Inogen (INGN) Risk Factors

The trading market for our common stock will rely in part on the research and reports that equity research analysts publish about us and our business. We will not have any control of the analysts or the content and opinions included in their reports. The price of our stock could decline if one or more equity research analysts downgrade our stock or issue other unfavorable commentary or research. If one or more equity research analysts ceases coverage of our company or fails to publish reports on us regularly, demand for our stock could decrease, which in turn could cause our stock price or trading volume to decline.

Our stock price could decline as a result of sales of a large number of shares of our common stock or the perception that these sales could occur. These sales, or the possibility that these sales may occur, also might make it more difficult for us to sell equity securities in the future at a time and at a price that we deem appropriate. As of September 30, 2020, one holder of approximately 3.5 million shares, or approximately 16.1%, of our outstanding shares, has rights, subject to some conditions, to require us to file registration statements covering the sale of their shares or to include their shares in registration statements that we may file for ourselves or other stockholders. We have also registered the offer and sale of all shares of common stock that we may issue under our equity compensation plans. In addition, in the future, we may issue additional shares of common stock or other equity or debt securities convertible into common stock in connection with a financing, acquisition, litigation settlement, and employee arrangements or otherwise. Any such issuance could result in substantial dilution to our existing stockholders and could cause our stock price to decline.

As of September 30, 2020, our executive officers, directors and stockholders who owned more than 5% of our outstanding common stock and their respective affiliates beneficially owned or controlled approximately 67.1% of the outstanding shares of our common stock. Accordingly, these executive officers, directors and stockholders who owned more than 5% of our outstanding common stock and their respective affiliates, acting as a group, have substantial influence over the outcome of corporate actions requiring stockholder approval, including the election of directors, any merger, consolidation or sale of all or substantially all of our assets or any other significant corporate transactions. These stockholders may also delay or prevent a change of control of us, even if such a change of control would benefit our other stockholders. The significant concentration of stock ownership may adversely affect the trading price of our common stock due to investors' perception that conflicts of interest may exist or arise.

We prepare our consolidated financial statements in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (U.S. GAAP). These principles are subject to interpretation by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and various bodies formed to interpret and create appropriate accounting principles. A change in these principles can have a significant effect on our reported results and may even retroactively affect previously reported transactions. Additionally, the adoption of new or revised accounting principles may require that we make significant changes to our systems, processes and controls. For example, the U.S.-based Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) is currently working together with the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) on several projects to further align accounting principles and facilitate more comparable financial reporting between companies who are required to follow U.S. GAAP under SEC regulations and those who are required to follow International Financial Reporting Standards outside of the United States. These efforts by the FASB and IASB may result in different accounting principles under U.S. GAAP that may result in materially different financial results for us in areas including, but not limited to, principles for recognizing revenue and lease accounting. Additionally, significant changes to U.S. GAAP resulting from the FASB's and IASB's efforts may require that we change how we process, analyze and report financial information and that we change financial reporting controls. It is not clear if or when these potential changes in accounting principles may become effective, whether we have the proper systems and controls in place to accommodate such changes and the impact that any such changes may have on our financial condition and results of operations.

Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, or Section 404, requires that we maintain internal control over financial reporting that meets applicable standards. We may err in the design, operation or documentation of our controls, and all internal control systems, no matter how well designed and operated, can provide only reasonable assurance that the objectives of the control system are met. Because there are inherent limitations in all control systems, there can be no absolute assurance that all control issues have been or will be detected. If we are unable, or are perceived as unable, to produce reliable financial reports due to internal control deficiencies, investors could lose confidence in our reported financial information and operating results, which could result in a negative market reaction. We are required to disclose significant changes made in our internal controls and procedures on a quarterly basis. Now that we are no longer an "emerging growth company," our independent registered public accounting firm is also required to attest to the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting pursuant to Section 404. Our independent registered public accounting firm may issue a report that is adverse in the event it is not satisfied with the level at which our controls are documented, designed or operating. Our remediation efforts may not enable us to avoid a material weakness in the future. Additionally, to comply with the requirements of being a public company, we may need to undertake various actions, such as implementing new internal controls and procedures and hiring accounting or internal audit staff or consultants, which may adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition. Although prior material weaknesses have been remediated, we cannot assure you that our internal controls will continue to operate properly or that our financial statements will be free from error. There may be undetected material weaknesses in our internal control over financial reporting, as a result of which we may not detect financial statement errors on a timely basis. Moreover, in the future we may implement new offerings and engage in business transactions, such as acquisitions, reorganizations or implementation of new information systems that could require us to develop and implement new controls and could negatively affect our internal control over financial reporting and result in material weaknesses. If we identify new material weaknesses in our internal control over financial reporting, if we are unable to comply with the requirements of Section 404 in a timely manner, if we are unable to assert that our internal controls over financial reporting are effective, or if our independent registered public accounting firm is unable to express an opinion as to the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting, we may be late with the filing of our periodic reports, investors may lose confidence in the accuracy and completeness of our financial reports and the market price of our common stock could be negatively affected. As a result of such failures, we could also become subject to investigations by the stock exchange on which our securities are listed, the SEC, or other regulatory authorities, and become subject to litigation from investors and stockholders, which could harm our reputation, financial condition or divert financial and management resources from our core business.

