a post-money valuation of $250 million. In August 2022, as part of an extension at the same terms, investors purchased additional shares of Keystone's common stock at a price per share of $20.88. Variance applied an adjustment of -29% to the company value of $250 million derived from the transaction due to the time that passed and changes in market conditions. The decrease of 29% was derived from the equity value of the peer group (similar companies) in the period between the date of the transaction and the date of the valuation. Following the adjustment, the equity value was determined to be $176 million.
(3) Estimation of Check-Cap's fair value based on the NAV Approach
A balance sheet analysis was performed as well as cash flow projection and an assessment of the value of the public vehicle. As per the balance sheet, Check-Cap had financial assets worth $32.7 million and financial liabilities of $3.7 million. The Variance cash flow analysis determined that the present value of Check-Cap's free cash flow is negative $7.7 million. The cash flow was comprised of R&D expenses, G&A expenses and other additional expenses. Based on Variance's experience, it determined the value of the public vehicle to be between $5-8 million. As a result, Check-Cap's equity value was between $26.2 million and $29.2 million per the NAV approach.
| | Scenario 1 | | | Scenario 2 | |
Financial Assets | | | 32.7 | | | | 32.7 | |
Financial Liabilities | | | (3.7 | ) | | | (3.7 | ) |
Free Cash Flow | | | (7.7 | ) | | | (7.7 | ) |
Public Vehicle Value | | | 5 | | | | 8 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Check-Cap Equity Value | | | 26.2 | | | | 29.2 | |
(4) Check-Cap Market Value
As of June 30, 2023, the market capitalization of Check-Cap was $16.7 million.
(5) Examination of the Exchange Ratio derived from the valuations described above
The table below presents a summary of the scenarios considered as per the analyses performed:
| | Keystone | | | Check-Cap | | | Combined | | | Check-Cap % | |
Scenario 1 | | | 171 | | | | 17 | | | | 188 | | | | 8.9 | % |
Scenario 2 | | | 171 | | | | 29 | | | | 201 | | | | 14.6 | % |
Scenario 3 | | | 230 | | | | 17 | | | | 246 | | | | 6.8 | % |
Scenario 4 | | | 230 | | | | 29 | | | | 259 | | | | 11.3 | % |
The exchange ratio in each of the scenarios is lower than the 15% stipulated in the transaction.
In our opinion, based on all of the aforementioned and pursuant to the implementation of the aforementioned procedures, the Exchange Ratio provided for in the transaction is fair and reasonable to Check-Cap, from a financial point of view.
In rendering the Variance Opinion, Variance relied upon and assumed, without independent verification or investigation, the accuracy and completeness of all the information that was publicly available or supplied or otherwise provided to Variance by Keystone and Check-Cap and their respective employees and formed a substantial basis for the Variance Opinion. With respect to the Forecasts provided by the managements of Keystone and Check-Cap, Variance assumed that the Forecasts were reasonably prepared on bases reflecting the best currently available estimates and judgments of the respective managements of Keystone and Check-Cap as to the future financial performance of the companies. Variance also assumed that there were no material changes in the assets, liabilities, financial conditions, results of operations, business or prospects of Keystone and Check-Cap since the date of the last financial statements that were made available to Variance. Variance has neither made nor obtained any independent evaluations or appraisals of the assets or liabilities, contingent or otherwise, of Keystone and Check-Cap.
In the Variance Opinion, Variance also addressed forward looking information that was provided to it by the managements of Check-Cap and Keystone. The forward-looking estimates could not predict the future; they were based on information available to Check-Cap and Keystone on the valuation date and included the assessments and intentions of their managements as of the valuation date, some of which, were provided verbally. If these assessments by the managements of Check-Cap and Keystone are not realized, the actual results may be significantly different from the estimated or perceived results based on this information, as was used in the Variance Opinion. Moreover, the Variance Opinion itself relies on information that anticipated the future, and represented Variance's assessment concerning various parameters and was based on information submitted to Variance. If these assessments are not realized, the actual results could be significantly different. It should be understood that, although subsequent developments may affect the Variance Opinion, Variance does not have any obligation to update, revise or reaffirm the Variance Opinion. In addition, the credit, financial and stock markets have been experiencing unusual volatility and Variance expressed no opinion or view as to any potential effects of such volatility on the Business Combination, and the Variance Opinion did not purport to address potential developments in any of such markets.
The Variance Opinion did not constitute a due diligence examination and did not claim to opine on any factual information provided to Variance and did not involve the scrutiny of Check-Cap and Keystone contracts and contractual relations. It was emphasized that Variance is not legal, tax, regulatory or accounting advisors and it has relied upon, without independent verification, the assessment of Check-Cap and Keystone and their legal, tax or regulatory advisors with respect to legal, tax or regulatory matters. The Variance Opinion did not constitute any legal advice, accounting, tax, or regulatory opinion.
Variance confirmed that it was free of conflict of interest concerning the execution of the Variance Opinion and the provision of the Variance Opinion; Variance had no personal interests in Check-Cap and Keystone's shares and/or a transaction under consideration and it was not dependent on Check-Cap or Keystone and/or on one of their controlling shareholders and/or on any person acting on their behalf (including functionaries, members of their respective boards of directors, shareholders, or any other third party), directly or indirectly. It was noted that Variance received or will receive fees that are immaterial to its overall business in connection with the Variance Opinion. The fees for the preparation of the Variance Opinion and all that was related to it have been determined in advance and were not contingent on the results of the Variance Opinion. It was clarified that Variance did not participate in negotiations that took place for the Business Combination.
Ownership of New Parent Following the Business Combination
Following the Closing, current Keystone equityholders will own approximately 85% of the issued and outstanding shares of New Parent Common Stock on a fully diluted basis and current Check-Cap equityholders will own approximately 15% of the issued and outstanding shares of New Parent Common Stock on a fully diluted basis. Entities affiliated with Accelmed, currently the principal shareholder of Keystone, will own approximately 60% of the issued and outstanding shares of Common Stock of New Parent. These percentage are subject to a net cash adjustment, such that if Check-Cap’s net cash (as determined in accordance with the Business Combination Agreement) as of the close of business on the last business day prior to the anticipated closing date is $1.0 million lower or higher than the net cash target of $22.3 million, there will be a linear adjustment to Check-Cap’s equityholders’ ownership in New Parent.
Governance of New Parent Following the Business Combination
Name of Company; Headquarters
Following the consummation of the Business Combination, New Parent’s name is expected to be changed to Keystone Dental Holdings, Inc., and Keystone is expected to change its name to KSDH Inc. The executive offices of New Parent will be located at 154 Middlesex Turnpike, Burlington, Massachusetts 01803. Following the consummation of the Business Combination, each of Keystone and Check-Cap will become a wholly-owned subsidiary of New Parent, Check-Cap will maintain a registered office in the State of Israel, and each of U.S. Merger Sub and Israeli Merger Sub will cease to exist.
Board of Directors
Keystone and Check-Cap have agreed that, upon the consummation of the Business Combination, the board of directors of New Parent will be comprised of those individuals designated by Keystone, provided, however, that Check-Cap shall have the right to designate (x) one (1) initial director of New Parent if the New Parent board of directors as of immediately following the effective time of the U.S. Merger will have up to seven (7) members, and (y) two (2) initial directors of New Parent if the New Parent board of directors as of immediately following the effective time of the U.S. Merger will have more than seven (7) members.
Uri Geiger, the Managing Partner of Accelmed, is expected to serve as chairman of the board of directors of New Parent after the Business Combination.
The board of directors of New Parent following the Business Combination will have a standing audit committee and compensation committee. The board of directors may also have a standing nominating committee, or the Board of Directors will assume that function.
Management
Keystone and Check-Cap expect that following the Business Combination Melker Nilsson will serve as Chief Executive Officer of New Parent and Amnon Tamir will serve as Chief Financial Officer of New Parent.
Interests of Check-Cap’s Directors and Executive Officers in the Business Combination
In considering the Business Combination, you should be aware that Check-Cap’s executive officers and directors may have interests in the Business Combination that may be different from, or in addition to, those of Check-Cap’s shareholders generally. The Check-Cap board was aware of and considered these interests among other matters, in evaluating and approving the Business Combination Agreement and the Business Combination and in recommending to Check-Cap shareholders that the Business Combination Proposal be approved, as described above under “— Recommendation of the Check-Cap Board”. These interests include:
Post-Business Combination Roles at New Parent
Following the Closing, it is expected that two of the current members of the Check-Cap board of directors will serve as members of the board of directors of New Parent.
Treatment of Check-Cap share options and RSUs
Certain of Check-Cap’s executive officers and directors hold Check-Cap share options and/or RSUs. As described above under “— Consideration to be Received in the Business Combination”, each option to purchase Check-Cap ordinary shares (whether vested or unvested) that is outstanding and unexercised immediately prior to the effective time of the Israeli Merger will cease to represent an option to purchase Check-Cap ordinary shares and will automatically expire and cease to exist as of immediately prior to the effective time of the Israeli Merger without any assumption or conversion, and no consideration will be delivered in respect thereof. Each Check-Cap Vested RSU that is outstanding immediately prior to the effective time of the Israeli Merger will be canceled and automatically convert into and represent the right to receive from New Parent an equal number of shares of New Parent Common Stock. Each Check-Cap RSU that is outstanding and unvested immediately prior to the effective time of the Israeli Merger will automatically expire and cease to exist as of immediately prior to the effective time of the Israeli Merger without any assumption or conversion, and no consideration will be delivered in respect thereof.
