ALBT Avalon GloboCare Corporation

ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS

You should carefully consider the following material risk factors as well as all other information set forth or referred to in this report before purchasing shares of our common stock. Investing in our common stock involves a high degree of risk. We may not be successful in preventing the material adverse effects that any of the following risks and uncertainties may cause. These potential risks and uncertainties may not be a complete list of the risks and uncertainties facing us. There may be additional risks and uncertainties that we are presently unaware of, or presently consider immaterial, that may become material in the future and have a material adverse effect on us. You could lose all or a significant portion of your investment due to any of these risks and uncertainties.

Summary of Risk Factors

Our business is subject to numerous risks and uncertainties that you should consider before investing in our company, as fully described below. The principal factors and uncertainties that make investing in our company risky include, among others:

General Operating and Business Risks

Risk Factors Related to our Laboratory Services Business

Risk Factors Related to Clinical and Commercialization Activity

Risks Related to Our Securities

General Operating and Business Risks

Our limited operating history makes it difficult for us to evaluate our future business prospects and make decisions based on those estimates of our future performance. 

We did not begin operations of our business through AHS until May 2015. We have a limited operating history and limited revenue. As a consequence, it is difficult, if not impossible, to forecast our future results based upon our historical data. Reliance on the historical results may not be representative of the results we will achieve, particularly in our combined form. Because of the uncertainties related to our lack of historical operations, we may be hindered in our ability to anticipate and timely adapt to increases or decreases in revenues or expenses. If we make poor budgetary decisions as a result of unreliable historical data, we could be less profitable or incur losses, which may result in a decline in our stock price.

Our results of operations have not resulted in profitability and we may not be able to achieve profitability going forward.

We incurred net losses amounting to $11,930,847 and $9,090,499 for the years ended December 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively. As of December 31, 2022, we had an accumulated deficit of approximately $63.1 million. If we incur additional significant losses, our stock price may decline, perhaps significantly. Our management is developing plans to achieve profitability. Our business plan is speculative and unproven. There is no assurance that we will be successful in executing our business plan or that even if we successfully implement our business plan, that we will be able to curtail our losses now or in the future. Further, as we are a new enterprise, we expect that net losses will continue.

There is substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern, which will affect our ability to obtain future financing and may require us to curtail our operations.

Our financial statements as of December 31, 2022 were prepared under the assumption that we will continue as a going concern. The independent registered public accounting firm that audited our 2022 financial statements, in their report, included an explanatory paragraph referring to our recurring losses since inception and expressing management’s assessment and conclusion that there is substantial doubt in our ability to continue as a going concern. Our financial statements do not include any adjustments that might result from the outcome of this uncertainty. Our ability to continue as a going concern depends on our ability to obtain additional equity or debt financing, attain further operating efficiencies, reduce expenditures, and, ultimately, to generate revenue. We cannot assure you, however, that we will be able to achieve any of the foregoing. See Note 2 to our Consolidated Financial Statements for further details.

Our cash will only fund our operations for a limited time and we will need to raise additional capital in order to support our development.

We are currently operating at a loss and expect our operating costs will increase significantly as we continue to grow our operations. The independent registered public accounting firm that audited our 2022 financial statements, in their report, included an explanatory paragraph referring to our recurring losses since inception and expressing management’s assessment and conclusion that there is substantial doubt in our ability to continue as a going concern. At December 31, 2022, we had cash of approximately $2.0 million. We will need to raise additional capital or generate substantial revenue in order to support our development and commercialization efforts.

If our available cash balances are insufficient to satisfy our liquidity requirements, including due to risks described herein, we may seek to raise additional capital through equity offerings, debt financings, collaborations or licensing arrangements. We will need to raise additional capital, and we may also consider raising additional capital in the future to expand our business, to pursue strategic investments, to take advantage of financing opportunities, or for other reasons, including to:

Our present and future funding requirements will depend on many factors, including:

Other than our debt facility with our chairman, we have no arrangements or credit facilities in place as a source of funds, and there can be no assurance that we will be able to raise sufficient additional capital on acceptable terms, or at all, and if we are not successful in raising additional capital, we may not be able to continue as a going concern. We may seek additional capital through a combination of private and public equity offerings, debt financings and strategic collaborations. Debt financing, if obtained, may involve agreements that include covenants limiting or restricting our ability to take specific actions, such as incurring additional debt, that could increase our expenses and require that our assets secure such debt. Equity financing, if obtained, could result in dilution to our then existing stockholders and/or require such stockholders to waive certain rights and preferences. If such financing is not available on satisfactory terms, or is not available at all, we may be required to delay, scale back or eliminate the development of business opportunities and our operations and financial condition may be materially adversely affected. We can provide no assurances that any additional sources of financing will be available to us on favorable terms, if at all. Future capital raises may dilute our existing stockholders’ ownership and/or have other adverse effects on our operations.

If we raise additional capital by issuing equity securities, our existing stockholders’ percentage ownership will be reduced and these stockholders may experience substantial dilution.

If we raise additional funds by issuing debt securities, these debt securities would have rights senior to those of our Common Stock and the terms of the debt securities issued could impose significant restrictions on our operations, including liens on our assets. If we raise additional funds through collaborations and licensing arrangements, we may be required to relinquish some rights to our technologies or products, or to grant licenses on terms that are not favorable to us.

We have significant outstanding debt obligations and servicing these debt obligations will require a significant amount of capital, and our business may not be able to pay our substantial debt.

As of December 31, 2022, we had $4.8 million of outstanding indebtedness. In order to service this indebtedness and any additional indebtedness we may incur in the future, we will need to generate cash from our operating activities. Our ability to generate cash is subject, in part, to our ability to successfully execute our business strategy, as well as general economic, financial, competitive, regulatory and other factors beyond our control. If we are unable to generate sufficient cash to repay our debt obligations when they become due and payable, either when they mature, or in the event of a default, we may not be able to obtain additional debt or equity financing on favorable terms, if at all, which may negatively impact our business operations and financial condition.

If we breach any of the undertakings or default on any of our obligations under our agreements with our lenders, our outstanding indebtedness could become immediately due and payable, which would harm our business, financial condition and results of operations and could require us to reduce or cease operations. If our indebtedness were to be accelerated, there can be no assurance that our assets would be sufficient to repay in full that indebtedness.

Our business is subject to risks arising from epidemic diseases, such as the outbreak of the COVID-19 illness.

The Coronavirus Disease 2019, or COVID-19, pandemic which has been declared by the World Health Organization to be a “public health emergency of international concern,” spread across the globe and impacted worldwide economic activity. Although several vaccines have been developed, a public health epidemic, including COVID-19, poses the risk that we or our employees, contractors, suppliers, and other partners may be prevented from conducting business activities for an indefinite period of time, including due to shutdowns that may be requested or mandated by governmental authorities. While it is not possible at this time to estimate the full impact that future pandemics, including COVID-19, could have on our business, the continued spread of COVID-19 and the measures taken by the governments of countries affected could disrupt the supply chain and adversely impact our business, financial condition or results of operations. Future pandemics, including COVID-19, and mitigation measures may also have an adverse impact on global economic conditions which could have an adverse effect on our business and financial condition. The extent to which these pandemics impact our results will depend on future developments that are highly uncertain and cannot be predicted, including new information that may emerge concerning the severity of the virus and the actions to contain its impact.

We depend upon key personnel and need additional personnel.

Our success depends on the continuing services of Wenzhao Lu, our Chairman of the Board, and David Jin, Meng Li and Luisa Ingargiola, our executive officers. The loss of Mr. Lu, Dr. Jin, Ms. Li or Ms. Ingargiola could have a material and adverse effect on our business operations. Additionally, the success of our operations will largely depend upon our ability to successfully attract and maintain competent and qualified key management personnel. As with any company with limited resources, there can be no guaranty that we will be able to attract such individuals or that the presence of such individuals will necessarily translate into profitability for us. Our inability to attract and retain key personnel may materially and adversely affect our business operations. The supply of qualified technical, professional, managerial and other personnel, including lab medical directors and lab operations managers, is currently constrained; competition for qualified employees, even across different industries, is intense, including as individuals leave the job market. We may lose, or fail to attract and retain, key management personnel, or qualified skilled technical, professional or other employees. The same is true for patient-facing staff with specialized training required to perform activities related to specimen collection. In the future, if competition for the services of these professionals increases, we may not be able to continue to attract and retain individuals in its markets. Changes in key management, or the ability to attract and retain qualified personnel, as a result of increased competition for talent, wage growth, or other market factors, could lead to strategic and operational challenges and uncertainties, distractions of management from other key initiatives, and inefficiencies and increased costs, any of which could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations, and cash flows.

The Laboratory Services MSO Acquisition will result in organizational changes that could create significant growth for our business. If we fail to effectively manage this growth and adapt our business structure in a manner that preserves our reputation, then our business, financial condition and results of operations could be harmed.

On February 9, 2023, we acquired 40% of all the issued and outstanding equity interests of Laboratory Services MSO. The Laboratory Services MSO Acquisition has resulted in significant growth in our operations. We have incurred and will continue to incur significant expenditures and the allocation of management time to assimilate Laboratory Services MSO in a manner that preserves the key aspects of our business, but there can be no assurance that we will be successful in our efforts. If we do not effectively integrate Laboratory Services MSO, the effectiveness of our business growth could suffer, and our reputation could be harmed, each of which could adversely impact our business, financial condition and results of operations.

The success of our business will depend, in part, on our ability to realize our anticipated benefits and opportunities from the acquisition. We can provide no assurance that the anticipated benefits of the Laboratory Services MSO Acquisition will be fully realized in the time frame anticipated or at all. The failure to meet the challenges involved in integrating the two businesses could cause an interruption of business activities, an increase in operating costs or lower anticipated financial performance. Our failure to achieve the anticipated and the potential benefits underlying our reasons for the Laboratory Services MSO Acquisition could have a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We must effectively manage the growth of our operations, or our company will suffer.

To manage our growth, we believe we must continue to implement and improve our services and products. We may not have adequately evaluated the costs and risks associated with our planned expansion, and our systems, procedures, and controls may not be adequate to support our operations. In addition, our management may not be able to achieve the rapid execution necessary to successfully offer our products and services and implement our business plan on a profitable basis. The success of our future operating activities will also depend upon our ability to expand our support system to meet the demands of our growing business. Any failure by our management to effectively anticipate, implement, and manage changes required to sustain our growth would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, and results of operations. 

Our revenue and results of operations may suffer if we are unable to attract new clients, continue to engage existing clients, or sell additional products and services.

We presently derive our revenue from providing medical related consulting services to related parties and generating rental revenue from our income-producing real estate property in New Jersey. Our growth therefore depends on our ability to attract new clients, maintain existing clients and properties and sell additional products and services to existing clients. This depends on our ability to understand and anticipate market and pricing trends and our clients’ needs and our ability to deliver consistent, reliable, high-quality services. Our failure to engage new clients, continue to re-engage with our existing clients or cross-sell additional services could materially and adversely affect our operating results.

Our prospects will suffer if we are not able to hire, train, motivate, manage, and retain a significant number of highly skilled employees.

We only recently commenced business and we presently generate medical related consulting services from related parties and generate rental revenue from our income-producing real estate property in New Jersey. On the consulting side, Wenzhao Lu, our Chairman and significant shareholder, is the Chairman of each of the clients in which we have provided consulting services. Our future success depends upon our ability to hire, train, motivate, manage, and retain a significant number of highly skilled employees, particularly research analysts, technical experts, and sales and marketing staff. We will experience competition for professional personnel in each of our business lines. Hiring, training, motivating, managing, and retaining employees with the skills we need is time consuming and expensive. Any failure by us to address our staffing needs in an effective manner could hinder our ability to continue to provide high-quality products and services and to grow our business.

Potential liability claims may adversely affect our business.

Our services, which may include recommendations and advice to organizations regarding complex business and operational processes and regulatory and compliance issues may give rise to liability claims by our clients or by third parties who bring claims against our clients. Healthcare organizations often are the subject of regulatory scrutiny and litigation, and we also may become the subject of such litigation based on our advice and services. Any such litigation, whether or not resulting in a judgment against us, may adversely affect our reputation and could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations. We may not have adequate insurance coverage for claims against us.

In accordance with our strategic development policy, we may invest in companies for strategic reasons and may not realize a return on our investments.