Our business strategy may, from time to time, include acquiring or investing in complementary services, technologies or businesses, such as our acquisition of MedSupport in 2017 and our acquisition of New Aera in 2019. We do not have an extensive history of acquiring other companies and cannot assure you that we will successfully identify suitable acquisition candidates, integrate or manage disparate technologies, lines of business, personnel and corporate cultures, realize our business strategy or the expected return on our investment, or manage a geographically dispersed company. Any such acquisition or investment could materially and adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations. We may issue equity securities which could dilute current stockholders' ownership, incur debt, assume contingent or other liabilities and expend cash in acquisitions, which could negatively impact our financial condition, stockholder equity, and stock price. The acquisition and integration process is complex, expensive and time-consuming, and may cause an interruption of, or loss of momentum in, product development and sales activities and operations of both companies, and we may incur substantial cost and expense, as well as divert the attention of management. Acquisitions and other strategic investments involve significant risks and uncertainties, including: - the potential failure to achieve the expected benefits of the combination or acquisition;- the potential failure to successfully develop or commercialize the acquired products or technology;- unanticipated costs and liabilities;- difficulties in integrating new products, businesses, operations, and technology infrastructure in an efficient and effective manner;- difficulties in maintaining customer relations;- the potential loss of key employees of the acquired businesses;- the diversion of the attention of our senior management from the operation of our daily business;- the potential adverse effect on our cash position to the extent that we use cash for the purchase price;- the potential incurrence of interest expense and debt service requirements if we incur debt to pay for an acquisition;- the potential issuance of securities that would dilute our stockholders' percentage ownership;- the potential to incur large and immediate write-offs and restructuring and other related expenses;- the potential of amortization expenses related to intangible assets;- the potential failure to achieve anticipated reimbursement classifications for acquired products;- the potential to become involved in intellectual property litigation related to such acquisitions or strategic investments; and - the inability to maintain uniform standards, controls, policies, and procedures. Any acquisition or investment could expose us to unknown liabilities. Moreover, we cannot assure you that we will realize the anticipated benefits of any acquisition or investment. In addition, our inability to successfully operate and integrate newly acquired businesses appropriately, effectively, and in a timely manner could impair our ability to take advantage of future growth opportunities and other advances in technology, as well as on our revenues, gross margins, and expenses. As part of our ongoing efforts to advance patient preference and maintain our technology leadership position, we acquired New Aera in 2019 and have completed our integration process. We have made certain assumptions relating to the New Aera acquisition, which assumptions may be inaccurate, including the failure to realize the expected benefits of the acquisition, failure to realize expected revenue, higher than expected operating, transaction and integration costs, as well as general economic and business conditions that adversely affect the combined company following the acquisition. If our assumptions relating to the acquisition are inaccurate, we may not be able to realize anticipated synergies and opportunities as a result of the acquisition, and the business may not perform as planned as a result of many of the risks and uncertainties that apply to the acquisition and to the rest of our business. For example, additional risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from currently anticipated results include, but are not limited to; risks relating to our ability to successfully integrate New Aera's business and operations within our existing business and operations; our ability to commercialize the TAV; market acceptance of the TAV; our ability to obtain Medicare or commercial reimbursement for the TAV; our ability to successfully incorporate TAV into our existing products; competition; our sales, marketing and distribution capabilities; our planned sales, marketing, and research and development activities; interruptions or delays in the supply of components or materials for, or manufacturing of, our products, which in certain cases are purchased through sole and single source suppliers; seasonal variations in customer operations; unanticipated increases in costs or expenses; risks associated with international operations; intellectual property risks and the other risks identified in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q. We may also encounter difficulties in integrating New Aera into our existing business. If anticipated synergies and opportunities are not realized, our business, operating results and financial condition would be harmed.

As a provider of oxygen equipment rentals, we depend heavily on Medicare reimbursement as a result of the higher proportion of elderly persons suffering from chronic long-term respiratory conditions. Medicare Part B, or Supplementary Medical Insurance Benefits, provides coverage to eligible beneficiaries that include items of durable medical equipment for use in the home, such as oxygen equipment and other respiratory devices. We believe that up to 56% of long-term oxygen therapy patients in the United States have primary coverage under traditional fee-for-service Medicare Part B. There are increasing pressures on Medicare to control healthcare costs and to reduce or limit reimbursement rates for home medical products. Legislation, including the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003, the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005, the Medicare Improvements for Patients and Providers Act of 2008, and the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act, contain provisions that directly impact reimbursement for the durable medical equipment products provided by us: - The Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003 significantly reduced reimbursement for inhalation drug therapies beginning in 2005, reduced payment amounts for certain durable medical equipment, including oxygen, beginning in 2005, froze payment amounts for other covered HME items through 2008, established a competitive bidding program for home medical equipment and implemented quality standards and accreditation requirements for durable medical equipment suppliers. - The Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 limited the total number of continuous rental months for which Medicare will pay for oxygen equipment to 36 months, after which time there is generally no additional reimbursement to the supplier (other than for periodic, in-home maintenance and servicing). The Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 also provided that title of the equipment would transfer to the beneficiary, which was later