Indemnification and Insurance
The Business Combination Agreement requires that the organizational documents of New Parent contain provisions no less favorable with respect to exculpation, indemnification, advancement or expense reimbursement than are set forth in the organizational documents of Check-Cap, which provisions may not be amended, repealed or otherwise modified for a period of seven years from the Closing in any manner that would affect adversely the rights thereunder of individuals who, at or prior to the Closing were directors, officers, employees, fiduciaries or agents of Check-Cap, unless such modification shall be required by applicable law.
Pursuant to the requirements of the Business Combination Agreement, the Israeli Surviving Company will purchase a “tail” directors’ and officers’ liability insurance policy that will provide coverage to Check-Cap’s executive officers and directors no less favorable than those of the policy in effect immediately prior to the Israeli Merger Effective Time, with respect to matters occurring prior to the Closing, until the seventh anniversary of the Closing.
Interests of Keystone’s Directors and Executive Officers in the Business Combination
In considering the Business Combination, you should be aware that Keystone’s executive officers and directors have interests in the Business Combination that may be different from, or in addition to, those of Keystone’s stockholders generally. The Keystone board was aware of and considered these interests among other matters, in evaluating and approving the Business Combination Agreement and the Business Combination, and in recommending that the Keystone stockholders vote to adopt the Business Combination Agreement and approve the Business Combination, including the U.S. Merger, as described above under “— Recommendation of the Keystone Board”. These interests include:
Post-Business Combination Roles at New Parent
Following the Closing, it is expected that Melker Nilsson will serve as Chief Executive Officer of New Parent and Amnon Tamir will serve as Chief Financial Officer of New Parent. It is also expected that each of Melker Nilsson, Uri Geiger, Erin Enright, Howard Zauberman, Shmuel Rubinstein, Stanley Stern and Sheryl Conley will serve as a member of, and Michael Tuckman will serve as an Observer on, the board of directors of New Parent.
Transaction Bonuses and Changes in Compensation
Following the Closing, it is expected that Melker Nilsson will receive a one-time transaction bonus in the amount of $250,000, Amnon Tamir will receive a one-time transaction bonus in the amount of $125,000 and a grant of options to purchase 22,584 shares of New Parent Common Stock and Stanley Stern, a member of the board of directors of Keystone, will receive a one-time transaction bonus in the amount of $50,000 and a grant of options to purchase 25,000 shares of New Parent Common Stock. In addition, following the Closing, Mr. Nilsson’s annual base salary will be increased from $525,000 to $550,000, and Mr. Tamir’s annual base salary will be increased from $294,000 to $400,000. Finally, Mr. Nilsson’s annual bonus target will be increased from 50% of his annual base salary to 65% of his annual base salary and Mr. Tamir’s annual bonus target will be increased from 35% of his annual base salary to 50% of his annual base salary.
Indemnification and Insurance
The Business Combination Agreement requires that the organizational documents of New Parent contain provisions no less favorable with respect to exculpation, indemnification, advancement or expense reimbursement than are set forth in the organizational documents of Keystone, which provisions may not be amended, repealed or otherwise modified for a period of seven years from the Closing in any manner that would affect adversely the rights thereunder of individuals who, at or prior to the Closing were directors, officers, employees, fiduciaries or agents of Keystone, unless such modification shall be required by applicable law.
Pursuant to the requirements of the Business Combination Agreement, Keystone will purchase a “tail” directors’ and officers’ liability insurance policy that will provide coverage to its executive officers and directors with respect to matters occurring prior to the Closing, until the seventh anniversary of the Closing.
Dividend Policy Following the Business Combination
New Parent currently intends to retain all available funds and any future earnings to support its operations and finance the growth and development of its business and does not intend to pay cash dividends on its common stock for the foreseeable future. Any changes to New Parent’s dividend policy will be made at the discretion of the board of directors of New Parent and will depend upon many factors, including the financial condition of New Parent, earnings, legal requirements, including limitations imposed by Delaware law, and other factors the board of directors of New Parent deems relevant.
Amendment and Restatement of New Parent’s Certificate of Incorporation and Bylaws
Pursuant to the terms of the Business Combination Agreement, immediately prior to the effective time of the U.S. Merger, Keystone’s certificate of incorporation and bylaws will be amended to be in substantially the forms attached as Annex D and Annex E, respectively, to the New Parent Prospectus. The Keystone Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation will, among other things, authorize 75,000,000 shares of common stock.
Closing of the Business Combination
The Closing will take place on a date to be specified by Keystone and Check-Cap, which will be no later than the third business day following the satisfaction or, to the extent permitted by law, waiver by the party or parties entitled to the benefits thereof of the conditions to the Closing (other than those conditions that by their nature are to be satisfied at the closing, but subject to the satisfaction or (to the extent permitted by law) waiver of those conditions), or at such other place, time and date as shall be agreed in writing between Keystone and Check-Cap. Subject to the satisfaction or waiver of the conditions to the Closing of the Business Combination described in the section entitled “The Business Combination Agreement — Conditions to Closing” in the accompanying New Parent Prospectus, including the approval of the Business Combination Proposal by Check-Cap shareholders at the Meeting, it is anticipated that the Business Combination will close in January 2024. It is possible that factors outside the control of both companies could result in the Business Combination being consummated at a different time, or not at all.
Regulatory Approvals
Under the Companies Law, Check-Cap and Israeli Merger Sub may not complete the Israeli Merger without first making the following filings and notifications:
| • | Merger Proposal. Check-Cap and Israeli Merger Sub are required to file with the Israeli Companies Registrar a “merger proposal” setting forth specified details with respect to the Israeli Merger, within three days after the calling of the Meeting. Check-Cap and Israeli Merger Sub filed the merger proposal with the Israeli Companies Registrar on November 5, 2023. Under the Companies Law, a minimum of 50 days must elapse from the date of the filing of the merger proposal by both merging companies with the Israeli Companies Registrar before the Israeli Merger can become effective, although the Israeli Merger may not be effective until the expiration of 30 days from the date of the approval of the Israeli Merger by Check-Cap’s shareholders. |
| • | Notice to Creditors. In addition, each of Check-Cap and Israeli Merger Sub is required to notify its creditors, if any, of the proposed merger. Pursuant to the Companies Law, a copy of the merger proposal must be sent to the secured creditors of each company within three days after the merger proposal is filed with the Israeli Companies Registrar, and, within four business days of such filing, known material creditors (if any) must be informed individually by registered mail of such filing and where the merger proposal can be reviewed. Non-secured creditors must be informed of the merger proposal by publication in two daily Hebrew newspapers circulated in Israel on the day that the merger proposal is filed with the Israeli Companies Registrar and, where necessary, elsewhere, and by making the merger proposal available for review. If a merging company has material creditors in a non-Israeli country, then publication of notice in a newspaper in such country is required within three business days after the merger proposal is filed with the Israeli Companies Registrar. |
| • | Check-Cap Post-Closing Dividend. Following the Closing, New Parent wishes to have Check-Cap, which will be a wholly-owned subsidiary of New Parent, distribute substantially all of its cash to New Parent (which we refer to as the Check-Cap Dividend). Under the Companies Law, a company may make a distribution only to the extent of its ‘profits’ (as defined in the Companies Law), unless a court approves the distribution. Check-Cap does not have sufficient ‘profits’ to make such intended distribution. Accordingly Check-Cap agreed in the Business Combination Agreement to prepare and file with the applicable Israeli District Court, in coordination with New Parent, a request for approval of the distribution of the Check-Cap Dividend pursuant to Section 303 of the Companies Law and to take such other steps as are reasonably necessary in connection therewith. On September 7, 2023, Check- Cap filed with the District Court of Haifa such request for approval of the distribution of a dividend. The court may approve the distribution if it is convinced that there is no reasonable concern that the payment of a dividend will prevent Check-Cap from satisfying its existing and foreseeable obligations as they become due. Accordingly, the board of directors of Check-Cap has declared and approved the distribution, subject to and following the Closing, of a dividend in the amount of $21.3 million, being Check-Cap’s estimated cash as of the Closing, including an amount for the redemption of all of the Check-Cap redeemable warrants, net of estimated liabilities of Check-Cap, i.e., the foreseeable obligations of Check-Cap through closing, which will be distributable by the Israeli Surviving Company following the Closing, subject to the approval of the Israeli District Court (or any appeal instance). If such court approval is conditioned upon Check-Cap undertaking material obligations or restrictions, Check-Cap may not agree to such obligations or restrictions without the prior written consent of Keystone (which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld, conditioned or delayed), provided that in no event would Check-Cap be required to undertake any material obligations or restrictions prior to the Closing. |
| • | ISA No-Action Approval. The Business Combination Agreement provides that New Parent will prepare, in coordination with Check-Cap, and file with the ISA an application for, and will use commercially reasonable efforts to obtain, an exemption and no-action letter from the ISA from the requirements of the Israeli Securities Law concerning the publication of a prospectus in Israel in respect of the offering of the New Parent Common Stock of New Parent to be issued to the Check-Cap shareholders and, to the extent necessary, the Keystone stockholders to whom the Israeli Securities Law applies. On September 14, 2023, New Parent filed an application with the ISA for such exemption and no-action letter, and on November 6, 2023, the ISA provided New Parent such exemption and no-action letter. |
Neither Keystone nor Check-Cap is required to make any filings or to obtain approvals or clearances from any antitrust regulatory authorities in the United States, Israel or other countries to consummate the Business Combination. In the United States, New Parent must comply with applicable federal and state securities laws rules and regulations in connection with the issuance of shares of New Parent Common Stock in the Business Combination, including the filing with the SEC of the Registration Statement of which the New Parent Prospectus forms a part.