From time to time, we may make investments in companies. These investments may be for strategic objectives to support our key business initiatives but may also be standalone investments or acquisitions. Such investments or acquisitions could include equity or debt instruments in private companies, many of which may not be marketable at the time of our initial investment. These companies may range from early-stage companies that are often still defining their strategic direction to more mature companies with established revenue streams and business models. The success of these companies may depend on product development, market acceptance, operational efficiency, and other key business factors. The companies in which we invest may fail because they may not be able to secure additional funding, obtain favorable investment terms for future financings, or take advantage of liquidity events such as public offerings, mergers, and private sales. If any of these private companies fails, we could lose all or part of our investment in that company. If we determine that impairment indicators exist and that there are other-than-temporary declines in the fair value of the investments, we may be required to write down the investments to their fair value and recognize the related write-down as an investment loss. 

We face intense competition which could cause us to lose market share.

In the healthcare markets in which we operate, we will compete with large healthcare providers who have more significant financial resources, established market positions, long-standing relationships, and who have more significant name recognition, technical, marketing, sales, distribution, financial and other resources than we do. The resources available to our competitors to develop new services and products and introduce them into the marketplace exceed the resources currently available to us. This intense competitive environment may require us to make changes in our services, products, pricing, licensing, distribution, or marketing to develop a market position.

If we fail to comply with our obligations in the agreements under which we license intellectual property rights from third parties or otherwise experience disruptions to our business relationships with our licensors, we could lose intellectual property rights that are important to our business.

We are party to a research agreement with the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (“MIT”) for development of chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) technology. MIT has granted us options to non-exclusively or exclusively license MIT inventions arising under this research agreement. We may need to negotiate commercially reasonable terms and conditions with MIT to advance our research and development activities or allow the commercialization of CAR technology or any other product candidates we may identify and pursue.

Avalon GloboCare and Arbele Limited (“Arbele”) are parties to the joint venture Avactis Biosciences, Inc. (“Avactis”) for development of AVA-011, a mRNA-based dual anti-CD19-CD22 CAR-T cell therapy candidate. Arbele has granted Avactis an exclusive license to its rights in this technology. We and Arbele may need to obtain additional licenses from others to advance our research and development activities or allow the commercialization of mRNA-based CAR technology or any other product candidates we may identify and pursue.

The Company formed a strategic partnership with HydroPeptide, LLC, a leading epigenetics skin care company, to engage in co-development and commercialization of a series of clinical-grade, exosome-based cosmeceutical and orthopedic products. As part of this agreement, the Company signed a three-way Material Transfer Agreement between Avalon GloboCare, HydroPeptide and the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center.

The Company and the University of Pittsburgh of the Commonwealth System of Higher Education (the “University”) entered into a Corporate Research Agreement (the “University Agreement”).  Pursuant to the University Agreement, for a term of two years the University agreed to use its reasonable efforts to perform academic research funded by the Company in connection with the development of point-of-care modular autonomous processing system to generate clinical-grade AVA-011, a RNA-based chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy candidate (the “Project”) subject to the appointment of Dr. Yen Michael S. Hsu as Principal Investigator. 

Our agreements with MIT, Hydropeptide, University of Pittsburg and Arbele impose, and we expect that future agreements will impose, various development, diligence, commercialization, or other obligations on AVAR and us. In spite of our efforts, these partners may conclude that we have materially breached its obligations under such agreements and might therefore terminate the agreements, thereby removing or limiting our ability or our subsidiary AVAR’s ability to develop and commercialize products and technology covered by these license agreements. If these in-licenses are terminated, or if the underlying patents fail to provide the intended exclusivity, competitors or other third parties would have the freedom to seek regulatory approval of, and to market, products identical to ours and we may be required to cease our development and commercialization of CAR or exosome technology or other product candidates that we may identify. Any of the foregoing could have a material adverse effect on our competitive position, business, financial conditions, results of operations, and prospects.

Moreover, disputes may arise regarding intellectual property subject to a licensing agreement, including:

In addition, the agreements under which we currently license intellectual property or technology from third parties are complex, and certain provisions in such agreements may be susceptible to multiple interpretations. The resolution of any contract interpretation disagreement that may arise could narrow what we believe to be the scope of our rights to the relevant intellectual property or technology, or increase what we believe to be our financial or other obligations under the relevant agreement, either of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects. Moreover, if disputes over intellectual property that we have licensed prevent or impair our ability to maintain our current licensing arrangements on commercially acceptable terms, we may be unable to successfully develop and commercialize the affected product candidates, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial conditions, results of operations, and prospects.

We may face uncertainty and difficulty in obtaining and enforcing our patents and other proprietary rights.

There can be no assurance that any patent applications we file or license will be approved, or that challenges will not be instituted against the validity or enforceability of any patent licensed-in or owned by us. Our pending and future patent applications may not result in patents being issued that protect our product candidates, in whole or in part, or which effectively prevent others from commercializing competitive product candidates. Even if our patent applications issue as patents, they may not issue in a form that will provide us with any meaningful protection, prevent competitors from competing with us or otherwise provide us with any competitive advantage. Our competitors may be able to circumvent our patents by developing similar or alternative product candidates in a non-infringing manner. The cost of litigation to uphold the validity and prevent infringement of a patent is substantial. Furthermore, there can be no assurance that others will not independently develop substantially equivalent technologies not covered by patents to which we have rights or obtain access to our know-how. In addition, the laws of certain countries may not adequately protect our intellectual property. Our competitors may possess or obtain patents on products or processes that are necessary or useful to the development, use, or manufacture of our product candidates. There can also be no assurance that our proposed technology will not infringe upon patents or proprietary rights owned by others, with the result that others may bring infringement claims against us and require us to license such proprietary rights, which may not be available on commercially reasonable terms, if at all. Any such litigation, if instituted, could have a material adverse effect, potentially including monetary penalties, diversion of management resources, and injunction against continued manufacture, use, or sale of certain products or processes.

We rely upon non-patented proprietary know-how. There can be no assurance that we can adequately protect our rights in such non-patented proprietary know-how, or that others will not independently develop substantially equivalent proprietary information or techniques or gain access to our proprietary know-how. Any of the foregoing events could have a material adverse effect on us. In addition, if any of our trade secrets, know-how or other proprietary information were to be disclosed, or misappropriated, the value of our trade secrets, know-how and other proprietary rights would be significantly impaired and our business and competitive position would suffer.

In September 2011, the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act, or the Leahy-Smith Act, was signed into law. The Leahy-Smith Act includes a number of significant changes to U.S. patent law. These include provisions that affect the way patent applications will be prosecuted and may also affect patent litigation. In particular, under the Leahy-Smith Act, the United States transitioned in March 2013 to a “first to file” system in which the first inventor to file a patent application will be entitled to the patent. Third parties are allowed to submit prior art before the issuance of a patent by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, or USPTO, and may become involved in opposition, derivation, post-grant and inter partes review, or interference proceedings challenging our patent rights. An adverse determination in any such submission, proceeding or litigation could reduce the scope of, or invalidate, our patent rights, which could adversely affect our competitive position.

The USPTO has developed new and untested regulations and procedures to govern the full implementation of the Leahy-Smith Act, and many of the substantive changes to patent law associated with the Leahy-Smith Act, and in particular, the “first-to-file” provisions, only became effective in March 2013. The Leahy-Smith Act has also introduced procedures that may make it easier for third parties to challenge issued patents, as well as to intervene in the prosecution of patent applications. Finally, the Leahy-Smith Act contains new statutory provisions that still require the USPTO to issue new regulations for their implementation, and it may take the courts years to interpret the provisions of the new statute. Accordingly, it is not clear what, if any, impact the Leahy-Smith Act will have on the operation of our business. The Leahy-Smith Act and its implementation could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of our patent applications and the enforcement or defense of our issued patents.

We may not be able to protect our intellectual property rights throughout the world.

Filing, prosecuting and defending patents on our product candidates in all countries throughout the world would be prohibitively expensive, and our intellectual property rights in some countries outside the United States may be less extensive than those in the United States. In addition, the laws of some foreign countries do not protect intellectual property rights to the same extent as federal and state laws in the United States. Consequently, we may not be able to prevent third parties from practicing our inventions in all countries outside the United States, or from selling or importing products made using our inventions in and into the United States or other jurisdictions. Competitors may use our technologies in jurisdictions where we do not obtain patent protection to develop their own products and may also export infringing products to territories where we have patent protection, but enforcement is not as strong as that in the United States. These products may compete with our products and our patents or other intellectual property rights may not be effective or sufficient to prevent them from competing.

Many companies have encountered significant problems in protecting and defending intellectual property rights in foreign jurisdictions. The legal systems of certain countries, particularly certain developing countries, do not favor the enforcement of patents, trade secrets, and other intellectual property protection, particularly those relating to biotechnology products, which could make it difficult for us to stop the infringement of our patents or marketing of competing products in violation of our proprietary rights generally. Proceedings to enforce our patent rights in foreign jurisdictions, whether or not successful, could result in substantial costs and divert our efforts and attention from other aspects of our business, could put our patents at risk of being invalidated or interpreted narrowly and our patent applications at risk of not issuing and could provoke third parties to assert claims against us. We may not prevail in any lawsuits that we initiate and the damages or other remedies awarded, if any, may not be commercially meaningful. Accordingly, our efforts to enforce our intellectual property rights around the world may be inadequate to obtain a significant commercial advantage from the intellectual property that we develop or license.

Patent terms may be inadequate to protect our competitive position on our product candidates for an adequate amount of time.

Patents have a limited lifespan. In the United States, if all maintenance fees are timely paid, the natural expiration of a patent is generally 20 years from its earliest U.S. non-provisional filing date. Various extensions may be available, but the life of a patent, and the protection it affords, is limited. Even if patents covering our product candidates are obtained, once the patent life has expired, we may be open to competition from competitive products, including generics or biosimilars. Given the amount of time required for the development, testing and regulatory review of new product candidates, patents protecting such candidates might expire before or shortly after such candidates are commercialized. As a result, any patents we may obtain may not provide us with sufficient rights to exclude others from commercializing products similar or identical to ours.

Obtaining and maintaining patent protection depends on compliance with various procedural, document submission, fee payment and other requirements imposed by governmental patent agencies, and any patent protection we may obtain in the future could be reduced or eliminated for non-compliance with these requirements.

Periodic maintenance fees, renewal fees, annuity fees and various other governmental fees on patents and/or applications will be due to be paid to the USPTO and various governmental patent agencies outside of the United States in several stages over the lifetime of the patents and/or applications. The USPTO and various non-U.S. governmental patent agencies require compliance with a number of procedural, documentary, fee payment and other similar provisions during the patent application process. There are situations in which non-compliance can result in abandonment or lapse of the patent or patent application, resulting in partial or complete loss of patent rights in the relevant jurisdiction. In such an event, our competitors might be able to enter the market and this circumstance would have a material adverse effect on our business.

It is difficult and costly to protect our proprietary rights, and we may not be able to ensure their protection. If we fail to protect or enforce our intellectual property rights adequately or secure rights to patents of others, the value of our intellectual property rights would diminish.

Our commercial viability will depend in part on obtaining and maintaining patent protection and trade secret protection of our product candidates, and the methods used to manufacture them, as well as successfully defending these patents against third-party challenges. Our ability to stop third parties from making, using, selling, offering to sell, or importing our products is dependent upon the extent to which we obtain rights under valid and enforceable patents or trade secrets that cover these activities.

The patent positions of pharmaceutical and biopharmaceutical companies can be highly uncertain and involve complex legal and factual questions for which important legal principles remain unresolved. No consistent policy regarding the breadth of claims allowed in biopharmaceutical patents has emerged to date in the United States. The biopharmaceutical patent situation outside the United States is even more uncertain. Changes in either the patent laws or in interpretations of patent laws in the United States and other countries may diminish the value of our intellectual property. Accordingly, we cannot predict the breadth of claims that may be allowed or enforced in the patents we own. Further, if any of our patents are deemed invalid and unenforceable, it could impact our ability to commercialize or license our technology.

The degree of future protection for our proprietary rights is uncertain because legal means afford only limited protection and may not adequately protect our rights or permit us to gain or keep our competitive advantage. For example:

We also may rely on trade secrets to protect our technology, especially where we do not believe patent protection is appropriate or obtainable. However, trade secrets are difficult to protect. Although we use reasonable efforts to protect our trade secrets, our employees, consultants, contractors, outside scientific collaborators, and other advisors may unintentionally or willfully disclose our information to competitors. In addition, courts outside the United States are sometimes less willing to protect trade secrets. Moreover, our competitors may independently develop equivalent knowledge, methods, and know-how.

We may be subject to claims challenging the inventorship of patents and other intellectual property.