repealed by the Medicare Improvements for Patients and Providers Act of 2008. For purposes of the rental cap, the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 provided for a new 36-month rental period that began January 1, 2006 for all oxygen equipment. After the 36th continuous month during which payment is made for the oxygen equipment, the supplier is generally required to continue to furnish the equipment during the period of medical need for the remainder of the useful lifetime of the equipment, provided there are no breaks in service due to medical necessity that exceed 60 days. The reasonable useful lifetime for our portable oxygen equipment is 60 months. After 60 months, if the patient requests, and the patient meets Medicare coverage criteria, the rental cycle starts over and a new 36-month rental period begins. There are no limits on the number of 60-month cycles over which a Medicare patient may receive benefits and an oxygen therapy provider may receive reimbursement, so long as such equipment continues to be medically necessary for the patient. We anticipate that the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 oxygen payment rules will continue to negatively affect our net revenue on an ongoing basis, as each month additional customers reach the capped rental period in month thirty-seven, resulting in potentially two or more years without rental income from these customers while we continue to incur customer service and maintenance costs. Our capped patients as a percentage of total patients on service was approximately 13.8% as of September 30, 2020 and 20.2% as of September 30, 2019. The percentage of capped patients may fluctuate over time as new patients come on service, patients come off of service before and during the capped rental period, and existing patients enter the capped rental period. We cannot predict the potential impact to rental revenues in future periods associated with patients in the capped rental period. - The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act, includes, among other things, new face-to-face physician encounter requirements for certain durable medical equipment and home health services, and a requirement that by 2016, the competitive bidding process must be nationalized or prices in non-competitive bidding areas must be adjusted to match competitive bidding prices. As of January 1, 2017, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) has decreased prices for durable medical equipment in non-competitive bidding areas to match competitive bidding prices. - There have been significant U.S. reimbursement and policy changes associated with the COVID-19 PHE that impact oxygen therapy and other durable medical equipment. The CARES Act allows HHS to waive certain Medicare telehealth payment requirements during the COVID-19 PHE declared by HHS on January 31, 2020 to allow beneficiaries in all areas to receive telehealth services, including at their home, starting March 6, 2020. H.R. 6074 also granted authority to waive certain requirements. Under this authority, CMS clarified that HHS would not conduct audits to determine whether there was a prior physician-patient relationship for telehealth claims submitted during the COVID-19 PHE. The CARES Act, passed on March 27, 2020 included the extension of the 50/50 blended rate for HME in rural and non-contiguous, non-competitively bid areas and established a new 75/25 blended rate for all other non-competitively bid areas through the duration of the COVID-19 PHE. The 75/25 blended rate is retroactive to March 6, 2020. While the duration of the current emergency is impossible to predict, the Zika virus PHE lasted approximately 360 days, and the H1N1 flu PHE lasted approximately 450 days. The CARES Act also included a temporary elimination of the 2% Medicare sequestration reduction that went into effect in 2013. This relief will be effective May 1, 2020 through December 31, 2020. In addition, the CARES Act established a provider relief fund of $100 billion, of which $30 billion was distributed on April 10, 2020, for Medicare providers and suppliers to prevent, prepare for, and respond to the COVID-19 PHE, and as a Medicare supplier we also received funds of $6.2 million in the second quarter of 2020. The Paycheck Protection Program and Heath Care Enhancement Act was also signed into law on April 24, 2020 and provides additional funding of $484 billion to programs enacted under the CARES Act. Of the $484 billion, $75 billion is additional funding for healthcare providers to reimburse healthcare related expenses and lost revenues attributable to COVID-19 PHE, which is in addition to the $100 billion approved in the CARES Act. - On April 6, 2020, an Interim Final Rule (IFR) was published in the Federal Register for policy and regulatory revisions in response to the COVID-19 PHE. This IFR included that for the duration of the COVID-19 PHE, the face-to-face requirements and clinical indications of coverage for home oxygen, among other respiratory products, will be waived. - The administration has also issued a number of regulatory waivers to increase the flexibility in durable medical equipment, prosthetics, orthotics and supplies (DMEPOS) suppliers' ability to service patients quickly and without the normal requirements. For example, the patient signature for proof of delivery for DMEPOS is waived when signatures cannot be collected during the COVID-19 PHE. In addition, CMS increased Medicare contractors' ability to waive replacement product requirements, paused the national prior authorization program for certain DMEPOS, automatically extended expiring accreditations, granted contractors the flexibility to grant appeals extensions, and medical review suspension. Both the IFR and temporary regulatory changes show significant flexibility from CMS to improve access for oxygen and other DMEPOS items during this COVID-19 PHE. These changes were retroactive to early March 2020. However, in July 2020, CMS released a COVID-19 Product Burden Relief FAQs document that included updates to this IFR, including that the pausing of the national prior authorization program for certain DMEPOS and medical review suspension ended effective August 3, 2020. These legislative provisions as currently in effect have had and may continue to have a material and/or adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. The HHS Office of Inspector General (OIG) has recommended states to review Medicaid reimbursement for durable medical equipment (DME) and supplies. The OIG cites an earlier report estimating that four states (California, Minnesota, New York, and Ohio) could have saved more than $18.1 million on selected DME items if their Medicaid prices were comparable to those under round one of the Medicare competitive bidding program. Since issuing those reports, the OIG identified $12 million in additional savings that the four states could have obtained on the selected items by using pricing similar to the Medicare round two competitive bidding and national mail-order programs. In light of varying Medicaid provider rates for DME and the potential for lower spending, the OIG recommends that CMS (1) seek legislative authority to limit state Medicaid DME reimbursement rates to Medicare program rates, and (2) encourage further reduction of Medicaid reimbursement rates through competitive bidding or manufacturer rebates (the OIG did not determine the cost of implementing a rebate or competitive bidding program