UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549

______________________

FORM 10-K

______________________

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2013

 or

For the transition period from ______ to ______

Commission file number: 33-2783-S

SIGMA LABS, INC.

(Exact name of Registrant as specified in its charter)

______________________  

Securities registered under Section 12(b) of the Act: None.

Securities registered under Section 12(g) of the Act: None.

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes ¨ No þ

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act. Yes ¨ No þ

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports) and, (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.

Yes þ No ¨

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files).

Yes þ No ¨

Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K (§ 229.405 of this chapter) is not contained herein and, will not be contained, to the best of registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K. þ

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check one):

 Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act). Yes ¨ No þ

State the aggregate market value of the voting and non-voting common equity held by non-affiliates computed by reference to the price at which the common equity was last sold, or the average bid and asked price of such common equity, as of the last business day of the registrant’s most recently completed second fiscal quarter. $16,081,116.

The outstanding number of shares of common stock as of March 31, 2014 was 603,891,061.

Documents incorporated by reference: None.

SIGMA LABS, INC.

FORM 10-K — FISCAL YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2013

INDEX

DISCLOSURE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

 This Report, including any documents which may be incorporated by reference into this Report, contains “Forward-Looking Statements” within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. All statements other than statements of historical fact are “Forward-Looking Statements” for purposes of these provisions, including any projections of revenues or other financial items, any statements of the plans and objectives of management for future operations, any statements concerning proposed new products or services, any statements regarding future economic conditions or performance, and any statements of assumptions underlying any of the foregoing. All Forward-Looking Statements included in this document are made as of the date hereof and are based on information available to us as of such date. We assume no obligation to update any Forward-Looking Statement. In some cases, Forward-Looking Statements can be identified by the use of terminology such as “may,” “will,” “expects,” “plans,” “anticipates,” “intends,” “believes,” “estimates,” “potential,” or “continue,” or the negative thereof or other comparable terminology. Although we believe that the expectations reflected in the Forward-Looking Statements contained herein are reasonable, there can be no assurance that such expectations or any of the Forward-Looking Statements will prove to be correct, and actual results could differ materially from those projected or assumed in the Forward-Looking Statements. Future financial condition and results of operations, as well as any Forward-Looking Statements are subject to inherent risks and uncertainties, including any other factors referred to in our press releases and reports filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission. All subsequent Forward-Looking Statements attributable to the Company or persons acting on its behalf are expressly qualified in their entirety by these cautionary statements. Additional factors that may have a direct bearing on our operating results are described under “Risk Factors” and elsewhere in this report.

 Introductory Comment

Throughout this Annual Report on Form 10-K, unless otherwise indicated or the context otherwise requires, the term “B6 Sigma” refers to B6 Sigma, Inc., a Delaware corporation and our wholly-owned, operating company acquired in September 2010; the terms the “Company,” “Sigma,” “we,” “us” and “our” refer to Sigma Labs, Inc., together with B6 Sigma, Inc. Sigma conducts substantially all of its operations through B6 Sigma.

PART I

Summary

B6 Sigma is a technology company that specializes in the development and commercialization of novel and unique manufacturing and materials technologies. It is the belief of our management that some of these technologies will fundamentally redefine conventional quality assurance and control practices by embedding quality assurance and process control into the manufacturing process in real time. In addition, the Company anticipates that its core technologies will enable its clientele to combine advanced manufacturing quality assurance and control protocols with novel materials to achieve breakthrough product potential in many industries including aerospace, defense, oil and gas, prosthetic implants and power generation.

Certain members of our team at B6 Sigma are uniquely qualified scientists with broad backgrounds in manufacturing and materials technologies. In the past, these members have worked with some of the largest defense contractors in the world, in such varied projects as next-generation manufacturing systems, advanced reactive munitions, nuclear weapons stewardship programs, and naval nuclear reactor programs.

 Our current business plan and principal business activities include the continued development of our In-Process Quality Assurance™ (IPQA®) suite of technologies and eventual commercialization of both our IPQA® and materials-related suite of technologies, with our main focus currently on the 3D Printing industry, which technologies are described elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. Our strategy is to leverage our manufacturing and materials knowledge, experience and capabilities through the following means: (i) identify, develop and commercialize manufacturing and materials technologies designed to improve manufacturing and quality control practices, and create innovative products in a variety of industries; and (ii) provide engineering consulting services in respect of our manufacturing and materials technology expertise to third parties that have needs in developing next-generation technologies for materials and manufacturing projects. We are presently engaged in a variety of activities in which we seek to commercialize technologies and products in the following industry sectors:

We expect to generate revenues primarily by selling or licensing our manufacturing and materials technologies. We expect that our continued development in fiscal 2014 of our “In Process Quality Assurance™” or “IPQA^® technology will enable us to commercialize this technology in the remainder of 2014. We plan to assist our commercialization partners with marketing-related activities for those advanced material-related technologies, including our dental implant biomedical prosthetics technology, for which we seek possible commercialization in the future. However, we presently make no sales of these technologies and generate no revenues therefrom, except for license fees payable to the Company under our exclusive license agreement entered into in April 2013 with Allotrope Sciences Corporation, as described below. Since its inception, B6 Sigma has generated revenues primarily from engineering consulting services it provides to third parties.

Our board of directors and management comprise scientists and business professionals with extensive experience in the energy and advanced manufacturing and materials technology markets. These individuals collectively possess over 100 years of experience working in the advanced manufacturing and materials technology space. As such, we believe we possess the resident expertise to provide engineering consulting services to other companies regarding their manufacturing operations, or to companies seeking to improve the design of their products by using alternative next-generation materials or improving certain characteristics of the original input material, on a fee for services basis. Accordingly, in addition to our primary business focus, we intend to generate revenues by providing such engineering consulting services to businesses seeking the same. Such consulting services may not necessarily involve deployment of our own technologies and may be limited to consulting with respect to the development, exploitation or improvement of the client’s own technology.

Additionally, some members of our management team have worked at or with United States Department of Energy (“DOE”) national laboratories (including the Knolls Atomic Power Laboratory, Bettis Atomic Power Laboratory, Los Alamos National Laboratory and Sandia National Laboratory) over the last 20 years. Due to their work with the DOE, members of our management team have developed extensive relationships with the DOE and its network of national laboratories. Accordingly, we expect to leverage these relationships in connection with licensing and developing technologies created at such national laboratories for commercialization in the private sector.

Sumner & Lawrence Limited (dba Sumner Associates), a wholly-owned subsidiary of Sigma, was acquired in December 2011 and is a private consulting company that provided services to the public and private sector. Sigma Labs plans to dissolve Sumner Associates during fiscal 2014 as the number of Sumner Associates' contracts has been reduced in the past two years due to, among other things, changing funding climates within the DOE. La Mancha Company, which Sigma Labs also acquired in December 2011 and was engaged in a similar line of business as Sumner Associates, has ceased all operations and has been dissolved.

EARLY STAGE TECHNOLOGY COMMERCIALIZATION AND MARKET POSITIONING

Since our inception, we have made tremendous progress in bringing early stage technology from scientific concept and curiosity to practical reality, as described below.

1. In-Process Quality Assurance™ (IPQA^®) for Additive Manufacturing. We believe that "additive manufacturing" ("AM"), more popularly known as 3D Printing ("3DP"), will significantly impact the manufacturing landscape and revolutionize 21^st century industry. AM results in very efficient metal utilization for parts made on-demand, and utilizes a wide variety of rapid prototyping methods. As a result of AM, parts can go straight from computer designs and 3D computer models to actual, physical parts in a single step. However, there are severe challenges in connection with 3D printing of metal parts. Current manufacturing processes are not capable of making every part right the first time. Also, process consistency and repeatability require further development for metal parts and this is a typical case for emerging technologies. Although many industry experts have lamented that 3D Printing for metal parts is currently a “black art” with limited applications, Sigma is developing its IPQA® technology into a breakthrough hardware and software suite of products for AM known as PrintRite3D®, which we expect will fully address some these shortcomings and enable metals AM technology to be realized sooner than would otherwise be possible given its current state of maturity. PrintRite3D® comprises a suite of software modules that address the three fundamental problems facing AM or 3DP today, namely: assuring the quality of the product; assuring the as-built geometry of the product; and, increasing the productivity or speed of the AM process.

2. Biomedical Implant Technology. Biomedical implants have greatly improved the quality of life for millions of individuals around the globe. There is a constant search for new technologies which will make implants easier to use, less painful, and easier to integrate into the body. Leveraging decades of Cold War technology, our scientists and engineers have developed an innovative, patent-pending surface treatment that appears to significantly cut down the healing time, reduce the pain and swelling, and reduce the chances for infection associated with implants. The results of our pre-clinical trials in Canada of treated dental implants in human patients so far have shown a remarkable improvement in biointegration time – these treated implants appear able to fully integrate with the human jaw in a period of 4 weeks as opposed to the more typical 8-12 weeks or longer. Also, we’ve concluded protein absorption studies at Sandia National Lab and the results appear to indicate that treated dental implants with our patent-pending surface technology absorb proteins more readily than untreated dental implants. As such these results appear to support the pre-clinical trials work that was conducted in Canada. The Company does not currently have the resources to continue its commercialization efforts of such technology without the assistance of a partner or licensee.