We or our licensors may be subject to claims that former employees, collaborators or other third parties have an interest as an inventor or co-inventor in intellectual property we own or license. For example, we or our licensors may have inventorship disputes arise from conflicting obligations of employees, consultants or others who are involved in developing our product candidates. We may be subject to claims by third parties asserting that our licensors, employees or we have misappropriated their intellectual property, or claiming ownership of what we regard as our own intellectual property. Litigation may be necessary to defend against these and other claims challenging inventorship or our or our licensors’ ownership of our owned or in-licensed patents, trade secrets or other intellectual property. If we or our licensors fail in defending any such claims, in addition to paying monetary damages, we may lose valuable intellectual property rights, such as exclusive ownership of, or right to use, intellectual property that is important to our product candidates. Even if we are successful in defending against such claims, litigation could result in substantial costs and be a distraction to management and other employees. Any of the foregoing could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

If any of our trade secrets, know-how or other proprietary information is disclosed, the value of our trade secrets, know-how and other proprietary rights would be significantly impaired and our business and competitive position would suffer.

Our viability also depends upon the skills, knowledge and experience of our scientific and technical personnel, and our consultants and advisors. To help protect our proprietary know-how and our inventions for which patents may be unobtainable or difficult to obtain, we rely on trade secret protection and confidentiality agreements. To this end, we require all of our employees, consultants, advisors and contractors to enter into agreements which prohibit unauthorized disclosure and use of confidential information and, where applicable, require disclosure and assignment to us of the ideas, developments, discoveries and inventions important to our business. These agreements are often limited in duration and may not provide adequate protection for our trade secrets, know-how or other proprietary information in the event of any unauthorized use or disclosure or the lawful development by others of such information. There is no assurance that such agreements will be honored by such parties or enforced in whole or part by the courts. We cannot be certain that others will not gain access to these trade secrets or that our patents will provide adequate protection. Others may independently develop substantially equivalent proprietary information and techniques or otherwise gain access to our trade secrets. In addition, enforcing a claim that a third party illegally obtained and is using any of our trade secrets is expensive and time consuming, and the outcome is unpredictable. If any of our trade secrets, know-how or other proprietary information is improperly disclosed, the value of our trade secrets, know-how and other proprietary rights would be significantly impaired and our business and competitive position would suffer.

We may incur substantial costs as a result of litigation or other proceedings relating to patent and other intellectual property rights and we may be unable to protect our rights to, or use of, our technology.

If we choose to go to court to stop a third party from using the inventions claimed in our patents, that individual or company has the right to ask the court to rule that such patents are invalid and/or should not be enforced against that third party. These lawsuits are expensive and would consume time and other resources, even if we were successful in discontinuing the infringement of our patents. In addition, there is a risk that the court will decide that these patents are not valid and that we do not have the right to stop the other party from using the inventions. There is also the risk that, even if the validity of these patents is upheld, the court will refuse to stop the other party on the ground that such other party’s activities do not infringe our rights to these patents. In addition, the U.S. Supreme Court has in the past invalidated tests used by the USPTO in granting patents over the past 20 years. As a consequence, issued patents may be found to contain invalid claims according to the newly revised standards. Some of our own patents may be subject to challenge and subsequent invalidation in a variety of post-grant proceedings, particularly inter partes review, before the USPTO or during litigation under the revised criteria, which make it more difficult to defend the validity of claims in already issued patents.

Furthermore, a third party may claim that we or our manufacturing or commercialization partners are using inventions covered by the third party’s patent rights and may go to court to stop us from engaging in our normal operations and activities, including making or selling our product candidates. These lawsuits are costly and could affect our results of operations and divert the attention of managerial and technical personnel. There is a risk that a court could decide that we or our commercialization partners are infringing the third party’s patents and order us or our partners to stop the activities covered by the patents. In addition, there is a risk that a court could order us or our partners to pay the other party damages for having violated the other party’s patents. The biotechnology industry has produced a proliferation of patents, and it is not always clear to industry participants, including us, which patents cover various types of products, manufacturing processes or methods of use. The coverage of patents is subject to interpretation by the courts, and the interpretation is not always uniform. If we are sued for patent infringement, we would need to demonstrate that our products, manufacturing processes or methods of use either do not infringe the patent claims of the relevant patent and/or that the patent claims are invalid, and we may not be able to do this. Proving invalidity, in particular, is difficult since it requires a showing of clear and convincing evidence to overcome the presumption of validity enjoyed by issued patents.

As some patent applications in the United States may be maintained in secrecy until the patents are issued, because patent applications in the United States and many foreign jurisdictions are typically not published until eighteen months after filing, and because publications in the scientific literature often lag behind actual discoveries, we cannot be certain that others have not filed patent applications for technology covered by our issued patents or our pending applications, or that we were the first to invent the technology. Our competitors may have filed, and may in the future file, patent applications covering technology similar to ours. Any such patent applications may have priority over our patent applications or patents, which could further require us to obtain rights to issued patents covering such technologies. If another party has filed a United States patent application on inventions similar to ours, we may have to participate in an interference proceeding declared by the USPTO to determine priority of invention in the United States. The costs of these proceedings could be substantial, and it is possible that such efforts would be unsuccessful if, unbeknownst to us, the other party had independently arrived at the same or similar invention prior to our own invention, resulting in a loss of our U.S. patent position with respect to such inventions.

Some of our competitors may be able to sustain the costs of complex patent litigation more effectively than we can because they have substantially greater resources. In addition, any uncertainties resulting from the initiation and continuation of any litigation or inter partes review proceedings could have a material adverse effect on our ability to raise the funds necessary to continue our operations.

Some jurisdictions in which we operate have enacted legislation which allows members of the public to access information under statutes similar to the U.S. Freedom of Information Act. Even though we believe our information would be excluded from the scope of such statutes, there are no assurances that we can protect our confidential information from being disclosed under the provisions of such laws. If any confidential or proprietary information is released to the public, such disclosures may negatively impact our ability to protect our intellectual property rights.

Breaches or compromises of our information security systems or our information technology systems or infrastructure could result in exposure of private information, disruption of our business and damage to our reputation, which could harm our business, results of operation and financial condition.

We utilize information security and information technology systems and websites that allow for the secure storage and transmission of proprietary or private information regarding our clients, patients, employees, vendors and others, including individually identifiable health information. A security breach of our network, hosted service providers, or vendor systems, may expose us to a risk of loss or misuse of this information, litigation and potential liability. Hackers and data thieves are increasingly sophisticated and operate large-scale and complex automated attacks, including on companies within the healthcare industry. Although we believe that we take appropriate measures to safeguard sensitive information within our possession, we may not have the resources or technical sophistication to anticipate or prevent rapidly-evolving types of cyber-attacks targeted at us, our clients, our patients, or others who have entrusted us with information. Actual or anticipated attacks may cause us to incur costs, including costs to deploy additional personnel and protection technologies, train employees, and engage third-party experts and consultants. We invest in industry standard security technology to protect personal information. Advances in computer capabilities, new technological discoveries, or other developments may result in the technology used by us to protect personal information or other data being breached or compromised. To our knowledge, we have not experienced any material breach of our cybersecurity systems. If our or our third-party service provider systems fail to operate effectively or are damaged, destroyed, or shut down, or there are problems with transitioning to upgraded or replacement systems, or there are security breaches in these systems, any of the aforementioned could occur as a result of natural disasters, software or equipment failures, telecommunications failures, loss or theft of equipment, acts of terrorism, circumvention of security systems, or other cyber-attacks, we could experience delays or decreases in revenue, and reduced efficiency of our operations. Additionally, any of these events could lead to violations of privacy laws, loss of customers, or loss, misappropriation or corruption of confidential information, trade secrets or data, which could expose us to potential litigation, regulatory actions, sanctions or other statutory penalties, any or all of which could adversely affect our business, and cause us to incur significant losses and remediation costs.

We may be exposed to liabilities under the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, and any determination that we violated the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act or Chinese anti-corruption law could have a material adverse effect on our business.

We are subject to the Foreign Corrupt Practice Act, or FCPA, and other laws that prohibit improper payments or offers of payments to foreign governments and their officials and political parties by U.S. persons and issuers as defined by the statute, for the purpose of obtaining or retaining business. We have operations and agreements with third parties where corruption may occur. It is our policy to implement safeguards to prevent these practices by our employees. However, our existing safeguards and any future improvements may prove to be less than effective, and the employees, consultants, sales agents or distributors of our company may engage in conduct for which we might be held responsible.

Violations of the FCPA or other anti-corruption laws may result in severe criminal or civil sanctions, and we may be subject to other liabilities, which could negatively affect our business, operating results and financial condition. In addition, the United States government may seek to hold our company liable for successor liability FCPA violations committed by companies in which we invest or that we acquire.

Risk Factors Related to our Laboratory Services MSO Business

Continued changes in healthcare reimbursement models and products (e.g., health insurance exchanges), changes in government payment and reimbursement systems, or changes in payer mix, including an increase in third-party benefits management and value-based payment models, could have a material adverse effect on our revenues, profitability and cash flow.

Diagnostic testing services are billed to managed care organizations (MCOs), Medicare, Medicaid, physicians and physician groups, hospitals, patients and employer groups. Most testing services are billed to a party other than the physician or other authorized person who ordered the test. Increases in the percentage of services billed to government and MCOs could have an adverse effect on our revenues. Although we currently do not provide any “in network” laboratory services, our plan is to begin providing such services in the near future.

These organizations have different contracting philosophies, which are influenced by the design of their products. Some MCOs contract with a limited number of clinical laboratories and engage in direct negotiation of rates. Other MCOs adopt broader networks with generally uniform fee structures for participating clinical laboratories. In some cases, those fee structures are specific to independent clinical laboratories, while the fees paid to hospital-based and physician-office laboratories may be different, and are typically higher. MCOs may also offer Managed Medicare or Managed Medicaid plans. In addition, an increasing number of MCOs are implementing, directly or through third parties, various types of laboratory benefit management programs that may include laboratory networks, utilization management tools (such as prior authorization and/or prior notification), and claims edits, which may impact coverage or reimbursement for commercial laboratory tests. Some of these programs address commercial laboratory testing broadly, while others are focused on certain types of testing such as molecular, genetic and toxicology testing. An increase in the use of such programs could lead to increased denial of claims, extended appeals, and reduced revenue.

Our ability to attract and retain MCOs is critical given the impact of healthcare reform, related products and expanded coverage (e.g. health insurance exchanges and Medicaid expansion) and evolving value-based care and risk-based reimbursement delivery models (e.g., accountable care organizations (ACOs) and Independent Physician Associations (IPAs)).

A portion of the managed care fee-for-service revenues is collectible from patients in the form of deductibles, coinsurance and copayments. As patient cost-sharing has been increasing, our collections may be adversely impacted.

In addition, Medicare and Medicaid and private insurers have increased their efforts to control the cost, utilization and delivery of healthcare services, including commercial laboratory services. Measures to regulate healthcare delivery in general, and clinical laboratories in particular, have resulted in reduced prices, added costs and decreased test utilization for the commercial laboratory industry by increasing complexity and adding new regulatory and administrative requirements. Pursuant to legislation passed in late 2003, the percentage of Medicare beneficiaries enrolled in Managed Medicare plans has increased. The percentage of Medicaid beneficiaries enrolled in Managed Medicaid plans has also increased; however, changes to, or repeal of, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) may continue to affect coverage, reimbursement, and utilization of laboratory services, as well as administrative requirements, in ways that are currently unpredictable. Further healthcare reform could adversely affect laboratory reimbursement from Medicare, Medicaid or commercial carriers.

We expect the efforts to impose reduced reimbursement, more stringent payment policies, and utilization and cost controls by government and other payers to continue. If our laboratory services business cannot offset additional reductions in the payments it receives for its services by reducing costs, increasing test volume, and/or introducing new services and procedures, it could have a material adverse effect on our revenues, profitability and cash flows. In 2014, Congress passed the Protecting Access to Medicare Act (PAMA), requiring Medicare to change the way payment rates are calculated for tests paid under the Clinical Laboratory Fee Schedule (CLFS), and to base the payment on the weighted median of rates paid by private payers. On June 23, 2016, CMS issued a final rule to implement PAMA that required applicable laboratories, including our laboratory services business, to begin reporting their test-specific private payer payment amounts to CMS during the first quarter of 2017. CMS exercised enforcement discretion to permit reporting for an additional 60 days, through May 30, 2017. CMS used that private market data to calculate weighted median prices for each test (based on applicable current procedural technology (CPT) codes) to represent the new CLFS rates beginning in 2018, subject to certain phase-in limits. For 2018-2020, a test price could not be reduced by more than 10% per year. As a result of provisions included within the CARES Act, PAMA rate reductions for 2021 were suspended. As a result of the Protecting Medicare and American Farmers from Sequester Cuts Act that became law in December 2021, the data reporting requirements and Medicare reimbursement cuts that would have occurred under PAMA in 2022 were delayed by one additional year. As a result of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023, which became law in December 2022, the data reporting requirements and Medicare reimbursement cuts that would have occurred under PAMA in 2023 were delayed by one additional year.