in each state). This was effective beginning January 1, 2018. Due to budgetary shortfalls, many states are considering, or have enacted, cuts to their Medicaid programs. In addition, many private payors reimburse at a percentage of the Medicare rates. Medicare, Medicaid and private payor reimbursement rate cuts have included, or may include elimination or reduction of coverage for our products, amounts eligible for payment under co-insurance arrangements, or payment rates for covered items. Continued state budgetary pressures could lead to further reductions in funding for the reimbursement for our products which, in turn, would adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. On January 17, 2017, HHS published a final rule effective March 20, 2017 to address the appeals backlog that includes allowing certain decisions to be made by the Medicare Appeals Council to set precedent for lower levels of appeal, expansion of the pool of available adjudicators, and increasing decision-making consistency among the levels of appeal. In addition, it included provisions to improve the efficiency by streamlining the appeals process, allowing attorneys to handle some procedural matters at the administrative law judge level, and proposed funding increases and legislative actions outlined in the federal budget for 2017. HHS estimates this could eliminate the backlog in appeals by 2021. However, if this plan is not effective, the appeals backlog could increase, which could increase our collection times and decrease our cash flow, increase billing administrative costs, and/or increase the provision for rental revenue adjustments, which would adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Medicare FFS claims with dates of service on or after April 1, 2013 are subject to a 2% sequestration reduction in Medicare payments, including claims for DMEPOS, including in competitive bidding areas. The claims payment adjustment is applied to all claims after determining co-insurance, any applicable deductible, and any applicable Medicare secondary payment adjustments. These reductions are included in rental revenue adjustments. This sequestration reduction was scheduled to continue until further notice. However, a provision in the CARES Act temporarily eliminated the 2% Medicare sequestration reduction for claims dated from May 1, 2020 through December 31, 2020 and the CARES Act also extends the end date of the Medicare sequestration reduction by one year, through 2030, in order to offset the 2020 suspension. Once the sequestration reduction is reinstated after December 31, 2020, this could adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations.

The Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003 requires the Secretary of HHS to establish and implement programs under which competitive acquisition areas are established throughout the United States for purposes of awarding contracts for the furnishing of competitively priced items of durable medical equipment, including oxygen equipment. Effective January 1, 2019, Medicare beneficiaries may receive durable medical equipment from any Medicare-enrolled supplier until new contracts are in effect. Reimbursement rates between January 1, 2019 and December 31, 2020 will be set at the current pricing level throughout the United States for all Medicare patients, subject to Consumer Price Index (CPI) and budget neutrality adjustments. Pricing in former competitive bidding areas (CBAs) is subject to annual CPI adjustments beginning in 2019. However, CMS also changed the calculation on budget neutrality to apply the offset to all oxygen and oxygen equipment classes beginning January 1, 2019 instead of previously only applying these adjustments to stationary oxygen equipment and oxygen contents. Based on these CPI and budget neutrality adjustments, effective January 1, 2019 the average Medicare reimbursement rates in former CBAs decreased to $72.92 a month for E1390 and $35.72 a month for E1392. Effective January 1, 2020, the average Medicare reimbursement rates were increased by 1.5% to $73.98 a month for E1390 and $36.25 a month for E1392 in these regions that were previously subject to competitive bidding. In addition, the average Medicare reimbursement rates in non-rural, non-former competitive bidding areas increased by 3.5% to $74.84 a month for E1390 and $36.87 a month for E1392. On October 27, 2020, CMS announced that competitive bidding contracts that were scheduled to go into effect on January 1, 2021 will not be awarded for most product categories, including oxygen, due to the payment amounts not achieving the expected savings and the current COVID-19 PHE. CMS also issued a proposed rule (CMS-1738-P) to establish payment amounts going forward for DMEPOS products and services covered under Medicare. We believe that Medicare rates will not change for the length of the PHE, except for the 2% Medicare sequestration that will go back into effect on January 1, 2021, any net change for inflation and budget neutrality adjustments that typically occur annually each January but have not yet been announced. CMS is proposing to set Medicare rates after the PHE at the 50/50 blended rates in the non-contiguous and rural areas as a permanent construct, but Medicare rates in all other areas would be set at the adjusted payment amount. This would reduce Medicare rates after the PHE is over in the current areas that are considered non-rural but not covered by a former CBA, as those areas are currently receiving a 75/25 blended reimbursement rate. There is a 60-day comment period on this proposed rule, so we expect this rule to be finalized in the first quarter of 2021. In addition to regional pricing, CMS imposed different pricing on "frontier states" and rural areas. CMS defines frontier states as states where more than 50% of the counties in the state have a population density of 6 people or less per square mile and rural states are defined as states where more than 50% of the population lives in rural areas per census data. Current frontier states include MT, ND, SD and WY; rural states include ME, MS, VT and WV; and non-contiguous United States areas include AK, HI, Guam and Puerto Rico. Effective June 1, 2018 through December 31, 2020, for frontier and rural states, frontier and rural zip codes in non-frontier/rural states and non-contiguous United States areas, the single payment amount will be the 50/50 blended reimbursement rates based on an average of the pre-competitive reimbursement bidding rates and the current average reimbursement rates to account for higher servicing costs in these areas. In 2019, this rate was $134.71 a month for E1390 and $44.32 a month for E1392, and this rate increased by 1.5% effective January 1, 2020 to $136.71 a month for E1390 and $44.93 a month for E1392. We estimate that approximately 15% of our patients are eligible to receive the higher reimbursement rates based on the geographic locations of our current patient population. CMS could propose future rounds of competitive bidding, which could reduce reimbursement rates, negatively impact the premium for POCs over other oxygen modalities, or limit beneficiary access to our technologies. Cumulatively in previous rounds of competitive bidding, we were offered contracts for a substantial majority of the CBAs and product categories for which we submitted bids. Effective January 1, 2017, we believe we had access to over 90% of the Medicare oxygen therapy market based on