3. Advanced Munitions Technology. Current global conflicts around the globe point to the perpetual need for new technology in our fight against those organizations, countries, and non-nations state aggressors who would harm the vital interests of the United States. Increasingly, there is a shift towards the use of precision strike capability. In urban centers, our troops wish to engage the enemy without harming innocent civilians. Also, the undeniable trend towards the use of drones, UAVs, and UAS systems requires new classes of weapons and munitions that pack a significant punch but with far lower weight. Current munitions have up to 70% steel by weight, which does not release any energy and causes significant collateral damage to innocent bystanders. The Company has developed and demonstrated at a working prototype level several classes of energetic materials which have structural strength until impact, and then release energy into the target without generating dangerous shrapnel which could fly out of the explosion zone. The Company believes that this selective munitions technology, if commercialized, will enable our forces to engage the enemy without harming civilians and will enable drones to have new strike capabilities. Additionally, our technology could be used for specialized bullets that multiply the force of smaller caliber rounds. For example, our Bonded Advanced Munitions (BAM™) reactive metals technology could give an M-16 round the punching power of a much larger caliber round and could have steel penetrating capability plus energy release on target or increased behind-armor effects in an otherwise insensitive munitions.

A detailed description of our three technologies follows.

Next-Generation Quality Assurance Solutions for Additive Manufacturing

The Market

An area of increasing interest in the manufacturing world is AM or 3DP. AM is a method of producing functional parts directly from computer design files without any tooling or other processing.

The total AM market size is estimated to reach approximately $6 billion by 2017 and $10.8 billion by 2021 according to Wohlers 2013 Annual Report. Metal parts are a rapidly growing segment of this overall market space as AM or 3D printing moves from just making models to making actual, fully functional parts. Large firms such as Honeywell Aerospace, General Electric Aviation (GEA) and Boeing Aircraft Company have seen AM as an enabling process for many components. GEA has foreseen that up to 50 percent of its aero-engine parts will be made by AM by 2016 and has sought to remove 1,000 lb from its current 4,000 lb engines by 2020. Further, both GE and Honeywell have made known their dissatisfaction with the inconsistency of the AM process from part-to-part and from machine-to-machine (MIT Technology Review, January/February Issue 2012). We believe that companies such as GE and Honeywell cannot achieve these ambitious weight reduction goals without new quality assurance and control technologies for metal AM parts because current quality control methods are not sufficient to allow cost-effective manufacturing of safety- and performance-critical metal parts. We believe that our PrintRite3D® technology would directly address this shortcoming for metal parts and allow such AM applications to move forward. As noted below, we are providing consultant services to GEA and Honeywell Aerospace to assist in these goals.

As further evidence of the demand for new quality control methods for safety-critical additive manufacturing, the US Navy’s Chief Scientist, W.E. Frazier, commented that the need for real-time quality monitoring and control is essential to achieving the Navy’s goals for additive manufacturing. This is precisely the technology that would be provided by our PrintRite3D® technology. There is currently a very limited supplier base providing high value-added, performance and safety critical metal parts including the OEM captive job shops. We believe that none are currently capable of addressing the issue of real-time quality control. Our PrintRite3D® is currently a market leader in this area.

The Company has ongoing contracts that include a project with Honeywell Aerospace funded by the Defense Advanced Projects Agency ("DARPA") on the application of our PrintRite3D® to performance-critical AM metal parts. This project is vitally important because it provides an early opportunity to demonstrate how our In-Process Quality Assurance™ technology or PrintRite3D® will reduce unnecessary post process inspection costs and improve quality for AM of highly critical aerospace metal components. Also, B6 Sigma was a participant on a GEA led team of companies and universities, which were recently awarded a research contract by the National Additive Manufacturing Innovation Institute (“NAMII” or AmerciaMakes) titled, “In-Process Quality Assurance™ for Laser Powder Bed Production of Aerospace Components“. The contract has the stated objective of maturing the In Process Quality Assurance™ (IPQA®) technology for aerospace applications by leveraging a development approach incorporating multiple AM OEM machines, multiple superalloys, and multiple product intent aerospace components. Lastly, we are part of a large research team, led by the Edison Welding Institute, to be awarded a grant funded by the National Institute of Standards ("NIST") to ensure that quality parts are produced and certified for use in products made by a variety of industries and their supply chains. The emphasis is on providing tools needed for additive manufacturing applications to progress from prototype to market-ready.

Technology and Competitive Advantage

Sigma Labs appears positioned to provide the AM market a product offering for real-time quality assurance and control based on our core competency in real-time monitoring and control called PrintRite3D®. Our IPQA®-enabled PrintRite3D® technology appears ideally suited to meet the needs of AM at this critical juncture in its development. Our technology will allow AM to be used during manufacturing of safety-critical or performance-critical metal parts, such as used aerospace and defense. Currently, these applications are difficult because the part quality cannot be completely guaranteed, and using inspection after manufacturing is difficult, costly and does not find all defects of concern. Therefore, we believe that PrintRite3D® will be a vital enabler for AM to realize its full potential. Sigma has unique offerings in this field. Furthermore, as a greater number of these AM applications could be cloud-based, the PrintRite3D® technology is fully compatible with highly networked, cloud-based implementation – subject to the data and intellectual property restrictions which may be imposed by some companies for competitive reasons.

We believe that Sigma Labs' unique process know how and trade secrets of IPQA® for AM, and a U.S. patent award for monitoring and control for processes specifically including AM, along with its PrintRite3D® technology has uniquely positioned Sigma to be a leader in the market space for quality assurance technologies for AM. Our proven and sophisticated analysis software has been demonstrated and tested at many manufacturing sites around the world which has validated the PrintRite3D® INSPECT and SENSOR PAK modules. In addition, Sigma has strategic relationships with experienced aerospace companies in North America that are assisting in the validation of our PrintRite3D® suite of modules.

Lastly, on April 10, 2013 Sigma Labs signed a Joint Technology Development Agreement ("JTDA") with General Electric Aviation to advance and implement in-process inspection technologies for additive manufactured jet engine components.

Business Model

Sigma Labs' management believes the concept would entail utilizing our innovative sensing and process monitoring, quality assurance and control technologies to develop integrated and interactive systems of in-process inspection, feedback, data collection and critical analysis. Such systems would benefit users comprising AM OEM equipment manufacturers, aerospace, defense, and biomedical OEMs, as well as other high-margin and high-volume OEM producer of parts such as oil and gas and automotive, respectively. Sigma Labs has beta-versions of the following product offerings available:

Other software modules are either in development or envisioned as complementary product offerings, they are:

We envision a business model comprising either direct PrintRite3D® product sales with supporting engineering services or engineering services wherein we use our own PrintRite3D® products to solve customer specific quality assurance problems. The target markets would be end users having an AM machine capable of making metal parts as well as AM software and equipment OEMs. PrintRite3D® system sales are designed to run on different machine platforms allowing us to maximize our product offering to the entire AM metal market. Also, in conjunction with our JTDA with GE Aviation, we envision PrintRite3D® being used in the manufacture of fuel nozzles for GE's newest jet engine - the LEAP engine. Including our PrintRite3D® technology as part of GE Aviation’s quality control model should provide the necessary "objective evidence of compliance" required by their customer (the F.A.A.) to ensure production quality and process reliability. Further, a possible extension of our business model would allow for manufacturers of performance and safety-critical components to use our products and services as part of a ‘click charge’ for every part made using our PrintRite3D® technology. We also envision a license and royalty aspect to our business model for AM OEM equipment makers wishing to embed our PrintRite3D® technology into new and existing AM machines worldwide.

We believe another much needed area for AM metal parts manufacturing is in software “Apps” for reducing design and development cycle times, saving the end customer time and money. These Apps could utilize the Cloud as the future of AM is moving towards data files and part data being stored in and downloaded from Cloud-based resources. We therefore envision extending our competitive advantage in the future by further developing and offering a PrintRite3D® CAD suite of Apps which would be specifically developed to improve part designs and significantly reduce traditional trial and error design approaches for features such as distortion control.

By combining the AM manufacturing capability of a leading aerospace company with Sigma’s real-time nondestructive inspection technology, a unique product offering (systems package) will be available to OEMs and end-users. After installing Sigma’s PrintRite3D® inspection systems, a database systems package will be actively marketed to OEM’s and principal end users. Finally, ‘user’ advisory groups could be formed to facilitate exchange of information, needs, new developments, etc. utilizing ever-green, annual contracts.

To summarize, Sigma Labs is a small, high-technology company focusing on real-time, advanced quality assurance solutions for additive manufacturing thereby increasing the value of the AM part.

