Vivos (RDGL) Risk Factors

The Company's success is heavily dependent on the continued active participation of certain consultants and collaborating scientists. Certain consultants have no written contracts. Loss of the services of any one or more of its consultants could have a material adverse effect upon the Company's business, results of operations and financial condition.

The Company's success and achievement of its growth plans depend on its ability to recruit, hire, train and retain highly qualified technical, scientific, regulatory, and managerial employees, consultants and advisors. Competition for qualified personnel among pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies is intense, and an inability to attract and motivate additional highly skilled personnel required for the expansion of the Company's activities, or the loss of any such persons, could have a material adverse effect on its business, results of operations and financial condition.

The Company's future success may depend, in part, on its ability to enter into and maintain collaborative relationships with one or more third parties, the collaborator's strategic interest in the Company's products and the Company's products under development, and the collaborator's ability to successfully market and sell any such products. The Company intends to pursue collaborative arrangements regarding the marketing and sales of its products; however, it may not be able to establish or maintain such collaborative arrangements, or if it is able to do so, the Company's collaborators may not be effective in marketing and selling its products. To the extent that the Company decides not to, or is unable to, enter into collaborative arrangements with respect to the sales and marketing of its products, significant capital expenditures, management resources and time will be required to establish and develop an in-house marketing and sales force with technical expertise. To the extent that the Company depends on third parties for marketing and distribution, any revenues received by the Company will depend upon the efforts and results of such third parties, which may or may not be successful.

There is only one supplier of Y-90 particles in the United States, requiring us to rely entirely on this supplier to provide the Y-90 particles needed to produce RadioGelTM. If we are unable to obtain a sufficient supply of Y-90 particles, we will not be able to proceed with our development of RadioGelTM and our business would be materially harmed. The Company currently subcontracts the manufacturing of RadioGelTM to IsoTherapeutics. Eckert and Ziegler is the sole supplier of the Y-90 particles used by IsoTherapeutics and is the only supplier of Y-90 particles in the United States. In the event PerkinElmer is unable to satisfy our supply requirements or stope producing Y-90 particles, we will be unable to continue with development of RadioGel™ and our business would be materially harmed.

The Company owns or has a license to use several U.S. and foreign patents and patent applications, trademarks and copyrights. The Company's intellectual property rights may be challenged, invalidated or infringed upon by third parties, or it may be unable to maintain, renew or enter into new licenses of third party proprietary intellectual property on commercially reasonable terms. In some non-U.S. countries, laws affecting intellectual property are uncertain in their application, which can adversely affect the scope or enforceability of the Company's patents and other intellectual property rights. Any of these events or factors could diminish or cause the Company to lose the competitive advantages associated with the Company's intellectual property, subject the Company to judgments, penalties and significant litigation costs, or temporarily or permanently disrupt its sales and marketing of the affected products or services.

There is no assurance the FDA or other global regulatory authorities will grant the Company permission to market the Company's brachytherapy Y-90 RadioGel™ device. The Company has been working with the FDA to obtain clearance for its brachytherapy Y-90 RadioGelTM device, but no assurances have been received. On December 23, 2014, the Company announced that it submitted a de novo application to the FDA for marketing clearance for its patented Y-90 RadioGelTM device pursuant to Section 513(f)(2) of the U.S. Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (the "Act"). In June 2015, the FDA notified the Company the de novo application was not granted. In February 2014, the FDA found the same device under Section 510(k) of the Act not substantially equivalent and concluded that the device is classified by statute as a Class III medical device, unless the device is reclassified. The Company is seeking reclassification of the product to Class II. If the Company is successful in seeking reconsideration of the Company's de novo application, as a regulatory matter, the device could be on an easier and faster path to market in the United States. However, there would still be the requirements to complete the in vitro and in vivo testing, and then some human clinical trials. That testing date is submitted in a de novo pre-market application and if accepted we could then go to market. As a practical matter, the Company would still need to secure funding and commercial arrangements before marketing could commence. If the de novo application is declined and if the Company obtains funding to permit it to continue operations, the Company will explore steps toward seeking approval for the device as a Class III medical device. Generally, the time period and cost of seeking approval as a Class III medical device is materially greater than the time period and cost of seeking approval as a Class II medical device. If the Company seeks approval as a Class III device, human clinical trials will be necessary. Generally, human trials for Class III products are larger, of longer duration and costlier than those for Class II devices. If human clinical trials are necessary, there will be additional cost and time to reach marketing clearance or approval. Unless the Company obtains sufficient funding, it will be unable to undertake such activities. There can be no assurance that the product will be approved as either a Class II or Class III device by the FDA even if additional data is provided. In August 2017, the Company met again with the FDA in a pre-submission meeting to once again go through the requirements for pre-clinical testing and to answer the previous FDA questions submitted years before. There can be no assurance that the Company will receive FDA approval, or if it does, the timing thereof.