For 2024-2026, a test price cannot be reduced by more than 15.0% per year. The process of data reporting and repricing will be repeated every three years for Clinical Diagnostic Laboratory Tests (CDLTs) beginning in 2024. CFLS rates for 2027 and subsequent periods will not be subject to phase-in limits. The phase-in of rates for CDLTs established in 2018 will resume in 2024. New CLFS rates will be established in 2025 based on data from 2019 to be reported in 2024. New CLFS rates will be established in 2028 based on data from 2026 to be reported in 2027 CLFS rates for Advanced Diagnostic Laboratory Tests (ADLTs) will be updated annually.

CMS published its initial proposed CLFS rates under PAMA for 2018-2020 on September 22, 2017. Following a public comment period, CMS made adjustments and published final CLFS rates for 2018-2020 on November 17, 2017, with additional adjustments published on December 1, 2017. 2021, 2022 and 2023 PAMA rates were frozen as described above.

Healthcare reform legislation also contains numerous regulations that will require us, as an employer, to implement significant process and record-keeping changes to be in compliance. These changes increase the cost of providing healthcare coverage to employees and their families. Given the limited release of regulations to guide compliance, as well as potential changes to the ACA, the exact impact to employers, including us, is uncertain.

Government payers, such as Medicare and Medicaid, have taken steps to reduce the utilization and reimbursement of healthcare services, including clinical testing services.

Although we currently do not provide any laboratory services that are billed through Medicare or Medicaid, we plan to do so in the near future. At that time, we will face efforts by government payers to reduce utilization of and reimbursement for diagnostic information services. One example of this is increased use of prior authorization requirements. We expect efforts to reduce reimbursements, to impose more stringent cost controls and to reduce utilization of clinical test services will continue.

Pursuant to PAMA, reimbursement rates for many clinical laboratory tests provided under Medicare were reduced from 2018 - 2020. PAMA calls for further revision of the Medicare CLFS for years after 2020, based on future surveys of market rates; reimbursement rate reduction from 2024-26 is capped by PAMA at 15% annually. PAMA’s next data collection and reporting period have been delayed, most recently by federal legislation adopted in December 2022, which further delayed the reimbursement rate reductions and reporting requirements until January 1, 2024.

In addition, CMS has adopted policies limiting or excluding coverage for clinical tests that we perform. We also expect in the future to provide physician services that are reimbursed by Medicare under a physician fee schedule, which is subject to adjustment on an annual basis. Medicaid reimbursement varies by state and is subject to administrative and billing requirements and budget pressures.

In addition, over the last several years, the federal government has expanded its contracts with private health insurance plans for Medicare beneficiaries, called “Medicare Advantage” programs, and has encouraged such beneficiaries to switch from the traditional programs to the private programs. There has been growth of health insurance plans offering Medicare Advantage programs, and of beneficiary enrollment in these programs. States have mandated that Medicaid beneficiaries enroll in private managed care arrangements. In addition, state budget pressures have encouraged states to consider several courses of action that may impact our business, such as delaying payments, reducing reimbursement, restricting coverage eligibility, denying claims and service coverage restrictions. Further, CMS has set goals for value-based reimbursement to be achieved by 2030.

Reimbursement for Medicare services also is subject to annual reduction under the Budget Control Act of 2011, and the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010.

From time to time, the federal government has considered whether competitive bidding could be used to provide clinical testing services for Medicare beneficiaries while maintaining quality and access to care. Congress periodically considers cost-saving initiatives. These initiatives have included coinsurance for clinical testing services, co-payments for clinical testing and further laboratory physician fee schedule reductions.

Other steps taken to reduce utilization and reimbursement include requirements to obtain diagnosis codes to obtain payment, increased documentation requirements, limiting the allowable number of tests or ordering frequency, expanded prior authorization programs and otherwise increasing payment denials.

Steps to reduce utilization and reimbursement also discourage innovation and access to innovative solutions that we may offer.

Health plans and other third parties have taken steps to reduce the utilization and reimbursement of health services, including clinical testing services.

We face efforts by non-governmental third-party payers, including health plans, to reduce utilization of and reimbursement for clinical testing services. Examples include increased use of prior authorization requirements and increased denial of coverage for services. There is increased market activity regarding alternative payment models, including bundled payment models. We expect continuing efforts by third-party payers, including in their rules, practices and policies, to reduce reimbursements, to impose more stringent cost controls and to reduce utilization of clinical testing services. ACOs and Independent Delivery Networks (IDNs), including hospitals and hospital health systems, also may undertake efforts to reduce utilization of, or reimbursement for, diagnostic information services.

The healthcare industry has experienced a trend of consolidation among health insurance plans, resulting in fewer but larger insurance plans with significant bargaining power to negotiate fee arrangements with clinical testing providers. The increased consolidation among health plans also has increased pricing transparency, insurer bargaining power and the potential adverse impact of ceasing to be a contracted provider with an insurer. Health plans, and independent physician associations, may demand that clinical testing providers accept discounted fee structures or assume all or a portion of the financial risk associated with providing testing services to their members through capitated payment arrangements. Some health plans also are reviewing test coding, evaluating coverage decisions and requiring preauthorization of certain testing. There are also an increasing number of patients enrolling in consumer driven products and high deductible plans that involve greater patient cost-sharing.

Other steps taken to reduce utilization and reimbursement include requirements to obtain diagnosis codes to obtain payment, increased documentation requirements, limiting the allowable number of tests or ordering frequency, expanded prior authorization programs and otherwise increasing payment denials.

Steps to reduce utilization and reimbursement also discourage innovation and access to innovative solutions that we may offer.

The clinical testing business is highly competitive, and if we fail to provide an appropriately priced level of service or otherwise fail to compete effectively it could have a material adverse effect on our revenues and profitability.

The laboratory testing industry is fragmented and highly competitive. We primarily compete with three types of clinical testing providers: commercial clinical laboratories IDN-affiliated laboratories and physician-office laboratories. Our largest commercial clinical laboratory competitors are Quest Diagnostic Laboratories and Laboratory Corporation of America. In addition, we compete with many smaller regional and local commercial clinical laboratories, specialized advanced laboratories and providers of consumer-initiated testing. There also has been a trend among physician practices to establish their own histology laboratory capabilities and/or bring pathologists into their practices, thereby reducing referrals from these practices and increasing the competitive position of these practices.

The commercial laboratory business is intensely competitive both in terms of price and service. Pricing of laboratory testing services is often one of the most significant factors used by physicians, third-party payers and consumers in selecting a laboratory. As a result of significant consolidation in the commercial laboratory industry, larger commercial laboratory providers are able to increase cost efficiencies afforded by large-scale automated testing. This consolidation results in greater price competition. Our laboratory services business may be unable to increase cost efficiencies sufficiently, if at all, and as a result, its net earnings and cash flows could be negatively impacted by such price competition. We may face increased competition from health system laboratories, due to physicians within those systems directing their testing to the health system laboratory and away from us, and as those laboratories seek to expand their testing volume from unaffiliated physicians in their service areas. We may also face competition from companies that do not comply with existing laws or regulations or otherwise disregard compliance standards in the industry. Additionally, we may also face changes in fee schedules, competitive bidding for laboratory services, or other actions or pressures reducing payment schedules as a result of increased or additional competition. These competitive pressures may affect the attractiveness or profitability of our laboratory services business, and could adversely affect our financial results.

The diagnostic information services industry also is faced with changing technology and new product introductions. Competitors may compete using advanced technology, including technology that enables more convenient or cost-effective testing. Digital pathology, still in an emerging state, is an example of this. Competitors also may compete on the basis of new service offerings. Competitors also may offer testing to be performed outside of a commercial clinical laboratory, such as (1) point-of-care testing that can be performed by physicians in their offices; (2) advanced testing that can be performed by IDNs in their own laboratories; and (3) home testing that can be carried out without requiring the services of outside providers.

Failure to obtain and retain new customers, the loss of existing customers or material contracts, or a reduction in services or tests ordered or specimens submitted by existing customers, or the inability to retain existing and/or create new relationships with health systems could impact our ability to successfully grow our business.

To maintain and grow its business, we need to obtain and retain new customers and business partners. In addition, a reduction in tests ordered or specimens submitted by existing customers, a decrease in demand for our services from existing customers, or the loss of existing contracts, without offsetting growth in its customer base, could impact our ability to successfully grow its business and could have a material adverse effect on our revenues and profitability. We compete primarily on the basis of the quality of services, reporting and information systems, reputation in the medical community, the pricing of services and ability to employ qualified personnel. Our failure to successfully compete on any of these factors could result in the loss of existing customers, an inability to gain new customers and a reduction in our business.

Discontinuation or recalls of existing testing products; failure to develop or acquire licenses for new or improved testing technologies; or our customers using new technologies to perform their own tests could adversely affect our business. 

From time to time, manufacturers discontinue or recall reagents, test kits or instruments used by us to perform laboratory testing. Such discontinuations or recalls could adversely affect our costs, testing volume and revenue.

The commercial laboratory industry is subject to changing technology and new product introductions. If we are unable to license new or improved technologies to expand its esoteric testing operations, its testing methods may become outdated when compared with our competition, and testing volume and revenue may be materially and adversely affected.

In addition, advances in technology may lead to the development of more cost-effective technologies such as point-of-care testing equipment that can be operated by physicians or other healthcare providers (including physician assistants, nurse practitioners and certified nurse midwives, generally referred to herein as physicians) in their offices or by patients themselves without requiring the services of freestanding clinical laboratories. Development of such technology and its use by our customers could reduce the demand for its laboratory testing services and the utilization of certain tests offered by us and negatively impact its revenues.

Currently, most commercial laboratory testing is categorized as high or moderate complexity, and thereby is subject to extensive and costly regulation under Clinical Laboratory Improvement Act (CLIA). The cost of compliance with CLIA makes it impractical for most physicians to operate clinical laboratories in their offices, and other laws limit the ability of physicians to have ownership in a laboratory and to refer tests to such a laboratory. Manufacturers of laboratory equipment and test kits could seek to increase their sales by marketing point-of-care laboratory equipment to physicians and by selling test kits approved for home or physician office use to both physicians and patients. Diagnostic tests approved for home use are automatically deemed to be “waived” tests under CLIA and may be performed in physician office laboratories as well as by patients in their homes with minimal regulatory oversight. Other tests meeting certain FDA criteria also may be classified as “waived” for CLIA purposes. The FDA has regulatory responsibility over instruments, test kits, reagents and other devices used by clinical laboratories, and it has taken responsibility from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for classifying the complexity of tests for CLIA purposes. Increased approval of “waived” test kits could lead to increased testing by physicians in their offices or by patients at home, which could affect our market for laboratory testing services and negatively impact its revenues.

Changes or disruption in services supplies, or transportation provided by third parties have impacted and could continue to impact or adversely affect our business.

We depend on third parties to provide supplies and services critical to our laboratory testing business. We are heavily reliant on third-party ground and air travel for transport of clinical trial and diagnostic testing supplies and specimens, research products, and people. A significant disruption to these travel systems, or our access to them, could have a material adverse effect on our business. We are also reliant on an extensive network of third-party suppliers and vendors of certain services and products, including for certain animal populations. Disruptions to the continued supply, or increases in costs, of these services, products, or animal populations may arise from export/import restrictions or embargoes, political or economic instability, pressure from animal rights activists, adverse weather, natural disasters, public health crises, transportation disruptions, cyber-attacks, or other causes, as well as from termination of relationships with suppliers or vendors for their failure to follow our performance standards and requirements. Disruption of supply and services has impacted and could continue to impact or have a material adverse effect on our business.

Continued and increased consolidation of pharmaceutical, biotechnology and medical device companies, health systems, physicians and other customers could adversely affect our business.

Many healthcare companies and providers, including pharmaceutical, biotechnology and medical device companies, health systems and physician practices are consolidating through mergers, acquisitions, joint ventures and other types of transactions and collaborations. In addition to these more traditional horizontal mergers that involve entities that previously competed against each other, the healthcare industry is experiencing an increase in vertical mergers, which involve entities that previously did not offer competing goods or services. As the healthcare industry consolidates, competition to provide goods and services may become more intense, and vertical mergers may give those combined companies greater control over more aspects of healthcare, including increased bargaining power. This competition and increased customer bargaining power may adversely affect the price and volume of our services.