Biomedical Prosthetics, Implants and Munitions Technologies: Next Generation

The Company also has also dental and munitions technologies. If we identify suitable licensees or commercialization partners with respect to these technologies, we expect to limit our activities in these areas to marketing assistance.

In April 2013, Sigma Labs entered into an exclusive license agreement with Allotrope Sciences Corporation ("Allotrope"), pursuant to which we granted Allotrope rights to market and sell Sigma Labs' ARMS^™ and BAM^™ technologies to U.S. and Foreign Government customers. Allotrope is obligated to pay specified license fees and low single digit royalties on sales relating to the licensed patents. The initial term of the agreement is five years, unless sooner terminated as provided in the agreement, which may be renewed by Allotrope for up to three additional periods of one year each after the expiration of the initial term. Additionally, Allotrope may consider sales to system integrators requiring enhancements to current weapons systems where it makes business sense.

We are seeking and have not yet identified nor may not be successful in identifying a credible commercialization partner for our biomedical prosthetics and implant technology.

Recent Developments (in reverse chronological order)

On January 23, 2014, we announced that B6 Sigma was a participant on the winning team of companies and universities to be awarded an "America Makes" additive manufacturing research project from The National Additive Manufacturing Innovation Institute ("NAMII") for Sigma Labs’ proprietary In-Process Quality Assurance™ (IPQA®) System for monitoring of additive manufacturing (AM) and 3DP.

On January 14, 2014, we announced the completion of a $3,500,000 private placement of 43,750,000 shares of common stock, and a nine-month warrant to purchase up to 14,259,259 shares of common stock at an exercise price of $0.15 per share.

On December 26, 2013, we announced that we delivered two of our PrintRite3D^® quality assurance systems for 3D metal printing to a leading aerospace company.

On December 23, 2013, we announced the development by Sigma Labs of technology to support a low-cost, 3D metal printer based on arc welding technology.

On November 18, 2013, we announced that we extended our contract with Honeywell Aerospace, a division of Honeywell International (NYSE: HON), to include enhancements to further demonstrate the capabilities of Sigma Labs' PrintRite3D® technology.

On November 14, 2013, we announced that we obtained the complete assignment interest in our critical patent on advanced dental implant technology.

On September 24, 2013, we announced that B6 Sigma was a participant on the winning team of companies, universities and national laboratories to be awarded a grant of $5 million by the U.S. Department of Commerce's National Institute of Standards and Technology. The emphasis of the team's research is on providing tools needed for additive manufacturing applications to progress from prototype to market-ready. 

On May 7, 2013, we announced that we were awarded a contract from a Fortune 100 company who is one of the world's leading suppliers of power generation systems for land-based gas turbines.

On April 10, 2013, we entered into a Joint Technology Development Agreement with- GE Aviation to advance and implement in-process inspection technologies for additive manufactured jet engine components.

On April 10, 2013, we announced that we signed the licensing agreement with Allotrope Sciences, Corp. to market and commercialize Sigma Labs’ innovative reactive munitions technologies – ARMS™ and BAM™.

On February 6, 2013, we announced that we filed a provisional patent application that will enable rapid process qualification and part certification for 3D Printing of critical metal parts.

On January 14, 2013, we announced that we were awarded two U.S. Patents. The first award is for a new class of reactive material known as ARMS - Advanced Reactive Materials and Structures. The second patent award was for Sigma Labs' BAM - Bonded Advanced Munition - technology.

COMPETITION

We believe our technologies will be beneficial to several industries, including aerospace, defense, oil and gas, prosthetic implants, and power generation. However, developments by others may render our current and proposed technologies noncompetitive or obsolete, or we may be unable to keep pace with technological developments or other market factors. Additionally, our competitive position may be materially affected by our ability to develop or successfully commercialize certain technologies that we have identified for commercialization. Other general external factors may also impact the ability of our products to meet expectations or effectively compete, including pricing pressures.

 We anticipate some of our principal competitors in the United States will include Aerojet Ordnance, General Dynamics Ordnance and Tactical Systems, Alliant Techsystems Inc. and Energetic Materials and Processes, Inc., both of which are businesses focused on developing materials technology solutions in the advanced munitions market; and Straumann AG, BioMet 3I, Keystone Dental, HiOssen Dental, and companies that specialize in developing dental implants that heal rapidly; and, AM OEM equipment manufacturers like EOS, Concept Lasers and SLM; and third party solution providers like IMPACT Engineering, Inc, Computer Weld Technology, Inc. and Vibrant Corporation that specialize in designing and manufacturing automated welding equipment and quality control monitoring devices used in industrial applications. Most of these competitors have significantly greater research and development capabilities than we do, as well as substantially more sales, marketing and financial and managerial resources. These entities represent significant competition for us. In addition, acquisitions of, or investments in, competing companies by large corporations could increase such competitors’ research, financial, manufacturing and other resources.

 Intellectual Property

We regard our trademarks, domain names, trade secrets, in-licensed technologies, process knowledge, and other intellectual property as critical to our success. We rely on trademark and other intellectual property law, and confidentiality agreements and license agreements with employees, partners, and others to protect our intellectual assets. We were awarded two U.S. patents with respect to our munitions technology. We were also awarded a U.S. patent with respect to our IPQA® technology, in addition to filing a new patent application pertaining to our IPQA® technology and rapid qualification of additive manufacturing for metal parts. Also, we filed a PCT patent application pertaining to the advanced dental implant technology. There is no guarantee that the patents for which we have applied will offer adequate protection under applicable law.

 Government Regulation

 Our business activities are subject to a variety of federal, state and local laws and regulations These regulations are aimed at preventing the inadvertent disclosure of munitions related data or the export of technical knowledge to foreign countries. The work we do with governmental units may also be subject to laws respecting the confidentiality of any classified or national security information we receive during the course of our activities under any government contract.

 Additionally, with respect to our work with government agencies, our sales are driven by pricing based on costs incurred to produce products or perform services under contracts with the U.S. government. U.S. government contracts generally are subject to Federal Acquisition Regulations (“FAR”), agency-specific regulations that implement or supplement FAR, such as the DoD’s Defense Federal Acquisition Regulations and other applicable laws and regulations. These regulations impose a broad range of requirements, many of which are unique to government contracting, including various procurement, import and export, security, contract pricing and cost, contract termination and adjustment, and audit requirements. A contractor’s failure to comply with these regulations and requirements could result in reductions of the value of contracts, contract modifications or termination, and the assessment of penalties and fines and could lead to suspension or debarment from government contracting or subcontracting for a period of time. In addition, government contractors are also subject to routine audits and investigations by U.S. government agencies such as the Defense Contract Audit Agency (“DCAA”). These agencies review a contractor’s performance, cost structure, and compliance with applicable laws, regulations, and standards. The DCAA also reviews the adequacy of, and a contractor’s compliance with, its internal control systems and policies, including the contractor’s purchasing, property, estimating, compensation, and information systems.

 Employees

As of March 31, 2014, B6 Sigma, Inc. employs three full-time employees and one part-time employee. B6 Sigma is actively searching for additional, qualified administrative and engineering staff to support its expanding operations in the area of IPQA® for additive manufacturing.

Corporate Information

 Framewaves, Inc., a Nevada corporation ("Framewaves"), was incorporated in December 1985 as “Messidor Limited.” In December 2000, the corporation’s shareholders approved a name change to “Framewaves, Inc.” At the same time, the shareholders also approved the acquisition of Corners, Inc., a Nevada corporation, which was originally intended to be used as an operating subsidiary as part of the corporation’s business strategy to actively pursue the custom framing business. Ultimately, the corporation decided to pursue a different business opportunity.

As previously reported, on September 13, 2010, Framewaves entered into a share exchange agreement with B6 Sigma and the holders of all of the issued and outstanding capital stock of B6 Sigma. In connection with the closing of the transactions contemplated under the share exchange agreement, the shareholders of Framewaves approved a 150:1 forward stock split, and, on September 27, 2010, we changed the name of the corporation to “Sigma Labs, Inc.” Additionally, following completion of such reorganization, B6 Sigma became a wholly owned subsidiary of the Company.

 B6 Sigma was incorporated in February 2010.  One member of our current management team worked at TMC before leaving to form B6 Sigma. Pursuant to an asset purchase agreement, B6 Sigma acquired certain assets from a division of TMC in exchange for the surrender of certain securities of TMC previously issued to the founders of B6 Sigma. The assets acquired include equipment, contracts, licenses and intellectual property relating to our IPQA^® technology.

 Our principal executive offices are located at 100 Cienega Street, Suite C, Santa Fe, New Mexico 87501, and our current telephone number at that address is (505) 438-2576. Our website address is www.sigmalabsinc.com. We do not incorporate the information on our website into this annual report, and you should not consider such information part of this annual report.

