AxoGen, Inc.

We elected the package of practical expedients permitted under the transition guidance, which allowed us to not reassess whether any existing contracts contain a lease, to not reassess historical lease classification as operating or finance leases, and to not reassess initial direct costs. We also elected the practical expedient allowing us to not separate the lease and non-lease components for all classes of underlying assets, apart from equipment. We did not elect the practical expedient to use hindsight to determine the lease term for leases at January 1, 2019.

Adoption of the new standard resulted in the recording of right-to-use assets and lease liabilities of approximately $3,786 and $3,823, respectively, and the derecognition of capital lease assets, capital lease liabilities, and operating lease deferred rent of $96,  $63, and $70, respectively, as of January 1, 2019 with zero cumulative-effect adjustment to retained earnings. The new Leases standard did not materially impact our consolidated net earnings and had no impact on cash flows.

Fair Value Measurements

In August 2018, the FASB issued ASU 2018-13, Fair Value Measurements (Topic 820) Disclosure Framework-Changes to the Disclosure Requirements for Fair Value Measurement. ASU 2018-13 changes the fair value measurement disclosure requirements of ASC 820, “Fair Value Measurement” by adding, eliminating, and modifying certain disclosure requirements. ASU 2018-13 is effective for all entities for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2019 and requires application of the prospective method of transition. The Company is currently assessing the impact the guidance will have on its consolidated financial statements.

On August 6, 2015, the Company entered into a License and Services Agreement (the “CTS Agreement”) with Community Blood Center (d/b/a Community Tissue Services) (“CTS”), Dayton, Ohio, an FDA registered tissue establishment.  Processing of the Avance Nerve Graft pursuant to the CTS Agreement began in February 2016.  The CTS Agreement initially had a five-year term ending August 31, 2020. On February 22, 2019, the agreement was amended to extend the term through December 31, 2021. The amendment also gives the Company the right to terminate the agreement on or after March 1, 2021 with six-months advance notice. Under the CTS Agreement, the Company pays CTS a facility fee for use of clean room/manufacturing, storage and office space, which the Company accounts for as an embedded lease in accordance with ASC 842, “Leases”.  The Company also pays CTS for services in support of its manufacturing process such as for routine sterilization of daily supplies, providing disposable supplies, microbial services and office support.  During the three months ended March 31, 2019 and 2018,  the Company paid fees to CTS of approximately $488 and $419, respectively, which are included in cost of goods sold on the accompanying condensed consolidated statements of operations.

On January 9, 2019, Plaintiff Neil Einhorn, on behalf of himself and others similarly situated, filed a putative class action complaint in the United Stated District Court for the Middle District of Florida alleging violations of the federal securities laws against Axogen, Inc., certain of its directors and officers (“Individual Defendants”), and Axogen’s 2017 Offering Underwriters and 2018 Offering Underwriters (collectively, with the Individual Defendants, the “Defendants”), captioned Einhorn v. Axogen, Inc., et al., No. 8:19-cv-00069 (M.D. Fla.).  Plaintiff asserts that Defendants made false or misleading statements in connection with the Company’s November 2017 registration statement issued regarding its secondary public offering in November 2017 and May 2018 registration statement issued regarding its secondary public offering in May 2018, and during a class period of August 7, 2017 to December 18, 2018.   In particular, Plaintiff asserts that Defendants issued false and misleading statements and failed to disclose to investors: (1) that the Company aggressively increased prices to mask lower sales; (2) that the Company’s pricing alienated customers and threatened the Company’s future growth; (3) that ambulatory surgery centers form a significant part of the market for the Company’s products; (4) that such centers were especially sensitive to price increases; (5) that the Company was dependent on a small number of surgeons whom the Company paid to generate sales; (6) that the Company’s consignment model for inventory was reasonably likely to lead to channel stuffing; (7) that the Company offered purchase incentives to sales representatives to encourage channel stuffing; (8) that the Company’s sales representatives were encouraged to backdate revenue to artificially inflate metrics; (9) that the Company lacked adequate internal controls to prevent such channel stuffing and backdating of revenue; (10) that the Company’s key operating metrics, such as number of active accounts, were overstated; and (11) that, as a result of the foregoing, Defendants’ positive statements about the Company’s business, operations, and prospects, were materially misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis.  Axogen was served on January 15, 2019.  On February 4, 2019, the court granted the parties’ stipulated motion which provided that Axogen is not required to file a response to the complaint until thirty days after Plaintiff files a consolidated amended complaint, which will not occur until thirty days after the court appoints a lead plaintiff and lead counsel. On April 30, 2019, the Court granted Police and Fire Retirement System of the City of Detroit (“Detroit”)’s Motion for Appointment as Lead Counsel and approved of its Lead Counsel Saxena White P.A. and Grant & Eisenhofer P.A., and set the following schedule: on or before May 30, 2019, Detroit must file a consolidated amended complaint; on or before July 1, 2019, Defendants must file an answer or move to dismiss the consolidated amended complaint; on or before July 29, 2019, the parties shall meet and confer and prepare to file a Case Management Report, which must be filed by August 12, 2019; and, on or before 30 days after either the filing of an answer or the Court’s ruling on a motion to dismiss, Detroit must file a motion for class certification and Defendants must file an opposition 30 days later.  Plaintiff is seeking compensatory damages, reimbursement of expenses and costs, including counsel and expert fees and such other relief as the court deems just and proper.    The Company and Individual Defendants dispute the allegations and intend to vigorously defend against the Complaint.