In addition, as the broader healthcare industry trend of consolidation continues, including the acquisition of physician practices by health systems, relationships with hospital-based health systems and integrated delivery networks are becoming more important. Our laboratory services business’ inability to retain its existing relationships with physicians if they become part of healthcare systems and networks and/or to create new relationships could impact its ability to successfully grow.

Changes, including changes in interpretation, in payer regulations, policies or approvals, or changes in laws, regulations or policies in the U.S. or globally, may adversely affect us.

U.S. and state government payers, such as Medicare and Medicaid, as well as insurers, including MCOs, have increased their efforts to control the cost, utilization and delivery of healthcare services. From time to time, Congress has considered and implemented changes in Medicare fee schedules in conjunction with budgetary legislation. The first phase of reductions pursuant to PAMA came into effect on January 1, 2018, and will continue annually subject to certain delays in implementation and phase-in limits through 2026, and without limitations for subsequent periods. Further reductions due to changes in policy regarding coverage of tests or other requirements for payment, such as prior authorization, diagnosis code and other claims edits, may be implemented from time to time. Reimbursement for pathology services performed by us is also subject to statutory and regulatory reduction. Reductions in the reimbursement rates and changes in payment policies of other third-party payers may occur as well. Such changes in the past have resulted in reduced payments as well as added costs and have decreased test utilization for the commercial laboratory industry by adding more complex new regulatory and administrative requirements. Further changes in third-party payer regulations, policies, or laboratory benefit or utilization management programs may have a material adverse effect on our business. Actions by federal and state agencies regulating insurance, including healthcare exchanges, or changes in other laws, regulations, or policies may also have a material adverse effect upon our business.

Our business could be harmed from the loss or suspension of a license or imposition of a fine or penalties under, or future changes in, or interpretations of, the law or regulations of CLIA, Medicare, Medicaid or other national, state or local agencies in the U.S. and other countries where we operate laboratories currently and in the future. 

The commercial laboratory testing industry is subject to extensive U.S. regulation, and many of these statutes and regulations have not been interpreted by the courts. CLIA extends federal oversight to virtually all clinical laboratories operating in the U.S. by requiring that they be certified by the federal government or by a federally approved accreditation agency. The sanction for failure to comply with CLIA requirements may be suspension, revocation or limitation of a laboratory’s CLIA certificate, which is necessary to conduct business, as well as significant fines and/or criminal penalties. In addition, we are subject to regulation under state law. State laws may require that laboratories and/or laboratory personnel meet certain qualifications, specify certain quality controls or require maintenance of certain records. In the future, we may also operate laboratories outside of the U.S. and become subject to laws governing its laboratory operations in the other countries where it operates.

Applicable statutes and regulations could be interpreted or applied by a prosecutorial, regulatory or judicial authority in a manner that would adversely affect our business. Potential sanctions for violation of these statutes and regulations include significant fines and the suspension or loss of various licenses, certificates and authorizations, which could have a material adverse effect on our business. In addition, compliance with future legislation could impose additional requirements on us, which may be costly.

Failure of us or our third-party service providers to comply with privacy and security laws and regulations could result in fines, penalties and damage to our reputation with customers and have a material adverse effect upon our business.

If we and our third-party service providers do not comply with existing or new laws and regulations related to protecting the privacy and security of personal or health information, we could be subject to monetary fines, civil penalties or criminal sanctions.

In the U.S., HIPAA privacy and security regulations, including the expanded requirements under HITECH, establish comprehensive standards with respect to the use and disclosure of protected health information (PHI), by covered entities, in addition to setting standards to protect the confidentiality, integrity and security of PHI.

HIPAA restricts our ability to use or disclose PHI, without patient authorization, for purposes other than payment, treatment or healthcare operations (as defined by HIPAA), except for disclosures for various public policy purposes and other permitted purposes outlined in the privacy regulations. HIPAA and HITECH provide for significant fines and other penalties for wrongful use or disclosure of PHI in violation of the privacy and security regulations, including potential civil and criminal fines and penalties. The regulations establish a complex regulatory framework on a variety of subjects, including:

We have implemented policies and procedures designed to comply with the HIPAA privacy and security requirements as applicable. The privacy and security regulations establish a “floor” and do not supersede state laws that are more stringent. Therefore, we are required to comply with both additional federal privacy and security regulations and varying state privacy and security laws. In addition, federal and state laws that protect the privacy and security of patient information may be subject to enforcement and interpretations by various governmental authorities and courts, resulting in complex compliance issues. For example, we could incur damages under state laws, including pursuant to an action brought by a private party for the wrongful use or disclosure of health information or other personal information.

Failure to comply with U.S., state or local environmental, health and safety laws and regulations could result in fines, penalties and loss of licensure, and have a material adverse effect upon us. 

We are subject to licensing and regulation under laws and regulations relating to the protection of the environment and human health and safety, including laws and regulations relating to the handling, transportation and disposal of medical specimens, infectious and hazardous waste and radioactive materials, as well as regulations relating to the safety and health of laboratory employees. Failure to comply with these laws and regulations could subject us to denial of the right to conduct business, fines, criminal penalties and/or other enforcement actions that would have a material adverse effect on its business. In addition, compliance with future legislation could impose additional requirements on us that may be costly.

The U.S. healthcare system is evolving and medical laboratory testing market fundamentals are changing, and our business could be adversely impacted if we fail to adapt.

The U.S. healthcare system continues to evolve. Significant change is taking place in the healthcare system. For example, value-based reimbursement is increasing; CMS has set goals for value-based reimbursement to be achieved by 2030. Patients are encouraged to take increased interest in and responsibility for, and often are bearing increased responsibility for payment for, their healthcare. Healthcare industry participants are evolving and consolidating. Healthcare services increasingly are being provided by non-traditional providers (e.g., physician assistants), in non-traditional venues (e.g., retail medical clinics, urgent care centers) and using new technologies (e.g., telemedicine, digital pathology). Utilization of the healthcare system is being influenced by several factors and may result in a decline in the demand for diagnostic information services.

In addition, we believe that clinical testing market fundamentals are changing. We believe that PAMA-driven reimbursement pressure remains a catalyst for structural change in the market. We also believe that health plans and consumers increasingly are focusing on driving better value in laboratory testing services. We expect that the evolution of the healthcare industry will continue, and that industry change is likely to be extensive.

Failure to establish, and perform to, appropriate quality standards, or to assure that the appropriate standard of quality is observed in the performance of our diagnostic information services, could adversely affect the results of our operations and adversely impact our reputation.

The provision of diagnostic information services involves certain inherent risks. The services that we provide are intended to provide information in providing patient care. Therefore, users of our services may have a greater sensitivity to errors than the users of services or products that are intended for other purposes.

Negligence in performing our services can lead to injury or other adverse events. We may be sued under physician liability or other liability law for acts or omissions by our pathologists, laboratory personnel and IDN employees who are under our supervision. We are subject to the attendant risk of substantial damages awards in excess of our insurance coverage and risk to our reputation.

We are subject to numerous legal and regulatory requirements governing our activities, and we may face substantial fines and penalties, and our business activities may be impacted, if we fail to comply.

Our business is subject to or impacted by extensive and frequently changing laws and regulations in the United States (including at both the federal and state levels) and the other jurisdictions in which we engage in business. While we seek to conduct our business in compliance with all applicable laws, many of the laws and regulations applicable to us are vague or indefinite and have not been extensively interpreted by the courts, including many of those relating to:

These laws and regulations may be interpreted or applied by a prosecutorial, regulatory or judicial authority in a manner that could require us to make changes in our operations, including our pricing and/or billing practices. We may not be able to maintain, renew or secure required permits, licenses or any other regulatory approvals needed to operate our business or commercialize our services. If we fail to comply with applicable laws and regulations, or if we fail to maintain, renew or obtain necessary permits, licenses and approvals, we could suffer civil and criminal penalties, fines, exclusion from participation in governmental healthcare programs and the loss of various licenses, certificates and authorizations necessary to operate our business, as well as incur additional liabilities from third-party claims. If any of the foregoing were to occur, our reputation could be damaged and important business relationships with third parties could be adversely affected.

We also are subject from time to time to qui tam claims brought by former employees or other “whistleblowers.” The federal and state governments continue aggressive enforcement efforts against perceived healthcare fraud. Legislative provisions relating to healthcare fraud and abuse provide government enforcement personnel substantial funding, powers, penalties and remedies to pursue suspected cases of fraud and abuse. In addition, the government has substantial leverage in negotiating settlements since the amount of potential damages far exceeds the rates at which we are reimbursed for our services, and the government has the remedy of excluding a non-compliant provider from participation in the Medicare and Medicaid programs. Regardless of merit or eventual outcome, these types of investigations and related litigation can result in:

Changes in applicable laws and regulations may result in existing practices becoming more restricted, or subject our existing or proposed services to additional costs, delay, modification or withdrawal. Such changes also could require us to modify our business objectives.

Failure to accurately bill for our services, or to comply with applicable laws relating to government healthcare programs, could have a material adverse effect on our business.

Billing for diagnostic information services is complex and subject to extensive and non-uniform rules and administrative requirements. Depending on the billing arrangement and applicable law, we bill various payers, such as patients, insurance companies, Medicare, Medicaid, clinicians, IDNs and employer groups. The majority of billing and related operations for our Company are being provided by a third party under our oversight. Failure to accurately bill for our services could have a material adverse effect on our business. In addition, failure to comply with applicable laws relating to billing government healthcare programs may result in various consequences, including: civil and criminal fines and penalties, exclusion from participation in governmental healthcare programs and the loss of various licenses, certificates and authorizations necessary to operate our business, as well as incur additional liabilities from third-party claims. Certain violations of these laws may also provide the basis for a civil remedy under the federal False Claims Act, including fines and damages of up to three times the amount claimed. The qui tam provisions of the federal False Claims Act and similar provisions in certain state false claims acts allow private individuals to bring lawsuits against healthcare companies on behalf of government payers, private payers and/or patients alleging inappropriate billing practices.

Although we believe that we are in compliance, in all material respects, with applicable laws and regulations, there can be no assurance that a regulatory agency or tribunal would not reach a different conclusion. The federal or state government may bring claims based on our current practices, which we believe are lawful. The federal and state governments have substantial leverage in negotiating settlements since the amount of potential damages and fines far exceeds the rates at which we are reimbursed, and the government has the remedy of excluding a non-compliant provider from participation in the Medicare and Medicaid programs. We believe that federal and state governments continue aggressive enforcement efforts against perceived healthcare fraud. Legislative provisions relating to healthcare fraud and abuse provide government enforcement personnel with substantial funding, powers, penalties and remedies to pursue suspected cases of fraud and abuse.

Inflationary pressures could adversely impact us because of increases in the costs of materials, supplies and services, and increased labor and people-related expenses.

Inflationary pressures have resulted in increases in the costs of the testing equipment, supplies and other goods and services that we purchase from manufacturers, suppliers and others. Inflationary pressures, along with the competition for labor, have also resulted in a rise of our labor costs, which include the costs of compensation, benefits, and recruiting and training new hires. Our ability to raise the prices and fees we charge for the services we provide is limited. Continuation of the current inflationary environment may adversely impact us.

Risk Factors Related to Clinical and Commercialization Activity

We may not be able to file INDs to commence additional clinical trials on the timelines we expect, and even if we are able to do so, the FDA may not permit us to proceed.

Avalon has initiated its first-in-human clinical trial of CD19 CAR-T candidate, AVA-001 in August 2019 at the Hebei Yanda Lu Daopei Hospital and Beijing Lu Daopei Hospital in China (the world’s single largest CAR-T treatment network with over 600 patients being treated with CAR-T) for the indication of relapsed/refractory B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia and non-Hodgkin Lymphoma. We hope to file a number of investigational new drug applications, or INDs, for cell based therapies and diagnostic systems through INDs over the next several years. However, the timing of our filing of these INDs is primarily dependent on receiving further data from our pre-clinical studies, and our timing of filing on all product candidates is subject to further research. Additionally, our submission of INDs is contingent upon having sufficient financial resources to prepare and complete the application.

We cannot be sure that submission of an IND will result in the United States Food and Drug Administration, or FDA, allowing further clinical trials to begin, or that, once begun, issues will not arise that result in the suspension or termination of such clinical trials. Any IND we submit could be denied by the FDA or the FDA could place any future investigation of ours on clinical hold until we provide additional information, either before or after clinical trials are initiated. Additionally, even if such regulatory authorities agree with the design and implementation of the clinical trials set forth in an IND or clinical trial application, we cannot guarantee that such regulatory authorities will not change their requirements in the future. Unfavorable future trial results or other factors, such as insufficient capital to continue development of a product candidate or program, could also cause us to voluntarily withdraw an effective IND.