Our business is subject to numerous risks. We caution you that the following important factors, among others, could cause our actual results to differ materially from those expressed in statements made by us or on our behalf in filings with the SEC, press releases or communications with investors and others. Any or all of our statements in this annual report and in any other public statements we make may turn out to be wrong. They can be affected by inaccurate assumptions or by known or unknown risks and uncertainties. The factors mentioned in the discussion below will be important in determining future results. Consequently, actual future results may vary materially from those anticipated in this annual report or our other public statements.

Risks Related to Our Business and Industry

We have a limited operating history, which makes it difficult to evaluate an investment in the Company.

Since we recently commenced business operations, it can be expected that we will continue to incur significant operating expenses and will experience significant losses in the foreseeable future. There is no assurance that any revenues we generate will be sufficient for us to become profitable or thereafter maintain profitability. As a result, the Company cannot predict when, if ever, it might achieve profitability and cannot be certain that it will be able to sustain profitability, if achieved. Our lack of an operating history may make it difficult for you to evaluate our business prospects in connection with an investment in our securities.

 We face many of the risks normally associated with a new business.

 Because we have had a little under four years of operations, we face all the risks inherent in a new business, including the expenses, difficulties, complications and delays frequently encountered in connection with conducting new operations. These uncertainties include establishing our internal organization structure, developing our brand name, raising capital to meet our working capital requirements and developing a customer base, among others. If we are not effective in addressing these risks, we will not be able to operate profitably in the future, and we may not have adequate working capital to meet our obligations as they become due.

 The Company’s audited financial statements express substantial doubt about its ability to continue as a going concern.

 Our audited financial statements for the period ended December 31, 2013, have been prepared assuming that it will continue as a going concern. However, our auditors have expressed substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern because as of the date of the audited statements, we had generated limited revenues and had not achieved profitable operations. The Company’s ability to continue as a going concern is subject to its ability to finance its operations by generating and sustaining profits and/or obtaining necessary funding from outside sources. We have only recently commenced operations, and expect to continue to experience significant losses in the foreseeable future. There can be no assurance that we will ever achieve (or sustain) profitability, or successfully secure outside financing. Accordingly, there can be no assurance about our ability to continue as a going concern.

 We have limited financial resources and may need to raise significant additional capital to continue our operations.

 We will require significant financial resources to fund our current and future business operations. It is possible that our capital resources will be insufficient to fund all of such requirements and that the Company may be required to obtain additional capital in the future. In doing so, the Company may seek to access the capital markets to fund its capital needs. However, there can be no assurance that we will be able to secure such additional financing, or that we will do so on terms favorable to the Company. In addition, the current global financial crisis has exacerbated the difficulty of obtaining credit on favorable terms or at all, especially by companies with limited operating histories such as ours. Failure to obtain such additional funds as and when we need them, or securing such financing on unfavorable terms, may significantly impair our ability to continue operations.

Any additional financing we may undertake could result in dilution to existing stockholders.

Any additional financings we undertake in the future may be obtained through one or more transactions involving the issuance of our capital stock, which will dilute (either economically or in percentage terms) the ownership interests of our stockholders.

Our business may be adversely affected by the global economic downturn.

The global economy is currently in a pronounced economic downturn. Global financial markets are continuing to experience disruptions, including severely diminished liquidity and credit availability, declines in consumer confidence, declines in economic growth, increases in unemployment rates, and uncertainty about economic stability. Given these uncertainties, there is no assurance that there will not be further deterioration in the global economy, the global financial markets and consumer confidence. Any economic downturn generally could cause a drop in government spending and business investment, which would have a material adverse effect on our business. Further, as a result of the current global economic situation, there may be a disruption or delay in performance by the Company’s third-party contractors and suppliers. If such third parties are unable to adequately satisfy their contractual commitments to us in a timely manner, our business could be adversely affected.

If we fail to hire a chief financial officer, we may be unable to implement and monitor financial controls sufficient to ensure maximum profitability and compliance with applicable regulatory requirements.

We currently have no Chief Financial Officer (“CFO”) and it is unlikely we will hire a CFO in the near future due to the expense of employing a CFO and our limited capital resources. Monica Yaple is a consultant working as our Treasurer and she also presently acts as our principal accounting officer. Due to our limited internal organizational structure, our financial controls may be ineffective. Accordingly, unless we obtain the services of a qualified CFO, we may be unable to implement and monitor financial controls sufficient to ensure maximum profitability and compliance with applicable regulatory requirements. Such regulatory requirements include, among others, certifications and protocols set forth in the Sarbanes Oxley Act of 2002 and related laws and regulations governing accounting, and financial and auditing standards and practices designed to ensure accurate and transparent financial information regarding the financial health and prospects of companies.

We are not subject to certain reporting requirements under the federal securities laws – accordingly, our stockholders do not have the benefit of certain disclosures prior to voting on material transactions or the benefit of reviewing information regarding our officers’ and directors’ stock ownership and their transactions involving our securities.

We are currently subject to SEC reporting requirements under Section 15(d) of the Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”). Because we have not filed a registration statement under Section 12 of the Exchange Act, we are not subject to the SEC’s proxy rules and related information requirements of the Exchange Act. Further, our officers, directors and stockholders owning 10% or more of our outstanding capital stock are not required to file reports with the SEC concerning their stock ownership and stock trading activity under Section 16 of the Exchange Act, which provides for timely disclosure of insider transactions. Accordingly, our shareholders do not have the benefit of (i) certain disclosures required under the SEC’s proxy rules in connection with their approval of certain corporate actions (e.g., significant acquisitions and election of directors); and (ii) disclosures about our officers’ and directors’ ownership of and their transactions involving the Company’s securities.

We could incur significant damages if we are unable to adequately discharge our contractual obligations.

Our failure to comply with contract requirements or to meet our clients’ performance expectations on a contract could materially and adversely affect our financial performance and our reputation. This, in turn, would impact our ability to compete for new clients and contracts. Our failure to meet contractual obligations could also result in substantial actual and consequential damages under the terms of such contracts. In addition, some of our contracts require us to indemnify clients for our failure to meet performance standards and/or contain liquidated damages provisions and financial penalties related to performance failures. Although we do have liability insurance, the policy limits may not be adequate to provide protection against all such potential liabilities.

We have financial exposure on our fixed-price contracts because we are required to complete a project even if the costs exceed the revenues we generate on such fixed-price contract.

We presently provide and expect to provide services under fixed-price and performance-based arrangements. Generally, under our fixed-price contracts, we receive a specified fee regardless of our cost to perform under such contracts (compared with performance-based contracts under which we earn fees on a per-transaction basis). If we underestimate the cost to complete a contract, we will still be required to complete the work specified under such contract, which could result in a loss to us. To earn a profit on these fixed-price contracts, we must accurately estimate costs involved and assess the probability of meeting the specified objectives, realizing the expected units of work or completing individual transactions, within the contracted time period. We expect to recognize revenues on these contracts, including a portion of estimated profit, as costs are incurred.

Requests for Proposals (RFPs) to secure government contracts are time consuming to prepare and our ability to successfully respond to RFPs will impact our operations.

A substantial portion of our clients will be state or local government authorities. To market our services to government clients, we will likely be required to respond to Request for Proposals or “RFPs.” To do so effectively, we must estimate accurately our cost structure for servicing a proposed contract, the time required to establish operations and likely terms of the proposals submitted by competitors. We must also assemble and submit a large volume of information within an RFP’s rigid timetable. Our ability to respond successfully to RFPs will greatly impact our business. There is no assurance that we will be awarded any contracts through the RFP process, or that our submitted RFPs will result in profitable contracts.

Our government clients may terminate our contracts prior to completion, which could result in revenue shortfalls and reduce profitability or cause losses on government contracts.

Many of our contracts with government agencies contain initial or base periods of one or more years, as well as option periods typically covering more than half of the contract’s initial duration. However, our government clients are under no obligation to exercise the option to extend the contract term. The profitability of some of our contracts could be adversely impacted if such options are not exercised and the contract term is not extended accordingly. Additionally, our contracts will likely contain provisions permitting a government client to terminate the contract on short notice, with or without cause. The unexpected termination of significant contracts could result in significant revenue shortfalls. If revenue shortfalls occur and are not offset by corresponding reductions in expenses, our business could be adversely affected. We cannot anticipate if, when or to what extent a client might terminate its contracts with us.

We are subject to government audits and our failure to comply with applicable laws, regulations and standards could subject us to civil and criminal penalties and administrative sanctions.

 The government agencies we contract with have the authority to audit and investigate our contracts with them. As part of that process, a government agency may review our performance on a contract, our pricing practices, our cost structure and our compliance with applicable laws, regulations and standards. If the agency determines that we have improperly allocated costs to a specific contract, we will not be reimbursed for those costs and we will be required to refund the amount of any such costs that have been previously reimbursed. If a government audit identifies improper activities by us or we otherwise determine that these activities have occurred, we could be subject to civil and criminal penalties and administrative sanctions, including termination of contracts, forfeitures of profits, suspension of payments, fines and suspension or disqualification from doing business with the government. Any adverse determination could adversely impact our ability to bid for Requests for Proposals (RFPs) in one or more jurisdictions.