Securities Law Consequences
Following the effectiveness of the Registration Statement of which the New Parent Prospectus forms a part, shares of New Parent Common Stock issued in the Business Combination will not be subject to any restrictions on transfer arising under the Securities Act or the Exchange Act, except for shares of New Parent Common Stock issued to any stockholder who may be deemed an “affiliate” for the purposes of Rule 144 of the Securities Act of New Parent after the completion of the Business Combination. Persons who may be deemed “affiliates” of New Parent generally include individuals or entities that control, are controlled by or are under common control with, New Parent and may include the executive officers and directors of New Parent as well as its principal stockholders.
See “Shares Eligible for Future Sale” in the New Parent Prospectus.
The New Parent Prospectus does not cover resales of New Parent Common Stock received by any person upon the completion of the Business Combination, and no person is authorized to make any use of the New Parent Prospectus in connection with any resale of New Parent Common Stock.
Material U.S. Federal Income Tax Consequences and Material Israeli Tax Consequences of the Business Combination
For a summary of the material U.S. federal income tax considerations related to the exchange of Ordinary Shares for New Parent Common Stock pursuant to the Business Combination and the ownership and disposition of shares of New Parent Common Stock following the Business Combination as well as a summary of certain material Israeli tax considerations in connection with the Business Combination, please see the sections titled “Material U.S. Federal Income Tax Considerations for Holders of Check-Cap Securities” and “Material Israeli Tax Consequences of the Business Combination,” respectively, in the accompanying New Parent Prospectus.
Anticipated Accounting Treatment
For a description of the accounting treatment to be accorded to the Merger, see the New Parent Prospectus, under the heading “The Merger—Accounting Treatment.”
Following the Closing, any business of Check-Cap remaining prior to the Closing will be discontinued following the Closing. Management of Check-Cap is exploring transferring (including by way of sale, license or other disposition) Check-Cap’s remaining legacy assets (including intellectual property). In the event that Check-Cap shall enter into an agreement for such a sale or other disposition of its legacy assets at or prior to the Closing, the net proceeds received at or prior to the Closing, or to which Check-Cap is contractually entitled to receive within ninety (90) days following the Closing Date (subject to no conditions other than the passage of time), will be included in the calculation of the net cash of Check-Cap and will increase the number of shares of New Parent Common Stock that the holders of Check-Cap ordinary shares will receive at the Closing. In the event that Check-Cap enters into an agreement prior to or on the Closing to sell or otherwise dispose of its legacy assets but the proceeds therefor will be received more than 90 days after the Closing, New Parent will procure that the net proceeds of such transactions not otherwise distributed before the Closing are (i) distributed as promptly as possible, or (ii) set aside and reserved for future distribution, as applicable, to the relevant Check-Cap Legacy Holders.
Nasdaq Stock Market Listing
New Parent Common Stock is currently not traded on a stock exchange. New Parent has applied to list the New Parent Common Stock to be issued in the Business Combination on the Nasdaq Capital Market under the symbol “KSD”.
Transfer Agent and Registrar
The transfer agent and registrar for New Parent Common Stock is Continental Stock Transfer & Trust Company. The transfer agent and registrar’s address is One State Street Plaza, 30th Floor, New York, NY 10004.
Delisting and Deregistration of Check-Cap Ordinary Shares
If the Business Combination is consummated, Check-Cap ordinary shares will be delisted from Nasdaq and deregistered under the Exchange Act, and Check-Cap will no longer be required to file periodic reports with the SEC.
THE BUSINESS COMBINATION AGREEMENT
Please see the section of the accompanying New Parent Prospectus entitled “The Business Combination Agreement” for a description of the material provisions of the Business Combination Agreement. That description does not purport to describe all of the terms of the Business Combination Agreement and may not contain all of the information that is important to you. That summary is qualified in its entirety by reference to the complete text of the Business Combination Agreement, a copy of which was attached as Exhibit 99.1 to our Report of Foreign Private Issuer on Form 6-K that we furnished to the SEC on August 17, 2023 and that is incorporated by reference in this Proxy Statement. You are urged to read the Business Combination Agreement carefully and in its entirety because it is the legal document that governs the Business Combination and the transactions contemplated thereby.
The Business Combination Agreement contains representations, warranties and covenants by Check-Cap, Keystone and Merger Subs which were made only for purposes of the Business Combination Agreement and as of specified dates. The representations, warranties and covenants in the Business Combination Agreement were made solely for the benefit of the parties to the Business Combination Agreement, may not be intended as statements of fact, but rather as a way of allocating the risk between the parties in the event the statements therein prove to be inaccurate; have been qualified by certain disclosures that were made between the parties in the Business Combination Agreement, which disclosures are not reflected in the Business Combination Agreement itself; and may apply standards of materiality in a way that is different from what may be viewed as material by you or other investors. In addition, information concerning the subject matter of representations, warranties and covenants may change after the date of the Business Combination Agreement, which may or may not be fully reflected in our public disclosures. Neither the Business Combination Agreement nor the description in the accompanying New Parent Prospectus is intended to provide you with any other factual information about us. Such information can be found elsewhere in this Proxy Statement, in the accompanying New Parent Prospectus and in the public filings we make with the SEC, as described in the section entitled “Where You Can Find Additional Information.”
Proposal
It is therefore proposed that at the Meeting the following resolution be adopted:
“RESOLVED, that the Business Combination Proposal be and hereby is approved.”
Approval Required
See “Vote Required for Approval of the Proposals” above.
Board Recommendation
The Board of Directors recommends that you vote FOR the approval of the Business Combination Proposal.
RATIFICATION AND APPROVAL OF APPOINTMENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED
PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
(Item 2 on the Proxy Card)
Background
At the Meeting, shareholders will be asked to ratify and approve the re-appointment of Brightman Almagor Zohar & Co., Certified Public Accountants, a firm in the Deloitte Global Network, as our independent registered public accountants for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2023 and for such additional period until our next annual general meeting, pursuant to the recommendation of our Audit Committee and Board of Directors. Brightman Almagor Zohar & Co. has no relationship with us or our U.S. subsidiary except as independent registered public accountants and, from time to time and to a limited extent, as tax consultants and providers of some audit-related and other services.
In accordance with the rules of the SEC, Israeli law and our Articles of Association, our Audit Committee pre-approves and recommends to the Board, and our Board of Directors approves the compensation of Brightman Almagor Zohar & Co. for audit and other services, in accordance with the volume and nature of their services. The following table represents the aggregate fees for professional services rendered by Deloitte Brightman Almagor Zohar & Co., a Firm in the Deloitte Global Network, in each of the previous two fiscal years:
| | 2022 | | | 2021 | |
Audit Fees (1) | | $ | 110,000 | | | $ | 140,000 | |
Tax Fees (2) | | $ | 15,264 | | | $ | 5,060 | |
Other Fees (3) | | $ | 4,070 | | | $ | 2,961 | |
Total | | $ | 129,339 | | | $ | 148,021 | |
_______________________
(1) | The audit fees for the years ended December 31, 2022 and 2021 were for professional services rendered for the audits of our financial statements, consents and in connection with certain of our filings with the SEC. |
(2) | Tax fees for the year ended December 31, 2022, are for services rendered by our auditors in connection with a tax audit and tax study. Tax fees for the year ended December 31, 2021 are for services rendered by our auditors in connection with a tax audit. |
(3) | Other fees for the year ended December 31, 2022 and 2021, are for services rendered by our auditors in connection with a benchmark study. |
Proposal
It is therefore proposed that at the Meeting the following resolution be adopted:
“RESOLVED, that the appointment of Brightman Almagor Zohar & Co., Certified Public Accountants, a firm in the Deloitte Global Network, as the independent registered public accountants of the Company for the year ending December 31, 2023 and for such additional period until the next annual general meeting, be and hereby is ratified and approved.”
Approval Required
See “Vote Required for Approval of the Proposals” above.
Board Recommendation
The Board of Directors recommends that you vote FOR the approval of the re-appointment of Brightman Almagor Zohar & Co., Certified Public Accountants, a firm in the Deloitte Global Network, as our independent auditor for the year ending December 31, 2023.
APPROVAL AND RESTATEMENT OF COMPENSATION POLICY FOR EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND DIRECTORS
(Item 3 on the Proxy Card)
Background
Under the Companies Law, a public company is required to adopt a compensation policy that sets forth the terms of service and employment of office holders (within the meaning of the Companies Law), including the grant of any benefit, payment or undertaking to provide payment, any exemption from liability, insurance or indemnification, and any severance payment or benefit. Such compensation policy must comply with the requirements of the Companies Law. The compensation policy must be approved at least once every three years, by the Board of Directors, after considering the recommendations of the Compensation Committee, and by the shareholders by the Special Majority (see above “Vote Required for Approval of the Proposals”). In addition, the Board of Directors is required to periodically examine the compensation policy, as well as the need to adjust the policy in the event of a material change in the circumstances prevailing at the time of the adoption of the compensation policy or for other reasons.
The compensation policy must be determined and later reevaluated according to certain factors, including: (i) the advancement of a company’s objectives, business plan and its long-term strategy; (ii) the creation of appropriate incentives for executives, while considering (among other things) the company’s risk management policy; (iii) the size and the nature of the company’s operations; and (iv), with respect to variable compensation, the contribution of the office holder towards the achievement of the company’s long-term goals and the maximization of its profits, all with a long-term objective and in accordance with the position of the office holder. The compensation policy must include certain principles and provisions set forth in the Companies Law.