our analysis of the 103 CBAs that we won out of the 130 total CBAs. These 130 CBAs represented approximately 36% of the Medicare market with the remaining approximately 64% of the market not subject to competitive bidding. As of January 1, 2019, we can choose to accept Medicare oxygen patients throughout the United States. As of July 2018, we currently operate in all 50 states in the U.S. We did not sell or rent to patients in Hawaii due to the licensure requirements from inception to June 2018. We cannot guarantee that we will be offered contracts in subsequent rounds of competitive bidding. In all five rounds of competitive bidding in which we have participated, we have gained access to certain CBAs and been excluded from other CBAs. Medicare revenue, including patient co-insurance and deductible obligations, represented 8.4% and 4.8% of our total revenue in the three months ended September 30, 2020 and September 30, 2019, respectively, and 6.5% and 4.6% in the nine months ended September 30, 2020 and September 30, 2019, respectively. Medicare reimbursement for oxygen rental equipment is limited to a maximum of 36 months within a 60-month service period, and the equipment remains the property of the home oxygen supplier. The supplier that billed Medicare for the 36th month of service continues to be responsible for the patient's oxygen therapy needs for months 37 through 60, and there is generally no additional reimbursement for oxygen generating portable equipment for these later months. CMS does not separately reimburse suppliers for oxygen tubing, cannulas and supplies that may be required for the patient. The supplier is required to keep the equipment provided in working order and in some cases, CMS will reimburse for repair costs. At the end of the five-year useful life of the equipment, the patient may request replacement equipment and, if he or she can be re-qualified for the Medicare benefit, a new maximum 36-month payment cycle out of the next 60 months of service would begin. The supplier may not arbitrarily issue new equipment. We have analyzed the potential impact to revenue associated with patients in the capped rental period and have deferred $0 associated with the capped rental period as of September 30, 2020 and September 30, 2019. Our capped patients as a percentage of total patients on service was approximately 13.8% and 20.2% as of September 30, 2020 and September 30, 2019, respectively. The percentage of capped patients may fluctuate over time as new patients come on service, patients come off of service before and during the capped rental period, and existing patients enter the capped rental period. Our obligations to service Medicare patients over the rental period include supplying working equipment that meets each patient's oxygen needs pursuant to his/her doctor's prescription and certificate of medical necessity form and supplying all disposables required for the patient to operate the equipment, including cannulas, filters, replacement batteries, carts and carry bags, as needed. If the equipment malfunctions, we must repair or replace the equipment. We determine what equipment the patient receives, as long as that equipment meets the physician's prescription, and we can deploy used assets in working order as long as the prescription requirements are met. We must also procure a recertification of the certificate of medical necessity from the patient's doctor to confirm the patient's need for oxygen therapy one year after the patient first receives oxygen therapy and one year after each new 36-month reimbursement period begins. The patient can choose to receive oxygen supplies and services from another supplier at any time, but the supplier may only transition the patient to another supplier in certain circumstances. Average Medicare reimbursement rates for NIV HCPCS code E0466 were a monthly, non-capped rental with rates of $1,042.26 a month in 2019, and increased 0.9% effective January 1, 2020 to $1,051.64 a month, excluding Puerto Rico where the monthly Medicare reimbursement rate for E0466 was $1,827.24 per month in 2019 and increased to $1,843.69 a month effective January 1, 2020. While NIV has been removed from competitive bidding round 2021, NIV may be included in future rounds, which could reduce the reimbursement rates for these products. In addition, the Medicare Coverage Advisory Committee (MEDCAC) recently had a meeting on July 22, 2020 to discuss home use of non-invasive positive pressure ventilation in patients with chronic respiratory failure consequent to COPD. CMS is seeking MEDCAC's recommendations regarding the characteristics that define patient selection and usage criteria for these items. This request could signal forthcoming changes in Medicare coverage of these items, and possibly changes in HCPCS codes, which could impact our NIV business and growth initiatives. On May 15, 2019, a bi-partisan bill was introduced in the House of Representatives that would provide relief from competitive bidding in non-bid areas. As of October 30, 2020, there were 83 co-sponsors on this bill. If passed, the bill would provide retroactive relief to rural areas by making the 50/50 blended reimbursement rate in rural and noncontiguous areas to all items and services furnished with dates of service from June 1, 2018, with no end date, and by introducing a 75/25 blended reimbursement rate for areas other than rural or noncontiguous areas. The legislation also proposes to remedy a double-dip cut to oxygen payments caused by the misapplication of a 2006 budget neutrality offset balancing increased utilization for oxygen generating portable equipment with lower reimbursement for stationary equipment. There is no known timing on voting on this bill. As part of the CARES Act, portions of this bill including the 50/50 blended reimbursement rate in rural and noncontiguous areas and the 72/25 blended reimbursement rate for non-rural, non-competitive bidding areas were approved effective for claims after March 6, 2020 for the length of the COVID-19 PHE. The proposed rule CMS-1738-P would make the 50/50 blended rates in the non-contiguous and rural areas permanent but did not address the 75/25 blended reimbursement rates in certain areas or the budget neutrality adjustment. On September 4, 2020, H.R. 8158, a bi-partisan bill was introduced in the House of Representatives that would waive the oxygen budget neutrality requirement, similar to the provision in the May 15, 2019 bill. H.R. 8158 passed through the House Energy and Commerce Committee, but there is no known timing on voting on this bill. In February 2020, the current presidential administration sent Congress a 2021 budget proposal that included language on competitive bidding. Specifically, the proposal would eliminate the requirement under the competitive bidding program that CMS pay a single payment amount based on the median bid price, proposing instead that CMS pay winning suppliers at their own bid amounts beginning in 2024. Additionally, this proposal would expand competitive bidding to all areas of the country, including rural areas, which will be based on competition in those areas rather than on competition in urban areas. In addition to changes to competitive bidding, the 2021 budget proposal would allow on an annual basis through rulemaking for CMS to use retail price information to create DMEPOS fee schedule rates, which would not take into account associated services that Medicare DME suppliers