 Unions may interfere with our ability to obtain contracts.

 Our success will depend in part on our ability to win profitable contracts to administer and manage programs that may have been previously administered by government employees. Many government employees, however, belong to labor unions with considerable financial resources and lobbying networks. Unions have in the past and are likely to continue to apply political pressure on legislators and other officials seeking to outsource government programs. Union opposition may result in fewer opportunities for us to service government agencies.

We rely on our relationship with government agencies to obtain contracts.

To facilitate our ability to prepare bids in response to RFPs, we expect to rely in part on establishing and maintaining relationships with officials of various government entities and agencies. These relationships will enable us to provide informal input and advice to the government entities and agencies prior to the development of an RFP. We also expect to engage marketing consultants, including lobbyists, to establish and maintain relationships with elected officials and appointed members of government agencies. The effectiveness of these consultants may be reduced or eliminated if a significant political change occurs. We may be unable to successfully manage our relationships with government entities and agencies and with elected officials and appointees and any failure to do so may adversely affect our ability to bid successfully for RFPs.

 We have significant competition in bidding for government contracts from large national and international organizations.

 The government contracting industry is subject to intense competition. Many of our competitors are national and international in scope and have greater resources than we do. Substantial resources could enable certain competitors to “low bid” on government RFPs or take other measures in an effort to gain market share. In addition, we may be unable to compete for a certain large government contract because we may not be able to meet an RFP’s requirement to obtain and post a large cash performance bond. Also, in some geographic areas, we face competition from smaller consulting firms with established reputations and political relationships. There is no assurance that we will compete successfully against our existing or any new competitors.

We may not be able to effectively control and manage our growth, which would negatively impact our operations.

 We have operated our current line of business for a little over three years, and we expect to grow in the near future as our business develops and becomes established. If our business grows as we anticipate, it will be necessary for us to manage our expansion in an orderly fashion. Any significant growth in our activities or in the market for our services will require extension of our managerial, operational, marketing and other resources. Future growth will also impose significant additional responsibilities upon the members of management to identify, recruit, maintain, integrate, and motivate new employees. Our failure to manage growth effectively may lead to operational inefficiencies that will have a negative effect on our profitability. Additionally, if our growth comes at the expense of providing quality service and generating reasonable profits, our ability to successfully bid for contracts and our profitability will be adversely affected. We cannot assure investors that we will be able to effectively manage any future growth we may experience.

 Failure to obtain adequate insurance coverage could put the Company at risk for uninsured losses.

 We do currently have liability insurance. Some or all of the Company’s customers may require insurance as a requirement to conduct business with the Company. We may be unable to obtain or maintain adequate liability insurance on acceptable terms, if at all, and there is a risk that our insurance will not provide adequate coverage against our potential losses. Additionally, there are certain types of losses that may not be insurable at a cost that the Company can afford or at all. Claims or losses in excess of any insurance coverage we may obtain, or the lack of insurance coverage, could put the Company at risk of loss for any uninsured loss, which would have a material adverse effect on our business and financial condition.

 We are dependent on our President and Chief Executive Officer, and other key personnel, the loss of which could harm our business.

 The Company depends on Mark Cola, its President and Chief Executive Officer, as well as key scientific and other personnel. The loss of any of these individuals could harm the Company’s business and significantly delay or prevent the achievement of business objectives. In addition, our delivery of services will be labor-intensive: when the Company is awarded a government contract, we may need to quickly hire project leaders and case management personnel. The additional staff may also create a concurrent demand for increased administrative personnel. The success of our business will require that we attract, develop, motivate and retain:

 Innovative, experienced and technically proficient individuals are in great demand and are likely to remain a limited resource. We may be unable to continue to attract and retain desirable executive officers and senior managers. Our inability to hire sufficient personnel on a timely basis or the loss of significant numbers of executive officers and senior managers could adversely affect our business.

 Because we have limited capital resources, we expect to be dependent on cash flow and payments from customers in order to meet our expense obligations.

 A number of factors may cause our revenues, cash flow and operating results to vary from quarter to quarter, including the following:

 Changes in the volume of activity and the number of contracts commenced, completed or terminated during any quarter may cause significant variations in our cash flow from operations because a significant portion of our expenses are fixed. Fixed expenses include, rent, payroll, insurance, employee benefits, taxes and other administrative costs and overhead. Moreover, we expect to incur significant operating expenses during the start-up and early stages of large contracts and typically do not receive corresponding payments in that same quarter.

 We may make acquisitions in the future that we are unable to effectively manage given our limited resources.

 We may choose to grow our business by continuing to acquire other entities. We may be unable to manage businesses that we have acquired or integrate them successfully without incurring substantial expenses, delays or other problems that could negatively impact our results of operations. Moreover, business combinations involve additional risks, including:

 Also, client dissatisfaction or performance problems with an acquired firm could materially and adversely affect our reputation as a whole. Further, the acquired businesses may not achieve the revenues and earnings we anticipated.

 The Company must keep up with new and rapidly evolving technologies.

 Some of the Company’s activities involve developing products or processes that are based upon new, rapidly evolving technologies. The ability to commercialize these technologies could fail for a variety of reasons, both within and outside of the Company’s control.

Our success depends upon our ability to protect our intellectual property rights.

Our success in part depends on the Company's ability to maintain the proprietary nature of our technology and other trade secrets. To do so, we will be required to prosecute and maintain patents, obtain new patents and pursue trade secret and other intellectual property protection. We were awarded two U.S. patents with respect to our munitions technology. We were also awarded a U.S. patent with respect to our IPQA® technology, in addition to filing a new patent application pertaining to our IPQA® technology and rapid qualification of additive manufacturing for metal parts. Also, we filed a PCT patent application pertaining to the advanced dental implant technology. However, the efforts we have taken to protect our proprietary rights may not be sufficient or effective. Our business is also subject to the risk that our issued patents will not provide us with significant competitive advantages if, for example, a competitor were to independently develop or obtain similar or superior technologies. Prosecuting infringement claims can be expensive and time-consuming. In addition, in an infringement proceeding, a court may decide that a patent owned by us is not valid or is unenforceable, or may refuse to stop the other party from using the technology at issue on the grounds that the Company’s patents do not cover its technology. An adverse determination of any litigation or defense proceedings could put one or more of our patents at risk of being invalidated or interpreted narrowly and could put the Company’s patent applications at the risk of not issuing. Any significant impairment of our intellectual property rights could harm our business or our ability to compete. The unauthorized use of our intellectual property could make it more expensive to do business and harm our operating results.

 We may be sued by third parties who claim that we have infringed their intellectual property rights.

 We may be exposed to future litigation by third parties based on claims that our research, development and commercialization activities infringe the intellectual property rights of third parties to which the Company does not hold licenses or other rights, or that we have misappropriated the trade secrets of others. Any litigation or claims against us, whether or not valid, could result in substantial costs, and could place a significant strain on our financial and human resources. In addition, if successful, such claims could cause the Company to pay substantial damages. Furthermore, because of the substantial amount of discovery required in connection with intellectual property litigation, there is a risk that some of our confidential information could be compromised by disclosure during this type of litigation.

 Our services are subject to government regulation, changes in which may have an adverse effect on the Company.

 Our business activities subject us to a variety of federal, state and local laws and regulations. For example, we are required to comply with applicable provisions of the International Traffic in Arms Regulations, as well as other export controls and laws governing the manufacture and distribution of munitions technology. Changes in the laws and regulations applicable to our business activities may have an adverse effect on our operations and profitability by making it more expensive and less profitable for us to do business. Additionally, the market for our services depends largely on federal and state legislative programs. These programs can be modified or amended at any time by acts of federal and state governments. Further, if additional programs are not proposed or enacted, or if previously enacted programs are challenged, repealed or invalidated, our growth strategy could be adversely impacted.

 Our Bylaws contain provisions indemnifying our officers and directors against all costs, charges, and expenses incurred by them.

 Our Bylaws contain provisions with respect to the indemnification of our officers and directors against all costs, charges, and expenses, including an amount paid to settle an action or satisfy a judgment, actually and reasonably incurred by an officer or director, including an amount paid to settle an action or satisfy a judgment in a civil, criminal, or administrative action or proceeding to which he is made a party by reason of being or having been one of our directors or officers.

Our Bylaws do not contain anti-takeover provisions, which could result in a change of our management and directors if there is a takeover of us.

 We do not currently have a shareholder rights plan or any anti-takeover provisions in our Bylaws. Without any anti-takeover provisions, there is no deterrent for a takeover of our company, which may result in a change in our management and directors.

 Our operating costs could be higher than we expect, and this could reduce our future profitability.

 In addition to general economic conditions, market fluctuations and international risks, significant increases in operating, development and implementation costs could adversely affect our company due to numerous factors, many of which are beyond our control.

 Our existing directors, officers and key employees hold a substantial amount of our common stock and may be able to prevent other shareholders from influencing significant corporate decisions.