Our current compensation policy, in the form attached to this Proxy Statement as Exhibit A (the “Compensation Policy”) was approved by our shareholders at the annual general meeting held on December 10, 2020, and accordingly, we are now required to approve a new compensation policy in accordance with Israeli law. Our Compensation Policy serves as the basis for decisions concerning the terms of employment or engagement of our chief executive officer, members of our executive management, each person fulfilling such positions even if his or her title is different, and our directors. The Compensation Policy was drafted and approved in accordance with the requirements of the Companies Law and determines (among other things) the amount of the compensation of our office holders, its components, the maximum values for the various components of compensation and the method for determining compensation.
In accordance with the Israeli law requirement that a compensation policy be reviewed and readopted at least once every three years, our Compensation Committee and Board of Directors determined that in view of the current status of the Company’s operations and the pending the Business Combination (if approved by the shareholders at the Meeting and subject to closing), it would be in the best interest of the Company and its shareholders to approve and restate the current Compensation Policy in its entirety in its current form.
Under the Companies Law, the approval and restatement of the Compensation Policy must be approved by the Compensation Committee, the Board of Directors and the shareholders by the Special Majority (in that order). Accordingly, our Compensation Committee and Board of Directors approved, subject to shareholder approval, the renewal and restatement of the Compensation Policy, while taking into account the considerations, principles and provisions set forth in the Companies Law.
If the Compensation Policy is approved and restated by our shareholders at the Meeting, it shall become effective as of the Meeting and may remain in effect for up to three years, and shall be subject to periodic assessments by the Board of Directors in accordance with the Companies Law.
Proposed Resolution
It is proposed that the following resolution be adopted at the Meeting:
“RESOLVED, to approve and restate the Company’s Compensation Policy, in the form attached as Exhibit A to the Proxy Statement for the Meeting.”
Approval Required
See “Vote Required for Approval of the Proposals” above.
Board Recommendation
Our Board of Directors recommends that you vote “FOR” the approval and restatement of the Compensation Policy, as described in Proposal 3.
APPROVAL OF AUTHORIZATION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS TO DETERMINE
TO EFFECT A REVERSE SHARE SPLIT OF THE COMPANY’S ORDINARY SHARES
WITHIN A RANGE OF 1 FOR 2 TO 1 FOR 5 AND TO APPROVE AN AMENDMENT TO
THE ARTICLES OF ASSOCIATION TO REFLECT ANY SUCH REVERSE SPLIT
(Item 4 on the Proxy Card)
Purpose and Effect of the Reverse Split
We are seeking approval of the shareholders to authorize the Check-Cap Board to determine to effect a reverse share split of our outstanding ordinary shares within a range of 1 for 2 to 1 for 5, the exact ratio to be determined by our Board of Directors (the “Reverse Split”), and to amend our Articles of Association to effect any such Reverse Split (if implemented). The purpose of the Reverse Split, if implemented, is to increase the market price per share of the Check-Cap ordinary shares to comply with the minimum bid price requirement under the initial listing rules of the Nasdaq Capital Market for New Parent in connection with the consummation of the Business Combination and its initial listing on the Nasdaq Capital Market. As noted above, the Nasdaq Capital Market’s initial listing standards require a company to have, among other things, a $4.00 per share minimum bid price. An increase in the market price per share of our ordinary shares will assist in the initial listing application for New Parent that is required to be filed in connection with the consummation of the Business Combination.
Because Check-Cap’s current price per share is less than $4.00, the Reverse Split may be necessary to meet the minimum bid initial listing requirement for New Parent. We expect that combining the issued and outstanding Check-Cap ordinary shares into a smaller number will result in them trading at a higher per share trade price compared to their recent trading prices, though there is no assurance that initially the Check-Cap ordinary shares, and following the Closing the New Parent Common Stock, will continue to trade at a higher per share price. The Check-Cap Board intends to effect the Reverse Split if it believes that a decrease in the number of ordinary shares outstanding is likely to improve the market price of the ordinary shares in order to enable the listing of the shares of New Parent Common Stock on the Nasdaq Capital Market. If the Reverse Split is authorized by our shareholders, our Board of Directors will have the discretion to implement the Reverse Split or effect no Reverse Split at all if not required for the purpose of compliance with the Nasdaq initial listing standards.
Our Board of Directors has requested that shareholders approve a reverse split ratio range, as opposed to approval of a specified reverse split ratio, in order to give our Board of Directors the required discretion and flexibility to determine the Reverse Split ratio based, among other factors, upon prevailing market, business and economic conditions at the time. No further action on the part of the shareholders will be required to either effect or abandon the Reverse Split.
We are therefore seeking approval of our shareholders to authorize the Check-Cap Board to determine to effect the Reverse Split, and to approve and amendment to our Articles of Association to reflect any such Reverse Split. If the Reverse Split is approved by our shareholders, then the Check-Cap Board will have the authority to decide, within three months of the Meeting, whether to implement the Reverse Split and the exact ratio for the Reverse Split within the range. Following such determination by our Board of Directors, we will issue a press release announcing the effective date of the Reverse Split and will amend our Articles of Association to effect such Reverse Split. The Company is required to give notice to Nasdaq at least 15 calendar days prior to the record date of a Reverse Split.
48
If the Reverse Split is implemented, the number of Check-Cap authorized shares as well as the issued and outstanding Check-Cap ordinary shares would be reduced in accordance with the Reverse Split ratio selected by the Board of Directors and the par value per Check-Cap ordinary share will be increased proportionately. In addition, if the Reverse Split is implemented, the exercise price and the number of Check-Cap ordinary shares issuable pursuant to outstanding warrants will be adjusted pursuant to the terms of the respective warrants in connection with the Reverse Split. Furthermore, upon completion of the Reverse Split (if implemented), the number of Check-Cap ordinary shares issuable pursuant to the 2006 Unit Option Plan and 2015 Equity Incentive Plan and 2015 US Sub-Plan to the 2015 Equity Incentive Plan, as well as the number of shares and exercise prices subject to outstanding options under the plans and the number of shares subject to outstanding RSUs under the plans shall be appropriately adjusted.
No fractional shares will be issued as a result of the Reverse Split (if implemented). Instead, all fractional shares will be rounded up to the nearest whole ordinary share.
The Reverse Split, if implemented, will not affect the Exchange Ratio in the Business Combination (if approved and consummated); if the Reverse Split is implemented and the Business Combination is consummated, the number of shares of New Parent Common Stock that you will be entitled to receive upon the closing of the Business Combination will be adjusted accordingly.
Implementation of Reverse Split
If our shareholders approve the Reverse Split and our Board of Directors decides to effectuate the Reverse Split, each block of 1 to 5 (depending on the Reverse Split ratio) ordinary shares issued and outstanding will be reclassified, and changed into one fully paid and nonassessable ordinary share of the Company. In addition, the number of authorized ordinary shares that the Company may issue will be reclassified, and proportionately decreased in accordance with the Reverse Split ratio.
Upon the implementation of the Reverse Split, we intend to treat shares held by shareholders through a bank, broker, custodian or other nominee in the same manner as registered shareholders whose shares are registered in their names. Banks, brokers, custodians or other nominees will be instructed to effect the Reverse Split for their beneficial holders holding our ordinary shares in street name. However, these banks, brokers, custodians or other nominees may have different procedures than registered shareholders for processing the Reverse Split. Shareholders who hold our ordinary shares with a bank, broker, custodian or other nominee and who have any questions in this regard are encouraged to contact their banks, brokers, custodians or other nominees.
Our registered holders of ordinary shares hold their shares electronically in book-entry form with the transfer agent. These shareholders do not have share certificates evidencing their ownership of their ordinary shares. They are, however, provided with a statement reflecting the number of shares registered in their accounts. Registered holders who hold shares electronically in book-entry form with the transfer agent will not need to take action (the exchange will be automatic) to receive whole shares of post-Reverse Split ordinary shares, subject to adjustment for treatment of fractional shares.
Certain Risks Associated with the Reverse Split
While our Board of Directors believes that the potential advantages of the Reverse Split outweigh the risks, if our Board of Directors does effect the Reverse Split, we and New Parent could be exposed to certain risks, as set forth below.
The Reverse Split may not increase New Parent’s share price over the long-term.
The purpose of the Reverse Split, if implemented, is to comply with the minimum bid price requirement under the rules of the Nasdaq Capital Market for New Parent. It cannot be assured, however, that the Reverse Split will accomplish this objective for any meaningful period of time. While it is expected that the reduction in the number of outstanding shares will initially proportionally increase the market price of Check-Cap’s ordinary shares and, following the Closing, New Parent’s Common Stock, it cannot be assured that the Reverse Split will increase the market price of such shares by a multiple of the reverse split ratio chosen by Check-Cap’s Board in its sole discretion, or result in any sustained increase in the market price of New Parent’s Common Stock, which is dependent upon many factors, including the New Parent’s business and financial performance, general market conditions, and prospects for future success. Thus, while the share price of the New Parent’s Common Stock might meet the listing requirements for the Nasdaq Capital Market initially, it cannot be assured that it will continue to meet the Nasdaq continued listing standards in the future.
The Reverse Split may decrease the liquidity of New Parent’s Common Stock.
Although the anticipated increase in the market price of Check-Cap’s ordinary shares and, following the Closing, New Parent’s Common Stock could encourage interest in New Parent’s shares and possibly promote greater liquidity for New Parent’s stockholders, such liquidity could also be adversely affected by the reduced number of shares outstanding after the Reverse Split. The reduction in the number of outstanding shares may lead to reduced trading and a smaller number of market makers for New Parent’s Common Stock.