We have limited experience in conducting clinical trials.

We have limited human clinical trial experience with respect to our product candidates. Although our CEO, Dr. David Jin, is formerly with the FDA, this will not provide assurance of success. The clinical testing process is governed by stringent regulation and is highly complex, costly, time-consuming, and uncertain as to outcome, and pharmaceutical products and products used in the regeneration of tissue may invite particularly close scrutiny and requirements from the FDA and other regulatory bodies. Our failure or the failure of our collaborators to conduct human clinical trials successfully or our failure to capitalize on the results of human clinical trials for our product candidates would have a material adverse effect on us. If our clinical trials of our product candidates or future product candidates do not sufficiently enroll or produce results necessary to support regulatory approval in the United States or elsewhere, or if they show undesirable side effects, we will be unable to commercialize these product candidates. 

To receive regulatory approval for the commercial sale of our product candidates, we must conduct adequate and well-controlled clinical trials to demonstrate efficacy and safety in humans. Clinical failure can occur at any stage of the testing. Our clinical trials may produce negative or inconclusive results, and we may decide, or regulators may require us, to conduct additional clinical and/or non-clinical testing. In addition, the results of our clinical trials may show that our product candidates are ineffective or may cause undesirable side effects, which could interrupt, delay or halt clinical trials, resulting in the denial of regulatory approval by the FDA and other regulatory authorities. In addition, negative, delayed or inconclusive results may result in:

Delays in the commencement, enrollment, and completion of clinical testing could result in increased costs to us and delay or limit our ability to obtain regulatory approval for our product candidates.

Delays in the commencement, enrollment or completion of clinical testing could significantly affect our product development costs. A clinical trial may be suspended or terminated by us, the FDA, or other regulatory authorities due to a number of factors. The commencement and completion of clinical trials require us to identify and maintain a sufficient number of trial sites, many of which may already be engaged in other clinical trial programs for the same indication as our product candidates. We may be required to withdraw from a clinical trial as a result of changing standards of care, or we may become ineligible to participate in clinical studies. We do not know whether planned clinical trials will begin on time or be completed on schedule, if at all. The commencement, enrollment and completion of clinical trials can be delayed for a number of reasons, including, but not limited to, delays related to:

If we are required to conduct additional clinical trials or other testing of our product candidates beyond those that we currently contemplate, we or our development partners, if any, may be delayed in obtaining, or may not be able to obtain or maintain, clinical or marketing approval for these product candidates. We may not be able to obtain approval for indications that are as broad as intended, or we may be able to obtain approval only for indications that are entirely different from those indications for which we sought approval.

Changes in regulatory requirements and guidance may occur, and we may need to amend clinical trial protocols to reflect these changes with appropriate regulatory authorities. Amendments may require us to resubmit our clinical trial protocols to IRBs for re-examination, which may impact the costs, timing, or successful completion of a clinical trial. If we experience delays in the completion of, or if we terminate, our clinical trials, the commercial prospects for our product candidates will be harmed, and our ability to generate product revenues will be delayed. In addition, many of the factors that cause, or lead to, a delay in the commencement or completion of clinical trials may also ultimately lead to the denial of regulatory approval of a product candidate. Even if we are able to ultimately commercialize our product candidates, other therapies for the same or similar indications may have been introduced to the market and already established a competitive advantage. Any delays in obtaining regulatory approvals may:

Our success depends upon the viability of our product candidates and we cannot be certain any of them will receive regulatory approval to be commercialized.

We will need FDA approval to market and sell any of our product candidates in the United States and approvals from FDA-equivalent regulatory authorities in foreign jurisdictions to commercialize our product candidates in those jurisdictions. In order to obtain FDA approval of any of our product candidates, we must submit to the FDA a new drug application, or NDA, or a biologics license application, or BLA, demonstrating that the product candidate is safe for humans and effective for its intended use. This demonstration requires significant research and animal tests, which are referred to as pre-clinical studies, as well as human tests, which are referred to as clinical trials. Satisfaction of the FDA’s regulatory requirements typically takes many years, depends upon the type, complexity, and novelty of the product candidate, and requires substantial resources for research, development, testing and manufacturing. We cannot predict whether our research and clinical approaches will result in cell therapies that the FDA considers safe for humans and effective for indicated uses. The FDA has substantial discretion in the drug approval process and may require us to conduct additional pre-clinical and clinical testing or to perform post-marketing studies. The approval process may also be delayed by changes in government regulation, future legislation, administrative action or changes in FDA policy that occur prior to or during our regulatory review.

Even if we comply with all FDA requests, the FDA may ultimately reject one or more of our NDAs or BLAs, as applicable. We cannot be sure that we will ever obtain regulatory clearance for our product candidates. Failure to obtain FDA approval of any of our product candidates will reduce our number of potentially salable products and, therefore, corresponding product revenues, and will have a material and adverse impact on our business.

As the results of earlier pre-clinical studies or clinical trials are not necessarily predictive of future results, any product candidate we advance into clinical trials may not have favorable results in later clinical trials or receive regulatory approval.

Even if our pre-clinical studies and clinical trials are completed as planned, clinical trials, we cannot be certain that their results will support the claims of our product candidates. Positive results in pre-clinical testing and early clinical trials do not ensure that results from later clinical trials will also be positive, and we cannot be sure that the results of later clinical trials will replicate the results of prior clinical trials and pre-clinical testing. A number of companies in the pharmaceutical industry, including those with greater resources and experience, have suffered significant setbacks in Phase II or Phase III clinical trials, even after seeing promising results in earlier clinical trials.

Our clinical trial process may fail to demonstrate that our product candidates are safe for humans and effective for indicated uses. This failure would cause us to abandon a product candidate and may delay development of other product candidates. Any delay in, or termination of, our clinical trials will delay or cause us to refrain from the filing of our NDAs and/or BLAs with the FDA and, ultimately, our ability to commercialize our product candidates and generate product revenues. In addition, our clinical trials to date involve small patient populations. Because of the small sample size, the results of these clinical trials may not be indicative of future results.

Our business faces significant government regulation, and there is no guarantee that our product candidates will receive regulatory approval.

Our research and development activities, pre-clinical studies, anticipated human clinical trials, and anticipated manufacturing and marketing of our potential products are subject to extensive regulation by the FDA and other regulatory authorities in the United States, as well as by regulatory authorities in other countries. In the United States, our product candidates are subject to regulation as biological products or as combination biological products/medical devices under the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, the Public Health Service Act and other statutes, as outlined in the Code of Federal Regulations. Different regulatory requirements may apply to our products depending on how they are categorized by the FDA under these laws. These regulations can be subject to substantial and significant interpretation, addition, amendment or revision by the FDA and by the legislative process. The FDA may determine that we will need to undertake clinical trials beyond those currently planned. Furthermore, the FDA may determine that results of clinical trials do not support approval for the product. Similar determinations may be encountered in foreign countries. The FDA will continue to monitor products in the market after approval, if any, and may determine to withdraw its approval or otherwise seriously affect the marketing efforts for any such product. The same possibilities exist for trials to be conducted outside of the United States that are subject to regulations established by local authorities and local law. Any such determinations would delay or deny the introduction of our product candidates to the market and have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, and results of operations. 

Cell based therapeutics are subject to ongoing periodic unannounced inspection by the FDA, the Drug Enforcement Agency, other federal agencies and corresponding state agencies to ensure strict compliance with good manufacturing practices, and other government regulations and corresponding foreign standards. We do not have control over third-party manufacturers’ compliance with these regulations and standards, nor can we guarantee that we will maintain compliance with such regulations in regards to our own manufacturing processes. Other risks include:

Even if our product candidates receive regulatory approval in the United States, we may never receive approval or commercialize our product candidates outside of the United States. In order to market and commercialize any product candidate outside of the United States, we must establish and comply with numerous and varying regulatory requirements of other countries regarding manufacturing, safety and efficacy. Approval procedures vary among countries and can involve additional product testing and additional administrative review periods. The time required to obtain approval in other countries might differ from that required to obtain FDA approval. The regulatory approval process in other countries may include all of the risks detailed above regarding FDA approval in the United States as well as other risks. Regulatory approval in one country does not ensure regulatory approval in another, but a failure or delay in obtaining regulatory approval in one country may have a negative effect on the regulatory approval process in others. Failure to obtain regulatory approval in other countries, or any delay or setback in obtaining such approval, could have the same adverse effects detailed above regarding FDA approval in the United States. Such effects include the risks that our product candidates may not be approved for all indications requested, which could limit the uses of our product candidates and have an adverse effect on product sales and potential royalties, and that such approval may be subject to limitations on the indicated uses for which the product may be marketed or require costly, post-marketing follow-up studies.

Even if our product candidates receive regulatory approval, we may still face future development and regulatory difficulties.

Even if U.S. regulatory approval is obtained, the FDA may still impose significant restrictions on a product’s indicated uses or marketing, or impose ongoing requirements for potentially costly post-approval studies. If any of our products were granted accelerated approval, FDA could require post-marketing confirmatory trials to verify and describe the anticipated effect on irreversible morbidity or mortality or other clinical benefit. FDA may withdraw approval of a drug or indication approved under the accelerated approval pathway if a trial required to verify the predicted clinical benefit of the product fails to verify such benefit; other evidence demonstrates that the product is not shown to be safe or effective under the conditions of use; the applicant fails to conduct any required post-approval trial of the drug with due diligence; or the applicant disseminates false or misleading promotional materials relating to the product. In addition, the FDA currently requires as a condition for accelerated approval the pre-approval of promotional materials, which could adversely impact the timing of the commercial launch of the product.

Given the number of recent high-profile adverse safety events with certain drug and cell related products, the FDA may require, as a condition of approval, costly risk management programs, which may include safety surveillance, restricted distribution and use, patient education, enhanced labeling, special packaging or labeling, expedited reporting of certain adverse events, pre-approval of promotional materials, and restrictions on direct-to-consumer advertising. Furthermore, heightened Congressional scrutiny on the adequacy of the FDA’s drug approval process and the FDA’s efforts to assure the safety of marketed cell based therapy has resulted in the proposal of new legislation addressing drug safety issues. If enacted, any new legislation could result in delays or increased costs during the period of product development, clinical trials, and regulatory review and approval, as well as increased costs to assure compliance with any new post-approval regulatory requirements. Any of these restrictions or requirements could force us to conduct costly studies or increase the time for us to become profitable. For example, any labeling approved for any of our product candidates may include a restriction on the term of its use, or it may not include one or more of our intended indications.

Our product candidates will also be subject to ongoing FDA requirements for the labeling, packaging, storage, advertising, promotion, record-keeping, and submission of safety and other post-market information on the cell based therapy. New issues may arise during a product lifecycle that did not exist, or were unknown, at the time of product approval, such as adverse events of unanticipated severity or frequency, or problems with the facility where the product is manufactured. Since approved products, manufacturers, and manufacturers’ facilities are subject to continuous review and periodic inspections, these new issues post-approval may result in voluntary actions by us or may result in a regulatory agency imposing restrictions on that product or us, including requiring withdrawal of the product from the market or for use in a clinical study. If our product candidates fail to comply with applicable regulatory requirements, such as good manufacturing practices, a regulatory agency may:

If we or current or future collaborators, manufacturers, or service providers fail to comply with healthcare laws and regulations, we or they could be subject to enforcement actions and substantial penalties, which could affect our ability to develop, market and sell our products and may harm our reputation.

Although we do not currently have any products on the market, once our therapeutic candidates or clinical trials are covered by federal health care programs, we will be subject to additional healthcare statutory and regulatory requirements and enforcement by the federal, state and foreign governments of the jurisdictions in which we conduct our business. Healthcare providers, physicians and third party payors play a primary role in the recommendation and prescription of any therapeutic candidates for which we obtain marketing approval. Our future arrangements with third party payors and customers may expose us to broadly applicable fraud and abuse, transparency, and other healthcare laws and regulations that may constrain the business or financial arrangements and relationships through which we market, sell and distribute our therapeutic candidates for which we obtain marketing approval. Restrictions under applicable federal and state healthcare laws and regulations include, but are not limited to, the following:

The scope and enforcement of each of these laws is uncertain and subject to rapid change in the current environment of healthcare reform, especially in light of the lack of applicable precedent and regulations. Federal and state enforcement bodies have recently increased their scrutiny of interactions between healthcare companies and healthcare providers, which has led to a number of investigations, prosecutions, convictions and settlements in the healthcare industry. Responding to investigations can be time-and resource-consuming and can divert management’s attention from the business. Any such investigation or settlement could increase our costs or otherwise have an adverse effect on our business.