offer. The proposal would also enable CMS not to impose the face-to-face requirement on all providers for durable medical equipment. Furthermore, the proposal seeks to address excessive billing of durable medical equipment that requires refills or serial claims. Specifically, Medicare would gain authority to test whether using a benefits manager for serial durable medical equipment claims would result in lower improper payments and reductions in inappropriate utilization. The benefits manager would be responsible for ensuring beneficiaries were receiving the correct quantity of supplies or service for the appropriate time period. Lastly, the proposal would expand prior authorization to additional items and services that are both high-cost and at high-risk for improper payments. These provisions were not included in the latest omnibus budget, so it is unclear if any of these proposals will be implemented. We believe additional cuts to reimbursement would continue to drive conversion to non-delivery technologies, including POCs; however, this could also exacerbate patient access issues for treatment. On August 6, 2019, CMS issued a proposed rule to establish methodologies to modernize pricing of new DMEPOS items and services based on commercial pricing data. In addition, the proposed rule recommends streamlining requirements related to face-to-face encounters, written orders prior to delivery and/or prior authorizations to reduce provider confusion. Lastly, the proposed rule recommends revising the existing DMEPOS competitive bidding program regulations to recognize that changes of ownership may occur on shorter timeframes and revising the submission of a hearing request in notices of breach of contract. CMS solicited comments on this proposed rule through September 27, 2019. Although we continue to monitor developments regarding the implementation of the competitive bidding program, we cannot predict the outcome of the competitive bidding program on our business when fully implemented, nor the Medicare reimbursement rates that will be in effect in future years for the items subject to competitive bidding, including our products. We expect that the stationary oxygen and non-delivery ambulatory oxygen reimbursement rates will continue to fluctuate, and a large negative payment adjustment would adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

A significant portion of our rental revenue is derived from reimbursement by third-party payors. We accept assignment of insurance benefits from customers and, in a majority of cases, invoice and collect payments directly from Medicare, private payors and Medicaid, as well as direct from patients under co-insurance provisions. For the three months ended September 30, 2020 and September 30, 2019, approximately 10.1% and 5.9%, respectively, and for the nine months ended September 30, 2020 and September 30, 2019, approximately 8.1% and 5.6%, respectively, of our total revenue was derived from Medicare, private payors, Medicaid, and individual patients who directly receive reimbursement from third-party payors and this percentage could increase as a percent of total revenue if we increase net patient additions faster than our sales revenue growth. Our financial condition and results of operations may be affected by the healthcare industry's reimbursement process, which is complex and can involve lengthy delays between the time that a product is delivered to the consumer and the time that the reimbursement amounts are settled. Depending on the payor, we may be required to obtain certain payor-specific documentation from physicians and other healthcare providers before submitting claims for reimbursement. Certain payors have filing deadlines and they will not pay claims submitted after such time. We are also subject to extensive pre-payment and post-payment audits by governmental and private payors that could result in material delays, refunds of monies received or denials of claims submitted for payment under such third-party payor programs and contracts. We cannot ensure that we will be able to continue to effectively manage the process, it would adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

As of September 30, 2020, we have thirty-one pending U.S. and international patent applications, forty-two issued U.S. patents, and nine issued foreign patents relating to the design and construction of our oxygen concentrators, our intelligent delivery technology and our non-invasive ventilator, including its proprietary nasal interface. We cannot specify which of these patents individually or as a group will permit us to gain or maintain a competitive advantage. Patents may be subject to reexamination, inter partes review, post-grant review, and derivation proceedings in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office or comparable proceedings in other patent offices worldwide, or challenges to inventorship in court. Foreign patents may be subject to opposition or comparable proceedings in the corresponding foreign patent offices and courts. Any of these proceedings could result in loss of the patent or denial of the patent application, or loss or reduction in the scope of one or more of the claims of the patent or patent application. Changes in either patent laws or in interpretations of patent laws may also diminish the value of our intellectual property or narrow the scope of our protection. Interference, reexamination, inter partes review, post grant review, defense, opposition, inventorship, and derivation proceedings may be costly and time consuming, and we, or the other parties from whom we might potentially license intellectual property, may be unsuccessful in defending against such proceedings. Thus, any patents that we own or might license may provide limited or no protection against competitors. In addition, our pending patent applications and those we may file in the future may have claims narrowed during prosecution or may not result in patents being issued. Even if any of our pending or future applications are issued, they may not provide us with any competitive advantage or adequate protection from allegations of infringement, whether valid or frivolous, which may result in the incurrence of material defense costs. Our patents and patent applications are directed to particular aspects of our products. Other parties may develop and obtain patent protection for more effective technologies, designs or methods for oxygen therapy or non-invasive ventilation therapy. If these developments were to occur, it would likely have an adverse effect on our sales. Our ability to develop additional patentable technology is also uncertain. Non-payment or delay in payment of patent fees or annuities, whether intentional or unintentional, may also result in the loss of patents or patent rights important to our business. Many countries, including certain countries in Europe, have compulsory licensing laws under which a patent owner may be compelled to grant licenses to other parties. In addition, many countries limit the enforceability of patents against other parties, including government agencies or government contractors. In these countries, the patent owner may have limited remedies, which could materially diminish the value of the patent. In addition, the laws of some foreign countries do not protect intellectual property rights to the same extent as do the laws of the United States, particularly in the field of medical products and procedures.