The Reverse Split may lead to a decrease in New Parent’s overall market capitalization.
Should the market price of Check-Cap’s ordinary shares prior to the Closing and New Parent’s common stock after the Closing decline after the Reverse Split, the percentage decline may be greater, due to the smaller number of shares outstanding, than it would have been if the Reverse Split had not been effected. A reverse share split is often viewed negatively by investors and, consequently, can lead to a decrease in the New Parent’s overall market capitalization. If the per share market price does not increase in proportion to the reverse share split ratio, then the value of New Parent, as measured by its capitalization, will be reduced. In some cases, the per-share share price of companies that have effected reverse share splits subsequently declined back to pre-reverse split levels, and accordingly, it cannot be assured that the total market value of Check-Cap’s ordinary shares prior to the Closing and New Parent’s Common Stock after the Closing will remain the same after the Reverse Split is effected (if effected), or that the Reverse Split will not have an adverse effect on the share price of Check-Cap’s ordinary shares prior to the Closing and New Parent’s Common Stock after the Closing due to the reduced number of shares outstanding after the Reverse Split.
The Reverse Split may result in some shareholders owning “odd lots” that may be more difficult to sell or require greater transaction costs per share to sell.
The Reverse Split may result in some shareholders owning “odd lots” of less than 100 ordinary shares on a post-split basis. These odd lots may be more difficult to sell, or require greater transaction costs per share to sell, than shares in “round lots” of even multiples of 100 shares.
Material U.S. Federal Income Tax Consequences
The following is a summary of the material U.S. federal income tax consequences of the Reverse Split to U.S. Holders (as defined below) of our ordinary shares. This summary does not purport to be a complete discussion of all of the possible U.S. federal income tax consequences. Further, it does not address the impact of the Medicare surtax on certain net investment income or the alternative minimum tax, U.S. federal estate or gift tax laws, any state, local or foreign income or other tax consequences or any tax treaties and does not address the tax treatment of any fractional shares that may result from the Reverse Split. Also, it does not address the tax consequences to holders that are subject to special tax rules, such as (i) persons who are not U.S. Holders; (ii) banks, insurance companies, or other financial institutions; (iii) regulated investment companies; (iv) tax-qualified retirement plans; (v) dealers in securities and foreign currencies; (vi) persons whose functional currency is not the U.S. dollar; (vii) traders in securities that use the mark-to-market method of accounting for U.S. federal income tax purposes; (viii) persons deemed to sell our ordinary shares under the constructive sale provisions of the Code; (ix) persons that acquired our ordinary shares through the exercise of employee stock options or otherwise as compensation or through a tax-qualified retirement plan; (x) persons that hold our ordinary shares as part of a straddle, appreciated financial position, synthetic security, hedge, conversion transaction or other integrated investment or risk reduction transaction; (xi) persons that own, directly, indirectly or constructively, at any time, ordinary shares representing 5% or more of our voting power or value; (xii) certain former citizens or long-term residents of the United States; and (xiii) tax-exempt entities or governmental organizations.
As used herein, the term “U.S. Holder” means a beneficial owner of our ordinary shares that is (i) an individual citizen or resident of the United States, (ii) a corporation (or other entity treated as a corporation for U.S. federal income tax purposes) that is created or organized (or treated as created or organized) in or under the laws of the United States, any state thereof or the District of Columbia, (iii) an estate whose income is includible in gross income for U.S. federal income tax purposes regardless of its source, or (iv) a trust if (x) a U.S. court can exercise primary supervision over the trust’s administration and one or more U.S. persons are authorized to control all substantial decisions of the trust, or (y) it has a valid election in effect under applicable U.S. Treasury regulations to be treated as a U.S. person.
The discussion is based on the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”), U.S. Treasury regulations, administrative rulings and judicial authority as of the date hereof, all of which are subject to change or differing interpretations, possibly with retroactive effect. This summary also assumes that the ordinary shares prior to the Reverse Split (the “Old Shares”) were, and the ordinary shares after the Reverse Split (the “New Shares”) will be, held as a “capital asset,” as defined within the meaning of Section 1221 of the Code (i.e., generally, property held for investment). The tax treatment of a U.S. Holder may vary depending upon the particular facts and circumstances of such U.S. Holder. Each shareholder is urged to consult with such shareholder's own tax advisor with respect to the tax consequences of the Reverse Split.
If a partnership (or other entity or arrangement classified as a partnership for U.S. federal income tax purposes) is the beneficial owner of ordinary shares, the U.S. federal income tax treatment of a partner in the partnership will generally depend on the status of the partner and the activities of the partnership. Partnerships that hold ordinary shares, and partners in such partnerships, should consult their own tax advisors regarding the U.S. federal income tax consequences of the Reverse Split.
We have not sought and will not seek any ruling from the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”), or an opinion from counsel, with respect to the U.S. federal income tax consequences of the Reverse Split. Our view regarding the tax consequences of the Reverse Split is not binding on the IRS or the courts. Moreover, there can be no assurance that the IRS or a court will agree with such statements and conclusions.
The Reverse Split is intended to constitute a “recapitalization” for U.S. federal income tax purposes. Therefore, subject to the discussion regarding passive foreign investment company (“PFIC”) status below, no gain or loss should be recognized by a U.S. Holder upon such U.S. Holder’s exchange (or deemed exchange) of Old Shares for New Shares pursuant to the Reverse Split. The aggregate tax basis of the New Shares received (or deemed received) in the Reverse Split should be the same as the U.S. Holder’s aggregate tax basis in the Old Shares exchanged (or deemed exchanged) therefor. The U.S. Holder’s holding period for the New Shares should include the period during which the U.S. Holder held the Old Shares surrendered (or deemed surrendered) in the Reverse Split. U.S. holders that hold ordinary shares acquired on different dates and at different prices should consult their tax advisors regarding identifying the bases and holding periods of the particular ordinary shares they hold after the Reverse Split.
Pursuant to Section 1291(f) of the Code, to the extent provided in U.S. Treasury regulations, if a U.S. person transfers stock in a PFIC in a transaction that does not result in full recognition of gain, then any unrecognized gain is required to be recognized notwithstanding any nonrecognition provision in the Code. The U.S. Treasury has issued proposed regulations under Section 1291(f) of the Code, but they have not been finalized. The IRS could take the position that Section 1291(f) of the Code is effective even in the absence of finalized regulations, or the regulations could be finalized with retroactive effect. Accordingly, no assurances can be provided as to the potential applicability of Section 1291(f) of the Code to the Reverse Split.
We believe that the Company was a PFIC for the taxable year ended December 31, 2022, and may be a PFIC for the taxable year ending December 31, 2023. However, the Company’s actual PFIC status for the current taxable year or any subsequent taxable year is uncertain and will not be determinable until after the end of such taxable year. Accordingly, there can be no assurance with respect to the Company’s status as a PFIC for the taxable year ending December 31, 2023, or any subsequent taxable year.
If the Company is treated as a PFIC with respect to a U.S. Holder and Section 1291(f) applies to the U.S. Holder’s transfer of shares pursuant to the Reverse Split, the U.S. Holder may be required to recognize any gain realized on such transfer. Under the proposed regulations mentioned above, if the Company were treated as a PFIC with respect to a U.S. Holder and the Company is treated as a PFIC at the time of the Reverse Split such that such U.S. Holder receives shares of a PFIC in the Reverse Split, such U.S. Holder generally would not be required to recognize any gain realized pursuant to the Reverse Split; however, if the Company is not treated as a PFIC at the time of the Reverse Split, such U.S. Holder may be required to recognize any gain realized pursuant to the Reverse Split. As discussed above, these proposed regulations have not been finalized and it is not possible to predict whether, in what form, and with what effective date the proposed regulations will be adopted as final regulations or how any such regulations would be applicable to the Reverse Split. U.S. Holders should consult their own tax advisors regarding the U.S. federal income tax consequences of the Reverse Split if the Company were treated as a PFIC.
Each shareholder should consult with his, her or its own tax advisor with respect to all of the potential tax consequences to such shareholder of the Reverse Split, including the applicability and effect of any state, local, and non-U.S. tax laws, as well as U.S. federal tax laws and any applicable tax treaties.
Certain Israeli Tax Consequences
The following discussion summarizing certain Israeli income tax consequences of the Reverse Split is based on the Israeli Income Tax Ordinance [New Version], 1961, as amended (the “Ordinance”), and the policy of the Israel Tax Authority (“ITA”) as currently in effect and is for general information only. The Ordinance and ITA policy are subject to change retroactively as well as prospectively. This summary does not purport to be a complete discussion of all the possible Israeli income tax consequences and is included for general information only. Further, it does not address the tax treatment of any fractional shares that may result from the Reverse Split. Shareholders are urged to consult their own tax advisors to determine the particular consequences to them of the Reverse Split.
Generally, a reverse share split could be viewed for Israeli tax purposes as a sale of the ordinary shares held by each shareholder prior to the Reverse Split (the “Old Shares”), with the consideration being the new ordinary shares received in the Reverse Split (the “New Shares”). Such sale (or deemed sale) of ordinary shares will generally be viewed as a capital gain taxable event for Israeli tax purposes and will result in the recognition of capital gain or capital loss for Israeli income tax purposes, unless an applicable exemption is provided in Israeli tax law or under an applicable treaty for the prevention of double taxation that exists between the State of Israel and the country of residence of the shareholder.