Ensuring that our business arrangements with third-parties comply with applicable healthcare laws and regulations could involve substantial costs. If our operations are found to be in violation of any such requirements, we may be subject to penalties, including civil or criminal penalties, monetary damages, the curtailment or restructuring of our operations, or exclusion from participation in government contracting, healthcare reimbursement or other government programs, including Medicare and Medicaid, any of which could adversely affect our financial results. Although effective compliance programs can mitigate the risk of investigation and prosecution for violations of these laws, these risks cannot be entirely eliminated. Any action against us for an alleged or suspected violation could cause us to incur significant legal expenses and could divert our management’s attention from the operation of our business, even if our defense is successful. In addition, achieving and sustaining compliance with applicable laws and regulations may be costly to us in terms of money, time and resources.

Any cell based therapies we develop may become subject to unfavorable pricing regulations, third party coverage and reimbursement practices or healthcare reform initiatives, thereby harming our business.

The regulations that govern marketing approvals, pricing, coverage and reimbursement for new drugs and cell based therapies vary widely from country to country. Some countries require approval of the sale price of a drug before it can be marketed. In many countries, the pricing review period begins after marketing or product licensing approval is granted. In some foreign markets, prescription pharmaceutical pricing remains subject to continuing governmental control even after initial approval is granted. Although we intend to monitor these regulations, our programs are currently in earlier stages of development and we will not be able to assess the impact of price regulations for a number of years. As a result, we might obtain regulatory approval for a product in a particular country, but then be subject to price regulations that delay our commercial launch of the product and negatively impact the revenues we are able to generate from the sale of the product in that country.

Our ability to commercialize any products successfully also will depend in part on the extent to which coverage and reimbursement for these products and related treatments will be available from government health administration authorities, private health insurers and other organizations. However, there may be significant delays in obtaining coverage for newly-approved cell based therapies. Moreover, eligibility for coverage does not necessarily signify that a cell based therapy will be reimbursed in all cases or at a rate that covers our costs, including research, development, manufacture, sale and distribution costs. Also, interim payments for new cell based therapy if applicable, may be insufficient to cover our costs and may not be made permanent. Thus, even if we succeed in bringing one or more products to the market, these products may not be considered medically necessary or cost-effective, and the amount reimbursed for any products may be insufficient to allow us to sell our products on a competitive basis. Because our programs are in earlier stages of development, we are unable at this time to determine their cost effectiveness, or the likely level or method of reimbursement. In addition, obtaining coverage and reimbursement approval of a product from a government or other third-party payor is a time-consuming and costly process that could require us to provide to each payor supporting scientific, clinical and cost-effectiveness data for the use of our product on a payor-by-payor basis, with no assurance that coverage and adequate reimbursement will be obtained. A payor’s decision to provide coverage for a product does not imply that an adequate reimbursement rate will be approved. Further, one payor’s determination to provide coverage for a product does not assure that other payors will also provide coverage for the product. Adequate third-party reimbursement may not be available to enable us to maintain price levels sufficient to realize an appropriate return on our investment in product development. If reimbursement is not available or is available only at limited levels, we may not be able to successfully commercialize any product candidate that we successfully develop.

Increasingly, the third party payors who reimburse patients or healthcare providers, such as government and private insurance plans, are seeking greater upfront discounts, additional rebates and other concessions to reduce the prices for pharmaceutical products. If the price we are able to charge for any products we develop, or the reimbursement provided for such products, is inadequate in light of our development and other costs, our return on investment could be adversely affected.

We currently expect that certain drugs we develop may need to be administered under the supervision of a physician on an outpatient basis. Under currently applicable U.S. law, certain drugs that are not usually self-administered (including injectable cell based therapies) may be eligible for coverage under Medicare through Medicare Part B. Specifically, Medicare Part B coverage may be available for eligible beneficiaries when the following, among other requirements have been satisfied:

Average prices for cell therapies may be reduced by mandatory discounts or rebates required by government healthcare programs or private payors and by any future relaxation of laws that presently restrict imports of drugs and cell based therapy from countries where they may be sold at lower prices than in the U.S. Reimbursement rates under Medicare Part B would depend in part on whether the newly approved product would be eligible for a unique billing code. Self-administered, outpatient drugs and cell based therapies are typically reimbursed under Medicare Part D, and cell based therapies that are administered in an inpatient hospital setting are typically reimbursed under Medicare Part A under a bundled payment. It is difficult for us to predict how Medicare coverage and reimbursement policies will be applied to our products in the future and coverage and reimbursement under different federal healthcare programs are not always consistent. Medicare reimbursement rates may also reflect budgetary constraints placed on the Medicare program.

Third party payors often rely upon Medicare coverage policies and payment limitations in setting their own reimbursement rates. These coverage policies and limitations may rely, in part, on compendia listings for approved therapeutics. Our inability to promptly obtain relevant compendia listings, coverage, and adequate reimbursement from both government-funded and private payors for new cell based therapies that we develop and for which we obtain regulatory approval could have a material adverse effect on our operating results, our ability to raise capital needed to commercialize products and our financial condition.

We expect that these and other healthcare reform measures that may be adopted in the future, may result in more rigorous coverage criteria and lower reimbursement, and in additional downward pressure on the price that we receive for any approved product. Any reduction in reimbursement from Medicare or other government-funded programs may result in a similar reduction in payments from private payors. The implementation of cost containment measures or other healthcare reforms may prevent us from being able to generate revenue, attain profitability or commercialize our cell based therapies, once marketing approval is obtained.

We believe that the efforts of governments and third party payors to contain or reduce the cost of healthcare and legislative and regulatory proposals to broaden the availability of healthcare will continue to affect the business and financial condition of pharmaceutical and biopharmaceutical companies. A number of legislative and regulatory changes in the healthcare system in the U.S. and other major healthcare markets have been proposed, and such efforts have expanded substantially in recent years. These developments could, directly or indirectly, affect our ability to sell our products, if approved, at a favorable price. For example, in the United States, in 2010, the U.S. Congress passed the ACA, a sweeping law intended to broaden access to health insurance, reduce or constrain the growth of health spending, enhance remedies against fraud and abuse, add new transparency requirements for the healthcare and health insurance industries, impose new taxes and fees on the health industry and impose additional policy reforms. Among the provisions of the ACA addressing coverage and reimbursement of pharmaceutical products, of importance to our potential therapeutic candidates are the following:

Separately, pursuant to the health reform legislation and related initiatives, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, or CMS, is working with various healthcare providers to develop, refine, and implement Accountable Care Organizations, or ACOs, and other innovative models of care for Medicare and Medicaid beneficiaries, including the Bundled Payments for Care Improvement Initiative, the Comprehensive Primary Care Initiative, the Duals Demonstration, and other models. The continued development and expansion of ACOs and other innovative models of care will have an uncertain impact on any future reimbursement we may receive for approved therapeutics administered by these organizations.

The healthcare industry is heavily regulated in the U.S. at the federal, state, and local levels, and our failure to comply with applicable requirements may subject us to penalties and negatively affect our financial condition.

As a healthcare company, our operations, clinical trial activities and interactions with healthcare providers may be subject to extensive regulation in the U.S., particularly if we receive FDA approval for any of its products in the future. For example, if we receive FDA approval for a product for which reimbursement is available under a federal healthcare program (e.g., Medicare, Medicaid), it would be subject to a variety of federal laws and regulations, including those that prohibit the filing of false or improper claims for payment by federal healthcare programs (e.g. the federal False Claims Act), prohibit unlawful inducements for the referral of business reimbursable by federal healthcare programs (e.g. the federal Anti-Kickback Statute), and require disclosure of certain payments or other transfers of value made to U.S.-licensed physicians and teaching hospitals or Open Payments. We are not able to predict how third parties will interpret these laws and apply applicable governmental guidance and may challenge our practices and activities under one or more of these laws. If our past or present operations are found to be in violation of any of these laws, we could be subject to civil and criminal penalties, which could hurt our business, our operations and financial condition.

The federal Anti-Kickback Statute prohibits, among other things, any person or entity, from knowingly and willfully offering, paying, soliciting or receiving any remuneration, directly or indirectly, overtly or covertly, in cash or in kind, to induce or in return for purchasing, leasing, ordering or arranging for the purchase, lease or order of any item or service reimbursable under Medicare, Medicaid or other federal healthcare programs. The term remuneration has been interpreted broadly to include anything of value. The Anti-Kickback Statute has been interpreted to apply to arrangements between pharmaceutical manufacturers on one hand and prescribers, purchasers, and formulary managers on the other. There are a number of statutory exceptions and regulatory safe harbors protecting some common activities from prosecution. The exceptions and safe harbors are drawn narrowly and practices that involve remuneration that may be alleged to be intended to induce prescribing, purchasing or recommending may be subject to scrutiny if they do not qualify for an exception or safe harbor. Failure to meet all of the requirements of a particular applicable statutory exception or regulatory safe harbor does not make the conduct per se illegal under the Anti-Kickback Statute. Instead, the legality of the arrangement will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis based on a cumulative review of all of its facts and circumstances. Our practices may not in all cases meet all of the criteria for protection under a statutory exception or regulatory safe harbor.

Additionally, the intent standard under the Anti-Kickback Statute was amended by the ACA, to a stricter standard such that a person or entity no longer needs to have actual knowledge of the statute or specific intent to violate it in order to have committed a violation. In addition, the ACA codified case law that a claim including items or services resulting from a violation of the federal Anti- Kickback Statute constitutes a false or fraudulent claim for purposes of the federal FCA. 

The civil monetary penalties statute imposes penalties against any person or entity that, among other things, is determined to have presented or caused to be presented a claim to a federal healthcare program that the person knows or should know is for an item or service that was not provided as claimed or is false or fraudulent.

Federal false claims and false statement laws, including the federal FCA, prohibit, among other things, any person or entity from knowingly presenting, or causing to be presented, a false or fraudulent claim for payment to, or approval by, the federal healthcare programs, including Medicare and Medicaid, or knowingly making, using, or causing to be made or used a false record or statement material to a false or fraudulent claim to the federal government. A claim includes “any request or demand” for money or property presented to the U.S. government. For instance, historically, pharmaceutical and other healthcare companies have been prosecuted under these laws for allegedly providing free product to customers with the expectation that the customers would bill federal programs for the product. Other companies have been prosecuted for causing false claims to be submitted because of the companies’ marketing of the product for unapproved, off-label, and thus generally non-reimbursable, uses.

HIPAA prohibits, among other offenses, knowingly and willfully executing a scheme to defraud any health care benefit program, including private payors, or falsifying, concealing or covering up a material fact or making any materially false, fictitious or fraudulent statement in connection with the delivery of or payment for items or services under a health care benefit program. To the extent that we act as a business associate to a healthcare provider engaging in electronic transactions, we may also be subject to the privacy and security provisions of HIPAA, as amended by HITECH, which restricts the use and disclosure of patient-identifiable health information, mandates the adoption of standards relating to the privacy and security of patient-identifiable health information, and requires the reporting of certain security breaches to healthcare provider customers with respect to such information. Additionally, many states have enacted similar laws that may impose more stringent requirements on entities like ours. Failure to comply with applicable laws and regulations could result in substantial penalties and adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations.

Many states also have similar fraud and abuse statutes or regulations that apply to items and services reimbursed under Medicaid and other state programs, or, in several states, apply regardless of the payor. Additionally, to the extent that our product is sold in a foreign country, we may be subject to similar foreign laws.

Our products, once approved, may be eligible for coverage under Medicare and Medicaid, among other government healthcare programs. Accordingly, we may be subject to a number of obligations based on their participation in these programs, such as a requirement to calculate and report certain price reporting metrics to the government, such as average sales price (ASP) and best price. Penalties may apply in some cases when such metrics are not submitted accurately and timely. Further, these prices for drugs may be reduced by mandatory discounts or rebates required by government healthcare programs or private payors and by any future relaxation of laws that presently restrict imports of drugs and biological products from countries where they may be sold at lower prices than in the United States. It is difficult to predict how Medicare coverage and reimbursement policies will be applied to our products in the future and coverage and reimbursement under different federal healthcare programs are not always consistent. Medicare reimbursement rates may also reflect budgetary constraints placed on the Medicare program.