 As of March 31, 2014, our directors and executive officers beneficially owned approximately 6.15% of our outstanding common stock. These shareholders, if they act together, may be able to direct the outcome of matters requiring approval of the shareholders, including the election of our directors and other corporate actions such as:

 The decisions of these shareholders may conflict with our interests or those of our other shareholders.

 Risks Related to Our Common Stock

 We do not foresee paying cash dividends in the foreseeable future and, as a result, our investors’ sole source of gain, if any, will depend on capital appreciation, if any.

 We do not plan to declare or pay any cash dividends on our shares of common stock in the foreseeable future and currently intend to retain any future earnings for funding growth of the Company’s business. As a result, investors should not rely on an investment in our securities if they require the investment to produce dividend income. Capital appreciation, if any, of our shares may be investors’ sole source of gain for the foreseeable future.

 Our securities are considered highly speculative.

 Our securities must be considered highly speculative, generally because of our limited operating history.  We have neither generated any material revenues nor have we realized a profit from our operations to date and there is no assurance that we will operate on a profitable basis.  Since we have not generated any material revenues and have only limited capital, we expect that we will need to raise additional monies through the sale of our equity securities or debt in order to continue our business operations.

Our stock is thinly traded, so you may be unable to sell your shares at or near the quoted bid prices if you need to sell a significant number of your shares.

 Although the shares of our common stock are quoted on the OTC Bulletin Board, there has been very limited trading in our shares, meaning that the number of persons interested in purchasing our common shares at any given time is relatively small or non-existent. This situation is attributable to a number of factors, including the fact that we are a new company, our business is still in the early stages, and that we are a small company which is unknown to stock analysts, stock brokers, institutional investors and others in the investment community that generate or influence sales volume. Even if we came to the attention of such persons, they tend to be risk-averse and would be reluctant to follow an unproven, early stage company such as ours or purchase or recommend the purchase of our shares until such time as we became more seasoned and viable. As a consequence, there may be periods of several days or more when trading activity in our shares is minimal or non-existent, as compared to a seasoned issuer which has a large and steady volume of trading activity that will generally support continuous sales without an adverse effect on share price. We cannot give you any assurance that a broader or more active public trading market for our common shares will develop or be sustained, or that current trading levels will be sustained. Due to these conditions, we can give you no assurance that you will be able to sell your shares if you need money or otherwise desire to liquidate your shares or that any such sale would be at or near ask prices.

 The price of our common stock could be highly volatile.

 It is likely that our common stock will be subject to price volatility, low volumes of trades, and large spreads in bid and ask prices quoted by market makers.  Due to the low volume of shares that may be traded on any trading day, persons buying or selling in relatively small quantities may easily influence prices of our common stock.  This low volume of trades could also cause the price of our stock to fluctuate greatly, with large percentage changes in price occurring in any trading day session.  Holders of our common stock may also not be able to liquidate their investment readily or may be forced to sell at depressed prices due to low volume trading.  If high spreads between the bid and ask prices of our common stock exist at the time of a purchase, the price of the common stock would need to appreciate substantially on a relative percentage basis for an investor to recoup an investment in our shares.  Broad market fluctuations and general economic and political conditions may also adversely affect the market price of our common stock.  No assurance can be given that an orderly and active market in our common stock will develop or be sustained.  If an orderly and active market does not develop, holders of our common stock may be unable to sell their shares, if at all. 

Our common stock may be considered a “penny stock,” and thereby be subject to additional sale and trading regulations that may make it more difficult to sell.

 Our common stock may be a “penny stock” if it meets one or more of the following conditions (i) the stock trades at a price less than $5.00 per share; (ii) it is not traded on a “recognized” national exchange; (iii) it is not quoted on the Nasdaq Capital Market, or even if so, has a price less than $5.00 per share; or (iv) is issued by a company that has been in business less than three years with net tangible assets less than $5 million.

 The principal result or effect of being designated a “penny stock” is that securities broker-dealers participating in sales of our common stock will be subject to the “penny stock” regulations set forth in Rules 15-2 through 15g-9 promulgated under the Exchange Act. For example, Rule 15g-2 requires broker-dealers dealing in penny stocks to provide potential investors with a document disclosing the risks of penny stocks and to obtain a manually signed and dated written receipt of the document at least two business days before effecting any transaction in a penny stock for the investor’s account. Moreover, Rule 15g-9 requires broker-dealers in penny stocks to approve the account of any investor for transactions in such stocks before selling any penny stock to that investor. This procedure requires the broker-dealer to (i) obtain from the investor information concerning his or her financial situation, investment experience and investment objectives; (ii) reasonably determine, based on that information, that transactions in penny stocks are suitable for the investor and that the investor has sufficient knowledge and experience as to be reasonably capable of evaluating the risks of penny stock transactions; (iii) provide the investor with a written statement setting forth the basis on which the broker-dealer made the determination in (ii) above; and (iv) receive a signed and dated copy of such statement from the investor, confirming that it accurately reflects the investor’s financial situation, investment experience and investment objectives. Compliance with these requirements may make it more difficult and time consuming for holders of our common stock to resell their shares to third parties or to otherwise dispose of them in the market or otherwise.

 If securities or industry analysts do not publish research or reports or publish unfavorable research about our business, the price and trading volume of our common stock could decline.

 The future trading market for our common stock will be influenced in part by any research and reports that securities or industry 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 securities or industry analysts commence coverage of us the trading price for our common stock and other securities would be negatively affected. In the event we obtain securities or industry analyst coverage, if one or more of the analysts who covers us downgrades our securities, the price of our securities would likely decline. If one or more of these analysts ceases to cover us or fails to publish regular reports on us, interest in the purchase of our securities could decrease, which could cause the price of our common stock and other securities and their trading volume to decline.

 If we are deemed to be an issuer of “penny stock”, the protection provided by the federal securities laws relating to forward-looking statements will not apply to us.

 Although federal securities laws provide a safe harbor for forward-looking statements made by a public company that files reports under the federal securities laws, this safe harbor is not available to issuers of penny stocks. As a result, if we are a penny stock, we will not have the benefit of this safe harbor protection in the event of any legal action based upon a claim that the material provided by us contained a material misstatement of fact or was misleading in any material respect because of our failure to include any statements necessary to make the statements not misleading. Such an action could hurt our financial condition.

 Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) sales practice requirements may also limit a stockholder’s ability to buy and sell our common stock.

 FINRA has adopted rules that require that in recommending an investment to a customer, a broker-dealer must have reasonable grounds for believing that the investment is suitable for that customer. Prior to recommending speculative low priced securities to their non-institutional customers, broker-dealers must make reasonable efforts to obtain information about the customer’s financial status, tax status, investment objectives and other information. Under interpretations of these rules, FINRA believes that there is a high probability that speculative low priced securities will not be suitable for at least some customers. FINRA requirements make it more difficult for broker-dealers to recommend that their customers buy our common stock, which may limit your ability to buy and sell our stock and have an adverse effect on the market for our shares.

 We may incur significant costs to ensure compliance with U.S. corporate governance and accounting requirements.

 We may incur significant costs associated with our public company reporting requirements, costs associated with applicable corporate governance requirements, including requirements under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, and other rules implemented by the Securities and Exchange Commission. We expect all of these applicable rules and regulations to significantly increase our legal and financial compliance costs and to make some activities more time consuming and costly. We also expect that these applicable rules and regulations may make it more difficult and more expensive for us to obtain director and officer liability insurance and we may be required to accept reduced policy limits and coverage or incur substantially higher costs to obtain the same or similar coverage. As a result, it may be more difficult for us to attract and retain qualified individuals to serve on our board of directors or as executive officers.

If we fail to maintain effective internal controls over financial reporting, the price of our common stock may be adversely affected.

 As a public reporting company, we are required to establish and maintain appropriate internal controls over financial reporting. Failure to establish those controls, or any failure of those controls once established, could adversely impact our public disclosures regarding our business, financial condition or results of operations. Any failure of these controls could also prevent us from maintaining accurate accounting records and discovering accounting errors and financial frauds.

 Rules adopted by the SEC pursuant to Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 require annual assessment of our internal control over financial reporting. The standards that must be met for management to assess the internal control over financial reporting as effective are complex, and require significant documentation, testing and possible remediation to meet the detailed standards. We may encounter problems or delays in completing activities necessary to make an assessment of our internal control over financial reporting. If we cannot assess our internal control over financial reporting as effective, investor confidence and share value may be negatively impacted. In addition, management’s assessment of internal controls over financial reporting may identify weaknesses and conditions that need to be addressed in our internal controls over financial reporting or other matters that may raise concerns for investors. Any actual or perceived weaknesses and conditions that need to be addressed in our internal control over financial reporting (including those weaknesses identified in our periodic reports), or disclosure of management’s assessment of our internal controls over financial reporting may have an adverse impact on the price of our common stock.

 Obtaining additional capital through the sale of common stock will result in dilution of equity interests.