However, Income Tax Ruling 15/07 issued by the ITA provides that if certain requirements are met, a reverse split would not be viewed as a capital gain taxable event and the aggregate tax basis of the New Shares received (or deemed received) in the Reverse Split will be the same as the shareholder’s aggregate tax basis in the Old Shares exchanged (or deemed exchanged) therefor. The shareholder’s holding period for the New Shares will include the period during which the shareholder held the Old Shares surrendered (or deemed surrendered) in the Reverse Split. The requirements of the foregoing ruling are as follows: the Reverse Split shall apply the same conversion ratio for all Company shares and all of the Company’s shareholders; there will be no change in the shareholders’ rights (whether in their voting rights or rights for profits) as a result of the Reverse Split; the Reverse Split shall not include any consideration, compensation or other economic benefit (whether by cash or by cash equivalents) paid or accrued to the shareholders or to the Company; the economic value of all of the issued shares shall not be affected by the Reverse Split; and the Reverse Split will not effect any change other than the number of issued shares. We believe that the Reverse Split meets the requirements of the foregoing ruling and accordingly, that the Reverse Split would not be viewed as a capital gain taxable event and the aggregate tax basis of the New Shares received (or deemed received) in the Reverse Split will be the same as the shareholder’s aggregate tax basis in the Old Shares exchanged (or deemed exchanged) therefor. The shareholder’s holding period for the New Shares will include the period during which the shareholder held the Old Shares surrendered (or deemed surrendered) in the Reverse Split. Our view regarding the tax consequences of the Reverse Split is not binding on the ITA or the courts. Accordingly, each shareholder should consult with his, her or its own tax advisor with respect to all of the potential Israeli tax consequences to such shareholder of the Reverse Split.
THE U.S. AND ISRAELI TAX CONSEQUENCES OF THE REVERSE SPLIT MAY DEPEND UPON THE PARTICULAR CIRCUMSTANCES OF EACH SHAREHOLDER. ACCORDINGLY, EACH SHAREHOLDER IS ADVISED TO CONSULT THE SHAREHOLDER’S TAX ADVISOR WITH RESPECT TO ALL OF THE POTENTIAL TAX CONSEQUENCES TO THE SHAREHOLDER OF THE REVERSE SPLIT.
Proposed Resolution
It is proposed that the following resolution be adopted at the Meeting:
“RESOLVED, to authorize our Board of Directors to determine to effect a reverse share split of the Company’s ordinary shares in a ratio to be determined by the Board of Directors in a range of 1 for 2 to 1 for 5, effective on the date to be determined by the Board of Directors and announced by the Company, and to approve the amendment of the Company’s Articles of Association to reflect any such reverse share split (if implemented).”
Approval Required
See “Vote Required for Approval of the Proposals” above.
Board Recommendation
Our Board of Directors recommends that you vote “FOR” the reverse share split and to amend our Articles of Association accordingly.
ELECTION OF DIRECTORS
(Item 5 on the Proxy Card)
Background
Under our articles of association, as currently in effect, our Board of Directors must consist of at least four and not more than 11 directors. Each of our directors holds office until the next annual general meeting of shareholders following his or her appointment (unless the tenure of such director expires earlier, or a director is removed from office pursuant to the Companies Law).
Our Board of Directors currently consists of five directors, Steven Hanley, Clara Ezed, Dr. Mary Jo Gorman, XiangQian (XQ) Lin and Yuval Yanai. Our Board of Directors has approved the nomination of all of our currently serving directors for re-election at the Meeting, each to hold office until our next annual general meeting of shareholders and until his or her successor is elected and qualified or, in the event that the Business Combination Proposal is approved and subject to the consummation of the Business Combination, until the resignation or removal of such director following the Closing.
As detailed above under Proposal 1, under “Background of the Business Combination,” on November 12, 2003, we reached a settlement with Symetryx under which we agreed (among other things) to present for approval at the Meeting the election of five directors to the Check-Cap Board out of ten director nominees, including five nominees proposed by Check-Cap (who we refer to as the Company Director Nominees) and five director nominees proposed by Symetryx (who we refer to as the Shareholder Director Nominees). Each Director Nominee shall be voted on separately. Five out of the ten Director Nominees shall be elected by the affirmative vote of the holders of the majority of the ordinary shares represented at the Meeting, in person or by proxy, entitled to vote and voting on the matter, by way of a plurality of votes cast (i.e., the five Director Nominees who receive an affirmative majority vote and who also receive the largest number of ”FOR” votes will be elected).
Company Director Nominees for Re-election
Our Board of Directors has approved the nomination of each of our currently serving directors for re-election at the Meeting, each to hold office until our next annual general meeting of shareholders and until his or her successor is elected and qualified.
Our Board of Directors has affirmatively determined that each of Steven Hanley, Clara Ezed, Dr. Mary Jo Gorman, XiangQian (XQ) Lin and Yuval Yanai is an “independent director” as defined under Nasdaq Listing Rules. Accordingly, subject to shareholder approval of the election of all of the Company Director Nominees, our Board of Directors will consist of five members, all of whom satisfy the independence requirements of the Nasdaq Listing Rules.
In accordance with the Companies Law, each of the Company Director Nominees has certified that he or she meets all the requirements of the Companies Law for election as a director of a public company, and possesses the necessary qualifications and is able to dedicate sufficient time to fulfill his or her duties as a director of our company, taking into consideration our company’s size and special needs. Accordingly, our Board of Directors has nominated the five Company Director Nominees below for re-election, each to hold office until our next annual general meeting of shareholders and until their respective successors are duly elected and qualified.
The following biographical information is provided with respect to each Company Director Nominee based upon our records and information provided to us by each nominee.
Steven Hanley has served as a member of our Board of Directors since February 2015 and as the Chairman of our Board of Directors since September 2017, and has served as a member of our Nominating Committee since October 2015 and as a member of our Financing Committee since June 2016. Mr. Hanley served as a member of our Audit Committee from March 2015 until December 2017 and as a member of our Compensation Committee from March 2015 until March 2019. Mr. Hanley is currently the Co-Founder, board member and Chief Executive Officer of MediBeacon Inc., an optical diagnostic company based in St. Louis, Missouri formed upon acquiring assets and intellectual property from Covidien in 2012. Mr. Hanley is an experienced global business leader who has managed highly complex pharmaceutical and medical device operations with annual global revenue exceeding $1 billion. As the President of Covidien plc’s Imaging Solutions business unit, Mr. Hanley led a multifunctional organization that included sales, marketing, logistics, manufacturing, as well as research and development. Internationally, Mr. Hanley’s track record includes numerous new drug and device product introductions and sales force expansion in Eastern Europe, China and Latin America. Mr. Hanley is experienced working in different cultures and successfully navigating dynamic regulatory environments. Over his nearly 18 years with the Covidien family of companies, Mr. Hanley developed a large network of business leaders and clinicians to help determine market needs, commercial potential and product positioning. As a sales leader, Mr. Hanley called on radiologists, nuclear medicine physicians, cardiologists, as well as surgeons in specialties including general, orthopedic, and OB/GYN. Mr. Hanley is Principal and Founder of Neem LLC, which was founded in 2009 to focus on startup and entrepreneurial medical device and other life science companies with whom the firm works to bridge the gap between breakthrough technology and commercialization. Mr. Hanley is the Chairman of the Board of Managers for Daya CNS LLC, based in St Louis Missouri. Mr. Hanley provided consultancy services to us on behalf of Neem LLC from November 2009 until December 31, 2014 and served as a Scientific Advisor to our company from June 2011 until his election to our Board of Directors in February 2015. Mr. Hanley holds B.A. and M.A. degrees in business administration from Marquette University.
Clara Ezed has served as a member of our Board of Directors since June 2017, and has served as a member of our Audit Committee since December 2017 and as a member of our Compensation Committee since March 2019. Since 2022, Ms. Ezed has served as a director at AXA Investment Managers UK Ltd., a global investment management firm. Prior to this, Ms. Ezed has served as an Executive Board Director Business Development of DLRC Ltd., an EU based life-sciences consulting firm, from May 2021 to May 2022. Ms. Ezed has served as Head of EU Operations, EU General Counsel and VP European Regulatory Affairs of La Jolla Pharmaceutical, a San Diego based biopharmaceutical company, from December 2017 to December 2020. Prior to that, Ms. Ezed served as VP, Legal & Regulatory Affairs of Emas Pharma Ltd., a global contract research organization, from October 2013 to November 2017. From September 2009 to October 2013, Ms. Ezed served as VP, Regulatory Affairs & Drug Safety of European Medical Advisory Services Ltd., a global contract research organization. Ms. Ezed, a lawyer and pharmacist with more than 24 years’ experience working in biotech, medtech and the pharmaceutical industry, has worked across various disciplines including operational business development, investor relations, regulatory and medical affairs, quality assurance, clinical operations and pharmacovigilance. Ms. Ezed holds a BSc. in Pharmacy from the University of Strathclyde, an MBA degree from Middlesex University, a Postgraduate Diploma in Pharmacovigilance from the University of Hertfordshire, a Postgraduate Diploma in Law from Nottingham University and a Postgraduate Diploma in Legal Professional Services from City Law School, London. Ms. Ezed is a member of the Bar of England and Wales and a member of the General Pharmaceutical Council.