The medical device industry in general has been characterized by extensive litigation and administrative proceedings regarding patents and other intellectual property rights. Our competitors hold a significant number of patents relating to respiratory therapy devices and products. Third parties have in the past asserted and may in the future assert that we are employing their proprietary technology without authorization. For example, Breathe Technologies, Inc. (Breathe), a subsidiary of Hill-Rom Holdings, filed a lawsuit against us, New Aera, Inc., Silverbow Development LLC, and one of our employees on November 21, 2019 in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. The lawsuit alleged, among other things, willful infringement of a patent assigned to Breathe, that inventorship was incorrectly assigned and that Breathe has rights to certain patents filed by New Aera, Inc. and Silverbow Development LLC, breach of contract, inducing breach of contract, interference with contract, and violation of California Business and Professional Code section 17200. If we fail in defending against lawsuits or claims brought against us in the future, we could be subject to substantial monetary damages, injunctive relief, and loss of valuable intellectual property rights, and we cannot predict the outcome of any lawsuit. An adverse determination or protracted defense costs of such lawsuits could have a material effect on our business and operating results. From time to time, we have also commenced litigation to enforce our intellectual property rights. For example, we previously pursued litigation against Inova Labs, Inc. (a subsidiary of ResMed Corp.) for infringement of two of our patents seeking damages, injunctive relief, costs, and attorneys' fees. While we settled our lawsuit with Inova Labs in June 2016, an adverse decision in any other legal action could limit our ability to assert our intellectual property rights, limit the value of our technology or otherwise negatively affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. Monitoring unauthorized use of our intellectual property is difficult and costly. Unauthorized use of our intellectual property may have occurred or may occur in the future. Although we have taken steps to minimize the risk of this occurring, any such failure to identify unauthorized use and otherwise adequately protect our intellectual property would adversely affect our business. Moreover, if we are required to commence litigation, whether as a plaintiff or defendant, not only will this be time-consuming, but we will also be forced to incur significant costs and divert our attention and efforts of our employees, which could, in turn, result in lower revenue and higher expenses. We cannot provide assurance that our products or methods do not infringe or appear to not infringe the patents or other intellectual property rights of third parties and if our business is successful, the possibility may increase that others will assert infringement claims against us whether valid or frivolous. Determining whether a product infringes a patent involves complex legal and factual issues, defense costs and the outcome of a patent litigation action are often uncertain. We have not conducted an extensive search of patents issued or assigned to other parties, including our competitors, and no assurance can be given that patents containing claims covering or appearing to cover our products, parts of our products, technology or methods do not exist, have not been filed or could not be filed or issued. Because of the number of patents issued and patent applications filed in our technical areas, our competitors or other parties may assert that our products and the methods we employ in the use of our products are covered by U.S. or foreign patents held by them. In addition, because patent applications can take many years to issue and because publication schedules for pending applications may vary by jurisdiction and some patent applications may not be published in the U.S., there may be applications now pending of which we are unaware and which may result in issued patents that our current or future products infringe or appear to infringe. Also, because the claims of published patent applications can change between publication and patent grant, there may be published patent applications that may ultimately issue with claims that we infringe. There could also be existing patents that one or more of our products or parts may infringe and of which we are unaware. As the number of competitors in the market for respiratory products and the number of patents issued in this area grows, the possibility of patent infringement claims against us increases. In certain situations, we may determine that it is in our best interests to voluntarily challenge a party's patents in litigation or other proceedings, including declaratory judgment actions, patent reexaminations, post grant reviews, or inter partes reviews. As a result, we may become involved in unwanted protracted litigation that could be costly, result in diversion of management's attention, require us to pay damages and/or licensing royalties and force us to discontinue selling our products. Infringement and other intellectual property claims and proceedings brought against us, whether successful or not, could result in substantial costs and harm to our reputation. Such claims and proceedings can also distract and divert management and key personnel from other tasks important to the success of the business. We cannot be certain that we will successfully defend against allegations of infringement of patents or other intellectual property rights. In the event that we become subject to a patent infringement or other intellectual property related lawsuit and if the asserted patents or other intellectual property were upheld as valid and enforceable and we were found to infringe the asserted patents or other intellectual property, or violate the terms of a license to which we are a party, we could be required to do one or more of the following: - cease selling or using any of our products that incorporate the asserted intellectual property, which would adversely affect our revenue;- pay damages for past use of the asserted intellectual property, which may be substantial;- obtain a license from the holder of the asserted intellectual property, which license may not be available on reasonable royalty terms, if at all, and which could reduce profitability; and - redesign or rename, in the case of trademark claims, our products to avoid infringing the intellectual property rights of third parties, which may not be possible and could be costly and time-consuming if it is possible to do so.