 We plan to raise additional funds in the future by issuing additional shares of common stock or other securities, which may include securities such as convertible debentures, warrants or preferred stock that are convertible into common stock. Any such sale of common stock or other securities will lead to further dilution of the equity ownership of existing holders of our common stock. Additionally, the existing options, warrants and conversion rights may hinder future equity offerings, and the exercise of those options, warrants and conversion rights may have an adverse effect on the value of our stock. If any such options, warrants or conversion rights are exercised at a price below the then current market price of our shares, then the market price of our stock could decrease upon the sale of such additional securities. Further, if any such options, warrants or conversion rights are exercised at a price below the price at which any particular shareholder purchased shares, then that particular shareholder will experience dilution in his or her investment.

 Not applicable.

On October 1, 2013, we renewed our lease with Russ Hedrick dba Hedrick Group LLC for our office space located at 100 Cienega Street, Santa Fe, New Mexico 87501 for a term of one year. The office space consists of 1,348 square feet. Our monthly rent expense under the lease is $3,000.

On October 21, 2013, we renewed our lease commencing on November 1, 2013 for our development lab space located at 3900 Paseo del Sol, Santa Fe, New Mexico 87507, unit A201-202. Such property is leased at a monthly rate of $755, and consists of 807.2 square feet. The term of the lease expires on October 31, 2014.

We believe that our facilities are suitable for our current needs.

 Neither Sigma Labs, Inc., nor any of its subsidiaries are currently a party to any legal proceedings. However, we may occasionally become subject to legal proceedings and claims that arise in the ordinary course of our business. It is impossible for us to predict with any certainty the outcome of pending disputes, and we cannot predict whether any liability arising from pending claims and litigation will be material in relation to our consolidated financial position or results of operations.

 Not Applicable.

PART II

 Market Information

Our common stock is quoted for trading on the OTC Bulletin Board under the symbol “SGLB.” Trading in our common stock during 2012 and certain periods of 2013 has been extremely limited. Additionally, during 2012, there were many days in which no shares were traded. While trading increased in our stock in 2013, that trading was sporadic.

 The following table sets forth the range of closing prices for our common stock for the quarters indicated. Such quotations reflect inter-dealer prices, without retail mark-up, mark-down or commission and may not necessarily represent actual transactions.

Shareholders

As of March 31, 2014, there were approximately 565 holders of record of our common stock based on information provided by our transfer agent.         

Dividends

 We have not paid any dividends on our common stock to date and do not anticipate that we will pay dividends in the foreseeable future. Any payment of cash dividends on our common stock in the future will be dependent upon the amount of funds legally available, our earnings, if any, our financial condition, our anticipated capital requirements and other factors that the Board of Directors may think are relevant. However, we currently intend for the foreseeable future to follow a policy of retaining all of our earnings, if any, to finance the development and expansion of our business and, therefore, do not expect to pay any dividends on our common stock in the foreseeable future.

 Securities Authorized For Issuance Under Equity Compensation Plans

 The following table contains information regarding our equity compensation plans as of December 31, 2013:

(1) On March 9, 2011, the Company's Board of Directors approved the Company's 2011 Equity Incentive Plan, which was approved on March 31, 2011 by holders of at least a majority of the issued and outstanding shares of common stock of the Company. As of December 31, 2013, the Company issued an aggregate of 29,625,000 shares of the Company's common stock, subject to restrictions, pursuant to the Company's 2011 Equity Incentive Plan.

(2) On March 15, 2013, the Company’s Board of Directors approved the Company’s 2013 Equity Incentive Plan. The 2013 Equity Incentive Plan was approved by holders of at least a majority of the issued and outstanding shares of common stock of the Company on October 10, 2013. Pursuant to the 2013 Equity Incentive Plan, the Company is authorized to grant "incentive stock options" and "non-qualified stock options", grant or sell common stock subject to restrictions or without restrictions, and grant stock appreciation rights to employees, officers, directors, consultants and advisers of the Company and its subsidiaries. A total of 30,000,000 shares of common stock of the Company are reserved for issuance under our 2013 Equity Incentive Plan. Incentive stock options granted under the 2013 Equity Incentive Plan are intended to qualify as “incentive stock options” within the meaning of Section 422 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”). Non-qualified stock options granted under the 2013 Equity Incentive Plan are not intended to qualify as incentive stock options under the Code. As of December 31, 2013, the Company issued no equity awards under the 2013 Equity Incentive Plan.

Recent Sales Of Unregistered Securities

 Not applicable.

 Repurchase of Shares

 We did not repurchase any of our shares during the fourth quarter of the fiscal year covered by this report.

 Not applicable to a “smaller reporting company” as defined in Item 10(f)(1) of SEC Regulation S-K.

 ITEM 7.                   MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS.

 Critical Accounting Policies

 The preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported assets, liabilities, sales and expenses in the accompanying financial statements. Critical accounting policies are those that require the most subjective and complex judgments, often employing the use of estimates about the effect of matters that are inherently uncertain. Such critical accounting policies, including the assumptions and judgments underlying them, are disclosed in Note 1 to the Consolidated Financial Statements included in this Annual Report. However, we do not believe that there are any alternative methods of accounting for our operations that would have a material affect on our financial statements.

Results Of Operations

 Year Ended December 31, 2013 Compared to the Year Ended December 31, 2012.

 We expect to generate revenues primarily under our engineering consulting services contracts to businesses that seek to improve their production processes and/or manipulate and improve the most functional characteristics of the materials and other input components used in their business operations. During the fiscal year ended December 31, 2012, B6 Sigma and Sumner generated $986,499 in revenues, as compared to $1,071,439 in revenues that were generated by B6 Sigma and Sumner during the fiscal year ended December 31, 2013 ("fiscal 2013"). The revenues we generated during fiscal 2012 and fiscal 2013 were primarily generated from engineering consulting services we provided to third parties during these periods.

 In fiscal 2012, B6 Sigma along with Sumner Associates generated $986,499 in revenues from consulting contracts. Specifically, we generated:

 In fiscal 2013, B6 Sigma along with Sumner Associates generated $1,071,439 in revenues from consulting and other contracts. Specifically, we generated:

Our general and administrative expenses for fiscal 2013 were $724,223, as compared to $649,926 in fiscal 2012. Our payroll expenses for fiscal 2013 were $247,619, as compared to $326,242 for fiscal 2012. Our expenses relating to non-cash compensation for fiscal 2013 were $258,400, as compared to $141,500 for fiscal 2012.

General and administrative expenses principally include organizational expenses and outside services fees, the largest component of which consists of services in connection with our obligations as an SEC reporting company, in addition to other legal and accounting fees. The net increase in general and administrative expenses, payroll expenses and non-cash compensation expenses in fiscal 2013 as compared to fiscal 2012 is principally the result of increased outside services costs offset by decreased payroll obligations and increased incentive compensation associated with our operations. The Company incurred $258,400 of non-cash compensation expenses during 2013, $35,000 of which was the result of the vesting of 1,750,000 shares of the 20,000,000 shares of Company common stock, subject to restrictions, issued to five of our employees pursuant to the Company’s 2011 Equity Incentive Plan. The other $223,400 was noncash compensation paid to consultants during 2013.

We expect our general and administrative expenses to increase during the remainder of 2014, as we continue to actively pursue our business plans, develop our technology, and increase our operations and marketing. We expect our payroll and non-cash compensation expenses to increase as we continue to grow our business.

Our net loss for fiscal 2013 increased overall and totaled $734,117, as compared to $685,566 for fiscal 2012. This increase in fiscal 2013 is primarily the result of the impaired loss of $87,340 and the increased revenue and decreased payroll expenses which outweighed the increased general & administration expenses and non-cash compensation expenses related to our operations.

Liquidity And Capital Resources

As of December 31, 2013, we had $992,448 in cash and a working capital surplus of $1,180,973, as compared with $150,071 in cash and a working capital surplus of $315,574 as of December 31, 2012. On January 10, 2014, in a private offering with an accredited investor, we sold an aggregate of 43,750,000 shares of our common stock for aggregate net proceeds of $3,301,000, after deducting fees and expenses relating to the offering. In connection with the purchase and sale of the shares, we issued the investor a warrant to purchase up to 14,259,259 shares of our common stock, at an exercise price of $0.15 per share. The warrant has a term of nine-months from the date of issuance (i.e., January 10, 2014). We also issued a warrant to a consultant to purchase up to 2,187,500 shares of common stock at $0.08 per share exercisable for a two-year period.

We plan to obtain additional funding through private sales of equity and/or debt securities.

We plan to generate revenues primarily by marketing and selling our manufacturing and materials technologies. However, for the period from our inception through fiscal 2013, we generated revenues and financed our operations primarily from engineering consulting services we provided during this period and through private sales of our common stock.

We expect that our continued development in fiscal 2013 of our IPQA ^® will enable us to commercialize this technology in the remainder of 2014 and 2015. However, until commercialization of such technologies, we plan to fund our development activities and operating expenses by providing consulting services concerning our areas of expertise, i.e., materials and manufacturing quality assurance technologies, and through the use of proceeds from sales of our securities.