Dr. Mary Jo Gorman has served as a member of our Board of Directors and as a member of our Audit Committee and Compensation Committee since May 2015, and has served as a member of our Financing Committee since June 2016. Dr. Gorman currently serves on the board of directors of Flosonics Medical, a privately-held medical company based in Canada, and serves on its compensation committee. Dr. Gorman also serves on the not-for-profit boards of Barnes Jewish Hospital, Goldfarb School of Nursing and Harris Stowe State University Foundation. From 2019 to 2021, Dr. Gorman served as the chief executive officer of Healthy Bytes, a venture backed healthcare services company, located in St. Louis, Missouri. Dr. Gorman also serves as Managing Director at Prosper Capital, an early stage investment fund focused on women-led businesses. In 2006, Dr. Gorman founded Advanced ICU Care, the largest telemedicine ICU services provider in the United States, in which she also served as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer from 2006 and 2014. From December 2016 to 2018, Dr. Gorman served as interim CEO and as a member of the audit committee of TripleCare, a U.S. provider of telemedicine-based healthcare services to skilled nursing facilities, subsequently sold to Curavi Health. Dr. Gorman served on the board of directors of Curavi Health from 2019 to July 2020. From 1999 to 2006, Dr. Gorman served at IPC-The Hospitalist Company (Nasdaq:IPCM), a leading national physician group practice, as Chief Medical Officer (2003-2006), Vice President of Medical Affairs (2001-2003) and Regional Medical Director (1999-2001). From 1996 to 1998, Dr. Gorman served as President of Inpatient Care Group, a hospitalist group in St. Louis, Missouri, which she had founded to provide hospitalist services to primary care physicians and hospitals and which was subsequently sold to IPC. From 1991 to 2008, Dr. Gorman served as President of Critical Care Services, Inc., a privately held corporation which she had founded and which was later sold to Advanced ICU Care. Dr. Gorman was awarded with the following awards: 2015 Distinguished Alumni Award, Southern Illinois University School of Medicine; 2013 Distinguished Alumni Award, Olin School of Business, Washington University; 2011 EY Entrepreneurial Winning WomenTM Class of 2011; 2009 Top 25 Influential Women in Healthcare by Modern HealthCare Magazine. Dr. Gorman holds a B.A. degree in Chemistry and Biology (Cum Laude) from St. Louis University, an M.B.A degree from Olin School of Business, Washington University and an M.D. from Southern Illinois University School of Medicine.
XiangQian (XQ) Lin has served as a member of our Board of Directors since February 2015. Mr. Lin has served as the President and Chief Executive Officer of the Esco Group since 2011, and is a life sciences entrepreneur and investor with a demonstrated track record across the United States, Asia and Europe. In 2018, Mr. Lin served as the founder and managing partner of EVX Ventures, a venture capital firm which builds and invests in biotech companies across Asia. Mr. Lin has co-founded multiple companies including Carmine Therapeutics and PairX Bio. Mr. Lin holds a BSc degree in Economics and Finance from the Wharton School of Business, University of Pennsylvania.
Yuval Yanai has served as a member of our Board of Directors since March 2015 and has served as the Chairman of our Audit Committee and Compensation Committee since March 2015, as the Chairman of our Nominating Committee since October 2015 and as the Chairman of our Financing Committee since June 2016. Mr. Yanai served as Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Given Imaging Ltd. from September 2005 through March 2014. From October 2000 through August 2005, Mr. Yanai served as Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Koor Industries Ltd. Prior to that, from April 1998 to September 2000, Mr. Yanai served as Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of NICE Systems Ltd., and, from 1991 to April 1998, he served as the Vice President, Finance and Chief Financial Officer of Elscint Ltd. Mr. Yanai also serves as an external director (within the meaning of the Israeli Companies Law) of S&P Global Maalot. Mr. Yanai also serves as an external director (within the meaning of the Israeli Companies Law) of Clal Biotechnology Industries and serves as the Chairman of its audit, financial reporting and compensation committees. Mr. Yanai also serves as a member of the board of directors of PulseNmore Ltd. and as a member of its financial reporting and audit committees and as Chairman of its investment committee. Mr. Yanai also serves as a member of the board of directors of Nobio Ltd., BRH Medical Ltd., CellSound Aesthetics Ltd. and Art Medical Ltd. Previously, Mr. Yanai served as the Chairman of The Israeli Fund for UNICEF (pro bono) and as an external director (within the meaning of the Israeli Companies Law) of Hadassah Medical Organization and as the Chairman of its finance and compensation committees and as a member of its tenders and donation committee. Mr. Yanai also previously served as an external director (within the meaning of the Israeli Companies Law) of Mazor Robotics Ltd. and Medical Compression Systems Ltd. and as a director of Medigus Ltd. and Alcobra Ltd. Mr. Yanai also served as a director of Notal Vision, Inc., Macrocure Ltd., Citycon Oj, Starplast Industries Ltd., Adama Ltd. (formerly Makteshim-Agan Industries Ltd.), ECI Telecom Ltd., Equity One, Inc., BVR Systems Ltd., Tadiran Communication Ltd., The Elisra Group, Telrad Networks Ltd. and Medical Compression Systems (D.B.N) Ltd. Mr. Yanai holds a B.Sc. degree in Accounting and Economics from Tel-Aviv University.
We are not aware of any reason why the Company Director Nominees, if elected, would be unable or unwilling to serve as directors.
If re-elected at the Meeting, the Company Director Nominees shall be entitled to the cash compensation set forth in Proposal 6, subject to shareholder approval at the Meeting.
Shareholder Director Nominees for Initial Election
The following biographical information regarding the individuals nominated by Symetryx for initial election at the Meeting that appears below is based solely on materials submitted to the Company by Symetryx. The Company takes no responsibility for its accuracy or completeness.
Jordan Lipton currently serves as the chairman of Noveto Ltd. since August 2022. Mr. Lipton also serves as a board member of Avalon Bridge Capital Inc. since May 2021, and as a Co-Founder, Chief Investment Officer of ACA Enterprise Holdings since February 2019. Between August 2019 and July 2023, he served as a Senior Vice President of Strategic Development at Justice Cannabis Co. From September 2018 to October 2021, Mr. Lipton served as a board member in Alerio Gold Corporation. From April 2019 to September 2019, he served as a managing director in Antera Inc. From August 2016 to April 2019, Mr. Lipton served as a managing director of Gravitas Financial Inc. Between 2014 and 2017 he also served as a partner in Silverbear Capital Inc. Mr. Lipton served from 2014 to 2016 as a managing director in AM Capital Receivables Management Limited. Between 2014 to 2015 he served as a consultant in First Global Data Corp. Between 2011 to 2014 he served as a VP Corporate Finance and Business Development in Fordham Hillsworth Financial Service Inc. Mr. Lipton has a Bachelor of Laws degree from the City University of London, and a Master of Business Administration from the Korea University.
Avital Shafran has a Bachelor of Sciences in Electrical and Computer Engineering, as well as a Master of Sciences in Computer Science, both from the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, and is currently studying towards a PhD in Computer Science researching AI. Since 2017, Ms. Shafran is employed as a teacher assistant at the Hebrew University. From 2016 until 2017, Ms. Shafran served as a Full stack developer at Intel.
Idan Ben Shitrit serves, since 2018, at a Hedge Fund management, as a board member at multiple private companies, and as a financial and wealth advisor. From 2016 to 2018, Mr. Ben Shitrit worked in investment banking. From 2009 to 2016, he served as a portfolio and securities manager in Expert Nostro Co., Meitav Nostro, and Altris Nostro. Between 2007 to 2008, Mr. Ben Shitrit served as an investment manager in Africa Israel Investment Ltd. In 2005 to 2007, he served as a Department Senior Manager in Michale Davis Group. Before 2005, Mr. Ben Shitrit served as a trader in Harel Investment Company and before that as a personal security unit manager. Mr. Ben Shitrit has a Bachelor of arts’ degree in Mathematics and Economics, from the Tel-Aviv University, and a Master of Business Administration from the Herzliya Reichman University.
William Vozzolo is serving as Global Treasurer, Head of Operations and CCO at OC Investment Management LP, a medium sized Fixed Income hedge fund in Miami, Florida. As Global Treasurer, his role entails managing the funding, cash management / yield enhancement strategy, and margin usage, along with investor relationship management. As Head of Operations, William manages a team of analysts, programmers and developers to ensure all post-execution is streamlined and at a low to zero risk to the firm. William is also titled CCO, ensuring the firm is compliant with all related regulatory bodies and responsible for establishing standards and implementing procedures to ensure that the compliance programs throughout the organization are effective and efficient in identifying, preventing, detecting, and correcting noncompliance. William is highly accomplished with a career spanning over two decades in finance. He commenced his journey at JPM in 2000, on the Fixed Income Repo Desk before joining Highland Financial, where he was an MBS repo trader and assumed responsibilities in operations management. In 2007, he transitioned to Highbridge Capital, where he played a pivotal role in establishing and elevating their repo desk and treasury management capabilities in the fixed income sector. William then spent three years at Barclays as a Product Manager. In 2013, he joined Field Street Capital Management, leading Operations and non-USD funding while simultaneously overseeing the business operations of the EU entity. In 2021, he joined OC Investment Management.
Liliane Malczewski is currently serving as president and as a board member at the Order of Dentists of Quebec, as well as president and chief executive manager of the Healy Dental Clinics, and also as the Chief of Dentistry at the Montreal Integrated Health, Social Services and University Centre (Ciusss Odim). Between 2018 to 2021, she served as Local Chief of Dentistry at the Lakeshore General Hospital. From 2012 to 2018, she served as President of the Cornwall & District Dental Society - Division of The Ontario Dental Association. Dr. Malczewski also served as a Clinical Dentist in various clinics between 2011 and 2019. She has an Executive master’s degree in business administration from the University of Fredericton, a Doctor of Dental Medicine from the University of Montreal, and a D.E.C. Health Sciences from the college of Jean-De-Brébeuf.