In order to distribute products commercially, we must comply with state laws that require the registration of manufacturers and wholesale distributors of drug and biological products in a state, including, in certain states, manufacturers and distributors who ship products into the state even if such manufacturers or distributors have no place of business within the state. Some states also impose requirements on manufacturers and distributors to establish the pedigree of product in the chain of distribution, including some states that require manufacturers and others to adopt new technology capable of tracking and tracing product as it moves through the distribution chain. Several states have enacted legislation requiring pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies to establish marketing compliance programs, file periodic reports with the state, make periodic public disclosures on sales, marketing, pricing, clinical trials and other activities, and/or register their sales representatives, as well as to prohibit pharmacies and other healthcare entities from providing certain physician prescribing data to pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies for use in sales and marketing, and to prohibit certain other sales and marketing practices. All of our activities are potentially subject to federal and state consumer protection and unfair competition laws. 

If our operations are found to be in violation of any of the federal and state healthcare laws described above or any other governmental regulations that apply to us, we may be subject to penalties, including without limitation, civil, criminal and/or administrative penalties, damages, fines, disgorgement, exclusion from participation in government programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, injunctions, private “qui tam” actions brought by individual whistleblowers in the name of the government, or refusal to allow us to enter into government contracts, contractual damages, reputational harm, administrative burdens, diminished profits and future earnings, and the curtailment or restructuring of our operations, any of which could adversely affect our ability to operate our business and our results of operations.

Our ability to obtain reimbursement or funding from the federal government may be impacted by possible reductions in federal spending.

U.S. federal government agencies currently face potentially significant spending reductions. The Budget Control Act of 2011, or the BCA, established a Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction, which was tasked with achieving a reduction in the federal debt level of at least $1.2 trillion. That committee did not draft a proposal by the BCA’s deadline. As a result, automatic cuts, referred to as sequestration, in various federal programs were scheduled to take place, beginning in January 2013, although the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 delayed the BCA’s automatic cuts until March 1, 2013. While the Medicare program’s eligibility and scope of benefits are generally exempt from these cuts, Medicare payments to providers and Part D health plans are not exempt. The BCA did, however, provide that the Medicare cuts to providers and Part D health plans would not exceed two percent. President Obama issued the sequestration order on March 1, 2013, and cuts went into effect on April 1, 2013. Additionally, the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2015 extended sequestration for Medicare through fiscal year 2027.

The U.S. federal budget remains in flux, which could, among other things, cut Medicare payments to providers. The Medicare program is frequently mentioned as a target for spending cuts. The full impact on our business of any future cuts in Medicare or other programs is uncertain. In addition, we cannot predict any impact President Trump’s administration and the U.S. Congress may have on the federal budget. If federal spending is reduced, anticipated budgetary shortfalls may also impact the ability of relevant agencies, such as the FDA or the National Institutes of Health, to continue to function at current levels. Amounts allocated to federal grants and contracts may be reduced or eliminated. These reductions may also impact the ability of relevant agencies to timely review and approve drug research and development, manufacturing, and marketing activities, which may delay our ability to develop, market and sell any products we may develop.

Risks Related to Our Securities

Our officers, directors and principal stockholders own a significant percentage of our stock and will be able to exert significant control over matters subject to stockholder approval.

Our officers, directors and 5% stockholders and their affiliates beneficially own a significant percentage of our outstanding common stock. As a result, these stockholders have significant influence and may be able to determine all matters requiring stockholder approval. For example, these stockholders may be able to control elections of directors, amendments of our organizational documents, or approval of any merger, sale of assets, or other major corporate transactions. This concentration of ownership could delay or prevent any acquisition of our company on terms that other stockholders may desire, and may adversely affect the market price of our common stock.

If we are unable to maintain listing of our securities on the Nasdaq Capital Market or another reputable stock exchange, it may be more difficult for our stockholders to sell their securities.

Nasdaq requires listing issuers to comply with certain standards in order to remain listed on its exchange. If, for any reason, Nasdaq should delist our securities from trading on its exchange and we are unable to obtain listing on another reputable national securities exchange, a reduction in some or all of the following may occur, each of which could materially adversely affect our stockholders. A delisting of our common stock is likely to reduce the liquidity of our common stock and may inhibit or preclude our ability to raise additional financing.

On February 9, 2022, the Company received notice from The Nasdaq Stock Market (“Nasdaq”) that the closing bid price for the Company’s common stock had been below $1.00 per share for the previous 30 consecutive business days, and that the Company was therefore not in compliance with the minimum bid price requirement for continued inclusion on The Nasdaq Capital Market under Nasdaq Listing Rule 5550(a)(2) (the “Rule”). Nasdaq’s notice had no immediate effect on the listing or trading of the Company’s common stock on The Nasdaq Capital Market. The notice indicated that the Company will have 180 calendar days, until August 8, 2022, to regain compliance with the Rule. On August 9, 2022, we were provided an additional compliance period of 180 calendar days, or until February 6, 2023, to regain compliance with the minimum closing bid requirement. The Company could regain compliance with the $1.00 minimum bid listing requirement if the closing bid price of its common stock is at least $1.00 per share for a minimum of ten (10) consecutive business days during the 180-day compliance period. If the Company did not regain compliance during the initial compliance period, it may be eligible for additional time to regain compliance with the Rule. To qualify, the Company was required to meet the continued listing requirement for market value of its publicly held shares and all other Nasdaq initial listing standards, except the bid price requirement, and provide written notice to Nasdaq of its intention to cure the deficiency during the second compliance period by effecting a reverse stock split, if necessary. If the Company was not eligible or it appeared to Nasdaq that the Company was not be able to cure the deficiency during the second compliance period, Nasdaq then provides written notice to the Company that the Company’s common stock will be subject to delisting. In the event of such notification, the Company may appeal Nasdaq’s determination to delist its securities, but there can be no assurance that Nasdaq would grant the Company’s request for continued listing. We effected a one-for-ten reverse stock split on January 5, 2023. On January 20, 2023, we received a letter from the staff of Nasdaq indicating that we have regained compliance with the Rule and as of the date of this filing, this matter is now closed.

The price of our common stock may be volatile and fluctuate substantially, which could result in substantial losses for our stockholders.

Our common stock has been listed on the Nasdaq Capital Market under the symbol “ALBT” since November 10, 2022. Our common stock was listed on the Nasdaq Capital Market under the symbol “AVCO” since November 5, 2018 through the close of business on November 9, 2022. Our common shares were traded previously on the OTC Market Group Inc.’s Venture Market (the “OTCQB”) since February 22, 2016, under the symbol “AVCO” since October 18, 2016 and “GTHC” prior to October 18, 2016.

The price of our common stock has been, and we expect it to continue to be, volatile. The stock market in general and the market for smaller healthcare companies in particular have experienced extreme volatility that has often been unrelated to the operating performance of particular companies. As a result of this volatility, you may not be able to sell your shares of common stock at or above the price you paid for your shares of common stock. The market price for our common stock may be influenced by many factors, including:

Future sales of our common stock or securities convertible or exchangeable for our common stock may cause our stock price to decline.

If our existing stockholders sell, or indicate an intention to sell, substantial amounts of our common stock in the public market, the price of our common stock could decline. The perception in the market that these sales may occur could also cause the price of our common stock to decline.

In addition, as of December 31, 2022, 924,464 shares of common stock issuable upon exercise of outstanding stock options and warrants and 900,000 shares of common stock issuable upon conversion of outstanding Series A convertible preferred stock, which will become eligible for sale in the public market to the extent permitted by the provisions of various vesting schedules, the lock-up agreements and Rule 144 under the Securities Act. If the shares we may issue from time to time upon exercise of outstanding options and warrants and conversion of outstanding Series A convertible preferred stock are sold, or if it is perceived that they will be sold, by the award recipients in the public market, the price of our common stock could decline.

You may experience dilution of your ownership interests because of the future issuance of additional shares of our common or preferred stock or other securities that are convertible into or exercisable for our common or preferred stock.

As of the date of this filing, we have issued an aggregate of (i) 9,000 shares of our newly designated Series A Convertible Preferred Stock and (ii) 11,000 shares of our newly designated Series B Convertible Preferred Stock. In the future, we may issue our authorized but previously unissued equity securities, resulting in the dilution of the ownership interests of our stockholders. We are authorized to issue an aggregate of 490,000,000 shares of common stock and 10,000,000 shares of “blank check” preferred stock. We may issue additional shares of our common stock or other securities that are convertible into or exercisable for our common stock in connection with hiring or retaining employees, future acquisitions, future sales of our securities for capital raising purposes, or for other business purposes. The future issuance of any such additional shares of our common stock may create downward pressure on the trading price of the common stock. We expect we will need to raise additional capital in the near future to meet our working capital needs, and there can be no assurance that we will not be required to issue additional shares, warrants or other convertible securities in the future in conjunction with these capital raising efforts, including at a price (or exercise prices) below the price you paid for your stock. 

The ability of our Board of Directors to issue additional stock may prevent or make more difficult certain transactions, including a sale or merger.

Our Board of Directors is authorized to issue up to 10,000,000 shares of preferred stock with powers, rights and preferences designated by it. Shares of voting or convertible preferred stock could be issued, or rights to purchase such shares could be issued, to create voting impediments or to frustrate persons seeking to effect a takeover or otherwise gain control of us. The rights of holders of our common stock are subject to the rights of the holders of our preferred stock, including our newly designated Series A Convertible Preferred Stock and Series B Convertible Preferred Stock, and any preferred stock that may be issued. The ability of the Board of Directors to issue such additional shares of preferred stock, with rights and preferences it deems advisable, could discourage an attempt by a party to acquire control of us by tender offer or other means. Such issuances could therefore deprive stockholders of benefits that could result from such an attempt, such as the realization of a premium over the market price for their shares in a tender offer or the temporary increase in market price that such an attempt could cause. Moreover, the issuance of such additional shares of preferred stock to persons friendly to the Board of Directors could make it more difficult to remove incumbent managers and directors from office even if such change were to be favorable to stockholders generally.

We are incorporated in Delaware. Certain anti-takeover provisions of Delaware law and our charter documents as currently in effect may make a change in control of us more difficult, even if a change in control would be beneficial to the stockholders. Delaware law also prohibits corporations from engaging in a business combination with any holders of 15% or more of their capital stock until the holder has held the stock for three years unless, among other possibilities, our Board of Directors approves the transaction. Our Board of Directors may use these provisions to prevent changes in the management and control of us. Also, under applicable Delaware law, our Board of Directors may adopt additional anti-takeover measures in the future.

If securities or industry analysts do not publish research or reports about our business, or if they issue an adverse or misleading opinion regarding our stock, our stock price and trading volume could decline.

The trading market for our common stock will be influenced by the research and reports that industry or securities analysts publish about us or our business. We do not currently have and may never obtain research coverage by securities and industry analysts. If no or few securities or industry analysts commence coverage of us, the trading price for our stock would be negatively impacted. In the event we obtain securities or industry analyst coverage, if any of the analysts who cover us issue an adverse or misleading opinion regarding us, our business model, our intellectual property or our stock performance, or if our operating results fail to meet the expectations of analysts, our stock price would likely decline. If one or more of these analysts cease coverage of us or fail to publish reports on us regularly, we could lose visibility in the financial markets, which in turn could cause our stock price or trading volume to decline.

We do not anticipate paying dividends on our common stock, and investors may lose the entire amount of their investment.

We have never declared or paid cash dividends on our common stock, and we do not anticipate such a declaration or payment for the foreseeable future.

We expect to use future earnings, if any, to fund business growth. Therefore, stockholders will not receive any funds absent a sale of their shares of common stock. We cannot assure stockholders of a positive return on their investment when they sell their shares, nor can we assure that stockholders will not lose the entire amount of their investment.

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

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

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

If we cannot satisfy, or continue to satisfy, the initial listing requirements and other rules of the Nasdaq Capital Market, our securities may be delisted, which could negatively impact the price of our securities and your ability to sell them.

Our common stock has been listed on the Nasdaq Capital Market under the symbol “ALBT” since November 10, 2022 and under the symbol “AVCO” since November 5, 2018 through the close of business on November 9, 2022. In order to maintain our listing on the Nasdaq Capital Market, we are required to comply with certain rules of the applicable trading market, including those regarding minimum stockholders’ equity, minimum share price and certain corporate governance requirements. We may not be able to continue to satisfy the listing requirements and other applicable rules of the Nasdaq Capital Market. If we are unable to satisfy the criteria for maintaining our listing, our securities could be subject to delisting.

If our common stock is delisted from trading by the applicable trading market we could face significant consequences, including.

We could be subject to securities class action litigation.

In the past, securities class action litigation has often been brought against a company following a decline in the market price of its securities. This risk is especially relevant for us because companies in our industry have experienced significant stock price volatility in recent years. If we face such litigation, it could result in substantial costs and a diversion of management’s attention and resources, which could harm our business.