We rely on a combination of trade secrets, copyrights, trademarks, confidentiality agreements and other contractual provisions and technical security measures to protect certain aspects of our technology, especially where we do not believe that patent protection is appropriate or obtainable. We require our employees and consultants to execute confidentiality agreements in connection with their employment or consulting relationships with us. We also require our employees and consultants to disclose and assign to us all inventions conceived during the term of their employment or engagement while using our property or that relate to our business. We also require our corporate partners, outside scientific collaborators and sponsored researchers, advisors and others with access to our confidential information to sign confidentiality agreements. We also have taken precautions to initiate reasonable safeguards to protect our information technology systems. However, these measures may not be adequate to safeguard our proprietary intellectual property and conflicts may, nonetheless, arise regarding ownership of inventions and other intellectual property. Such conflicts may lead to the loss or impairment of our intellectual property or to expensive litigation to defend our rights against competitors who may be better funded and have superior resources. Our employees, consultants, contractors, outside clinical collaborators and other advisors may unintentionally or willfully disclose our confidential information to competitors. In addition, confidentiality agreements may be unenforceable or may not provide an adequate remedy in the event of unauthorized disclosure. Enforcing a claim that a third-party illegally obtained and is using our trade secrets is expensive and time-consuming, and the outcome is unpredictable. Moreover, our competitors may independently develop equivalent knowledge, methods and know-how. Unauthorized parties may also attempt to copy or reverse engineer certain aspects of our products that we consider proprietary, and in such cases we could not assert any trade secret rights against such party. As a result, other parties may be able to use our proprietary technology or information, and our ability to compete in the market would be harmed. "Inogen," "Inogen One," "Inogen One G2," "Inogen One G3," "G4," "G5," "Live Life in Moments, not Minutes," "Never Run Out of Oxygen," "Oxygen Therapy on Your Terms," "Oxygen.Anytime.Anywhere," "Reclaim Your Independence," "Intelligent Delivery Technology," "Inogen At Home," the Inogen design, "TIDAL ASSIST," "TAV," and "SIDEKICK" are registered trademarks with the United States Patent and Trademark Office of Inogen, Inc. We own pending applications for "Inogen," "MOMENTUM TRANSFER" and "SONIC BLADE" with the United States Patent and Trademark Office. We own trademark registrations for the mark "Inogen" in Argentina, Australia, Canada, China, Columbia, Ecuador, South Korea, Mexico, Europe (European Union registration), Iceland, India, Israel, Japan, Kuwait, New Zealand, Norway, Peru, Turkey, Singapore, and Switzerland. We own pending applications for the mark "Inogen" in Australia, Brazil, Chile, China, Europe (European Union application), India, Malaysia, Paraguay, South Africa, and Uruguay. We own a trademark registration for the mark "?????" in Japan. We own trademark registrations for the marks "???" and "???" in China. We own trademark registrations for the mark "Inogen One" in Australia, Canada, China, South Korea, Mexico, and Europe (European Union registration). We own a trademark registration for the mark "Satellite Conserver" in Canada. We own a trademark registration for the mark "Inogen At Home" in Europe (European Union Registration). We own trademark registrations for the mark "G4" in Europe (European Union registration) and the United Kingdom. We own trademark registrations for the mark "G5" in Europe (European Union Registration) and the United Kingdom. We own trademark applications for the Inogen design in Bolivia and China. We own a trademark registration for the mark "?????" in Saudi Arabia. Other service marks, trademarks, and trade names referred to in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q are the property of their respective owners.

We purchase components and subassemblies from third-party suppliers, including some of our single-source suppliers, through purchase orders and do not have long-term supply contracts with many of these third-party suppliers. Many of our third-party suppliers, therefore, are not obligated to perform services or supply products to us for any specific period, in any specific quantity or at any specific price, except as may be provided in a particular purchase order. We do not maintain large volumes of inventory from most of these suppliers. For example, our TAV product is sold in some cases with a stationary concentrator produced by another oxygen concentrator manufacturer. Due to the COVID-19 PHE and related increased demand for stationary oxygen concentrators, we have limited supply of these stationary oxygen concentrators at this time. This has had and will continue to have an impact on TAV sales until supply is stabilized or we receive regulatory clearance or approval to use the TAV with another oxygen concentrator source. We may also be affected by other supply limitations during the COVID-19 PHE that could impact our ability to fulfill orders. If we inaccurately forecast demand or fail to place orders timely enough relative to fluctuating lead time requirements for components or subassemblies, our ability to manufacture and commercialize our products could be delayed and our competitive position and reputation could be harmed. In addition, if we fail to effectively manage our relationships with these suppliers or if our suppliers, in the near term or the long term, are not able to supply sufficient quantities of components or subassemblies needed for our products due to the COVID-19 PHE, we may be required to change suppliers which would be time consuming and disruptive and could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.