Reasons for voting FOR the Company Director Nominees
| ● | The Company Director Nominees are exceptionally qualified directors with diverse skills and decades of expertise across the medical device and pharmaceutical industry, as well as in capital markets, M&A and strategic business development in the U.S., Europe and Israel.
|
| ● | The Company Director Nominees, all of whom are independent directors and without any conflict of interest, have diligently overseen the Company through the recent developments in its business and an extensive and thorough strategic process, in order to create long-term value for the Company’s shareholders, resulting in the signing of the Business Combination Agreement with Keystone. The Check-Cap Board believes the Keystone transaction provides the Check-Cap shareholders with a significant opportunity to participate in the potential growth of the combined company following the completion of the Business Combination.
|
| ● | Re-election of the Company Director Nominees brings certainty and proven knowledge of the Company as it delivers the Business Combination Agreement to deliver long-term value to Check-Cap shareholders. |
Considerations AGAINST the Shareholder Director Nominees
| ● | Symetryx is an activist shareholder with a history of dubious behavioral patterns – and has launched a disruptive and damaging campaign in order to jeopardize the Keystone transaction, to gain access to the Company’s cash and pursue an alternate transaction with a party affiliated to Symetryx, in direct contravention of the best interests of the Company’s shareholders. |
| | |
| ● | Symetryx acquired all of its shares in Check-Cap following the June 6, 2023 announcement that following review, the Check-Cap Board had determined that it was appropriate to pursue strategic options, in order to make a quick profit by gaining access to the Company’s cash reserves for its own benefit, at the expense of substantial long-term value creation potential for other Check-Cap shareholders.
|
| ● | Symetryx’s goal is to remove all five Company directors – all of whom are independent and non-conflicted and whose skills are critical to Board oversight – and replace them with five conflicted directors, whose sole purpose for appointment is to obstruct the consummation of the Business Combination in order to pursue a transaction with such party affiliated to Symetryx.
|
| ● | Symetryx has presented NO strategic plan and NO vision for Check-Cap’s future. The Check-Cap Board strongly believes that Symetryx’s campaign to take control of the Check-Cap Board is highly opportunistic and self-interested, and puts shareholders’ investment at risk by threatening to dismantle the proposed Business Combination with Keystone and destroy value for Check-Cap’s shareholders.
|
| ● | The Shareholder Director Nominees predominantly have no listed company experience, and bring no proven management experience to deliver long-term value for Check-Cap shareholders. |
Proposal
The shareholders are being asked to elect five directors as members of the Check-Cap Board out of the ten Director Nominees named above, each to serve as members of our Board of Directors until our next annual general meeting of shareholders and until their respective successors are duly elected and qualified or, in the event that the Business Combination Proposal is approved and subject to the consummation of the Business Combination, until the resignation or removal of such director following the Closing. Each Director Nominee shall be voted on separately.
Approval Required
See “Vote Required for Approval of the Proposals” above.
Board Recommendation
The Board of Directors recommends a vote “FOR” the election of each of the Company Director Nominees named above and “AGAINST” the election of each of the Shareholder Director Nominees named above.
APPROVAL OF REMUNERATION FOR DIRECTORS
(Item 6 on the Proxy Card)
Background
Under the Companies Law, the terms of remuneration payable to a director of a public company require the approval of the compensation committee, board of directors and the shareholders, in that order. Our Compensation Committee and Board of Directors have approved, subject to shareholder approval, the payment to the Director Nominees who are elected to serve as directors at the Meeting under Proposal 5 the following fees, to be paid on a quarterly basis, provided that subject to the approval of the Business Combination Proposal and the consummation of the Business Combination, such fees will be paid until the Closing, at which time the Check-Cap ordinary shares will be delisted from Nasdaq and deregistered under the Exchange Act and Check-Cap will cease to be a public company:
| • | Annual fees: An annual fee of (i) $25,000 for service on the Board of Directors and (ii) $2,500 for service on the Audit Committee. |
| • | Per meeting fee: A per meeting fee of $850 for each meeting of the Board of Directors or any committee thereof attended in person or via telephone or any resolution approved by written consent. |
| • | Chairman fee: An annual fee of (i) $10,000 for service as Chairman of the Board of Directors (other than an Active Chairman, who may be entitled to an increased fee in accordance with our Compensation Policy) and (ii) $5,000 for service as Chairman of the Audit Committee. |
The foregoing fees are the same annual and per meeting fees that have been paid to our directors since our 2017 annual general meeting.
The elected Director Nominees will also be entitled to reimbursement of expenses (including travel, stay and lodging), subject to the Companies Law and the regulations promulgated thereunder, and in accordance with our company practices and our Compensation Policy, as in effect from time to time. In addition, if re-elected at the Meeting, the Company Director Nominees will continue to benefit from the directors’ and officers’ indemnification and exculpation agreements that we previously entered into with each of them, as well as from our directors’ and officers’ liability insurance policy, as in effect from time to time.
The proposed payment of annual and per meeting fees to our directors and other compensation terms are consistent with our Compensation Policy (as currently in effect and as proposed to be approved and restated at the Meeting under Proposal 3).
Proposal
It is therefore proposed that at the Meeting the following resolution be adopted:
“RESOLVED, that the cash remuneration to be paid to Director Nominees who are elected to serve as directors at the Meeting under Proposal 5, as set forth in Proposal 6 of the Proxy Statement for the Meeting be, and hereby is, approved.”
Approval Required
See “Vote Required for Approval of the Proposals” above.
Board Recommendation
The Board of Directors recommends a vote FOR the approval of the cash remuneration to be paid to Director Nominees who are elected to serve as directors at the Meeting.
TO APPROVE ENTRY INTO INDEMNIFICATION AND EXCULPATION AGREEMENTS
AND PROVIDE DIRECTORS’ AND OFFICERS’ LIABILITY INSURANCE COVERAGE TO SHAREHOLDER DIRECTOR
NOMINEES (IF ANY) ELECTED AT THE MEETING
(Item 7 on the Proxy Card)
Background
Shareholders are being asked to consider and vote on the approval of the entry into an indemnification and exculpation agreement with any Shareholder Director Nominee elected at the Meeting (if any), substantially in the form of those that the Company previously entered into with the Company’s directors and officers, and to provide directors’ and officers’ liability insurance coverage to any Shareholder Director Nominees elected at the Meeting (if any), as in effect from time to time.
Proposal
“RESOLVED, to approve the entry into an indemnification and exculpation agreement with and provide liability insurance coverage to any Shareholder Director Nominee elected at the Meeting.”
Approval Required
See “Vote Required for Approval of the Proposals” above.
Board Recommendation
The Board of Directors is not expressing an opinion on this proposal.
REVIEW AND DISCUSSION OF FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Our Board of Directors has approved, and is presenting to the shareholders for review and discussion at the Meeting, our audited financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2022. This item will not involve a shareholder vote.
Our audited financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2022, which form part of our annual report on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2022 filed with the SEC on March 31, 2023, are available for viewing via the SEC’s website at www.sec.gov as well as under the Investors section of our website at http://ir.check-cap.com/. Shareholders may receive a hard copy of the annual report on Form 20-F containing the audited financial statements free of charge upon request. None of the audited financial statements, the Form 20-F nor the contents of our website form part of the proxy solicitation material.
WHERE YOU CAN FIND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
We are subject to the information reporting requirements of the Exchange Act, as applicable to foreign private issuers. We fulfill these requirements by filing reports with the SEC. Our SEC filings are available to the public on the SEC’s website at www.sec.gov and under the Investors section of our website at http://ir.check-cap.com/. The contents of our website do not form part of the proxy solicitation material.
As a foreign private issuer, we are exempt from the rules under the Exchange Act related to the furnishing and content of proxy statements. The circulation of this Proxy Statement should not be taken as an admission that we are subject to those proxy rules.
New Parent’s Registration Statement on Form S-4, and the New Parent Prospectus contained therein, which was originally filed with the SEC on September 1, 2023, as amended on October 5, 2023, October 26, 2023, November 7, 2023 and November 13, 2023, contains a detailed description of the Business Combination, Keystone’s and Check-Cap’s respective businesses, and certain risk factors related thereto. You are urged to read the New Parent Prospectus, a copy of which is being sent to you together with this Proxy Statement.
We also refer you to the section titled “Where You Can Find More Information” in the accompanying New Parent Prospectus, where you can learn how to find more information about Check-Cap and/or Keystone.
YOU SHOULD RELY ONLY ON THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS PROXY STATEMENT AND IN THE ACCOMPANYING NEW PARENT PROSPECTUS. WE HAVE NOT AUTHORIZED ANYONE TO GIVE ANY INFORMATION DIFFERENT FROM THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS PROXY STATEMENT OR IN THAT PROSPECTUS. THIS PROXY STATEMENT IS DATED NOVEMBER 22, 2023. YOU SHOULD NOT ASSUME THAT THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS PROXY STATEMENT IS ACCURATE AS OF ANY LATER DATE, AND THE MAILING OF THIS PROXY STATEMENT TO SHAREHOLDERS SHALL NOT CREATE ANY IMPLICATION TO THE CONTRARY.
Management knows of no other business to be transacted at the Meeting; but, if any other matters are properly presented to the Meeting, the persons named in the enclosed form of proxy will vote upon such matters in accordance with their best judgment.
| By Order of the Board of Directors, /s/ Steven Hanley Steven Hanley Chairman of the Board of Directors |
Date: November 22, 2023