Our revenues have increased on a consolidated basis as a result of consulting contracts to which B6 Sigma and Sumner are parties. As of March 31, 2014, B6 Sigma has two active consulting contracts with respect to which we expect to perform and generate up to approximately $266,000 in revenues in fiscal 2014. Management decided in March 2014 to discontinue servicing the contract previously held by Sumner.

Some of these consulting contracts are fixed price contracts, for which we will receive a specified fee regardless of our cost to perform under such contract. In connection with entering into these fixed-contract consulting arrangements, we are required to estimate our costs of performance. To actually earn a profit on these contracts, we must accurately estimate costs involved and assess the probability of meeting the specified objectives, realizing the expected units of work or completing individual transactions, within the contracted time period. Accordingly, if we under-estimate the cost to complete a contract, we remain obligated to complete the work based on our initial cost estimate, which would reduce the amount of profit actually earned under the contract. Similarly, some of Sumner's consulting contracts are fixed price contracts with the same cost considerations faced by the Company, as described above.

We have no credit lines or facilities as of March 31, 2014, nor have we ever had a credit facility since our inception.

Based on the funds we have as of March 31, 2014 and the proceeds that we expect to receive under our consulting agreements and from private offerings of the Company's stock, we believe that we will have sufficient funds to pay our administrative and other operating expenses during 2014. Until we are able to generate significant revenues from sales of our technologies, our ability to continue to fund our liquidity and working capital needs will be dependent upon revenues from existing and future consulting contracts of B6 Sigma, and proceeds received from sales of Sigma Labs' securities.

Inflation and changing prices have had no effect on our continuing operations over our two most recent fiscal years.

 We have no off-balance sheet arrangements as defined in Item 303(a) of Regulation S-K.

 Not applicable to a “smaller reporting company.”

 Financial Statements are referred to in Item 15, listed in the Index to Financial Statements and filed and included elsewhere herein as a part of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

ITEM 9.                   CHANGES IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE.

 None.

 Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures

 Rule 15d-15(e) under the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), defines the term “disclosure controls and procedures” as those controls and procedures designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed by a company in the reports that it files or submits under the Exchange Act is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in the Securities and Exchange Commission rules and forms and that such information is accumulated and communicated to the company’s management, including its principal executive and principal financial officers, or persons performing similar functions, as appropriate to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure.

 Based upon an evaluation of the effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures performed by our management, with the participation of our Chief Executive Officer and Principal Accounting Officer, as of the end of the period covered by this annual report, our management concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures were effective.

 Management’s Annual Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting

 Management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting, as such term is defined in Exchange Act Rule 15d-15(f) under the Exchange Act. Our management, with the participation of our Chief Executive Officer and Principal Accounting Officer, conducted an evaluation of the effectiveness of our control over financial reporting based on the framework in Internal Control-Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (“COSO”). Based on management’s evaluation under the framework, management has concluded that our internal control over financial reporting was effective as of December 31, 2013.

 We continuously seek to improve and strengthen our control processes to ensure that all of our controls and procedures are adequate and effective. Any failure to implement and maintain improvements in the controls over our financial reporting could cause us to fail to meet our reporting obligations under the Securities and Exchange Commission’s rules and regulations. Any failure to improve our internal controls to address the weakness we have identified could also cause investors to lose confidence in our reported financial information, which could have a negative impact on the trading price of our common stock.

 This annual report does not include an attestation report of the Company’s registered public accounting firm regarding internal control over financial reporting. Management’s report was not subject to attestation by our registered public accounting firm pursuant to Securities and Exchange Commission rules that permit us to provide only management’s report in this annual report.

 There have been no changes in our internal controls over financial reporting during the fourth quarter of the year ended December 31, 2013 that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal controls over financial reporting.

Effective, October 31, 2013, Tom O'Mara was appointed as a member of the Board of Directors of the Company. Effective December 31, 2013, Damon Giovanielli resigned as a director of the Company. Effective February 20 and 21, 2014, Allen Mason resigned as interim Chairman of the Board of Directors and as a director, respectively. Neither Messrs. Giovanielli’s nor Mason’s resignation was the result of a disagreement with the Company on any matter relating to the Company’s operations, policies or practices.

PART III

 The following table sets forth the name, age and position held by each of our executive officers and directors as of March 31, 2014.

Each director will serve until the next annual meeting of the stockholders of the Company or until his successor is elected and qualified.

Business Experience of Directors and Management

The following describes the significant business experience of our directors and executive officers:

  Mark Cola was appointed as Chief Executive Officer of the Company on September 20, 2012 and President, Chief Operating Officer and a director of the Company in September 2010. From June 2006 through April 2010, Mr. Cola served as Director of Operations for the Beyond6 Sigma Division of TMC Corporation.  In addition, Mr. Cola has over 30 years of experience in the aerospace and nuclear industries, including with Rockwell International, SPECO Division of Kelsey-Hayes Co., Westinghouse in the Naval Nuclear Reactors Program, Houston Lighting & Power, and within the NNSA Weapons Complex at Los Alamos National Laboratory at which he held various technical and managerial positions including team leader and group leader of the welding and joining section as well as an advanced manufacturing technology group, respectively. He has also worked as a Research Engineer at Edison Welding Institute and for Thermadyne’s Stoody Division, a leading manufacturer of wear-resistant materials.  

At Beyond6 Sigma, Mr. Cola worked with a wide range of clients ranging from aerospace to defense systems.  His expertise is in manufacturing process development, friction welding, light alloys such as titanium and aluminum, mechanical, physical and welding metallurgy, and nickel-based super-alloys for harsh environments. Mr. Cola served as the Technical Co-Chairman for the inaugural National Nuclear Security Administration Future Technologies Conference held in May 2004, and he is a principal reviewer for the American Welding Society’s Welding Journal. Mr. Cola earned a B.S. in Metallurgical Engineering and an M.S. in Welding Engineering from The Ohio State University.

Our board of directors believes that Mr. Cola is qualified to serve as a member of the board because of Mr. Cola's extensive prior experience as a manager of a number of engineering companies and his scientific and academic qualifications as well as his expertise in matters pertaining to the operation of manufacturing and technology companies.

Monica Yaple was appointed as Treasurer of Sigma Labs on September 20, 2012, and served as Chief Financial Officer from September 20, 2012 until January 2014. Ms. Yaple is a Certified Public Accountant and has been providing accounting and consulting services for Sigma Labs since January, 2012. Ms. Yaple has been practicing public accounting in New Mexico since 2001, and became a CPA in 2003. She spent five years with Accounting & Consulting Group, a New Mexico regional public accounting firm. She then was a partner of Griego Professional Services, an Albuquerque public accounting firm, for six years. She is currently the sole owner of her own firm, Monica Yaple, CPA, where she provides accounting and consulting services for a variety of clients. Ms. Yaple graduated from Hardin-Simmons University with a BBA degree in Accounting.

Michael Thacker was appointed as a director of Sigma Labs on May 4, 2012 and as Secretary on September 20, 2012. Mr. Thacker also serves as a director and Secretary for Sumner Associates, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Sigma Labs. Mr. Thacker has over 40 years of experience in marketing, sales, management, computer and earth science technology. Mr. Thacker’s career includes employment by IBM, the A.C. Nielson Co., and Dun and Bradstreet. Mr. Thacker graduated from Stanford, the Colorado School of Mines, and served as a reserve officer in the U.S. Army/Artillery.

Our board of directors believes that Mr. Thacker is qualified to serve as a member of the board because of Mr. Thacker's extensive prior experience as a director of technology companies and his scientific and academic qualifications.

Tom O'Mara was appointed as a director of Sigma Labs on October 31, 2013. Mr. O'Mara has over 45 years of financial and management experience. He has served as President and as a director of many nationally prominent companies, such as Bell & Howell, a provider of document processing, microfilmers, scanners, and financial services, of which he held from 1976 until 1985 a number of positions, including Group President, and he was responsible for the company's global audio-visual businesses and Optics Division. Mr. O’Mara also held a position at Bridge Products, Inc. where he served as President and COO from 1985 to 1987. Mr. O'Mara also is the founder and owner since 1992 of O'Mara Partners, a general management consulting company specializing in creating operational strategies to deal with change.

Mr. O'Mara' significant experience in management and finance has led to the conclusion that he should serve as a director of the Company.

Family Relationships

 There are no family relationships among any of the executive officers and directors.

 Involvement in Certain Legal Proceedings

 There have been no events under any bankruptcy act, no criminal proceedings and no judgments, injunctions, orders or decrees material to the evaluation of the ability and integrity of any director, executive officer, promoter or control person of the Company during the past ten years. The Company is not aware of any legal proceedings in which any director, nominee, officer or affiliate of the Company, any owner of record or beneficially of more than five percent of any class of voting securities of the Company, or any associate of any such director, nominee, officer, affiliate of the Company, or security holder is a party adverse to the Company or any of its subsidiaries or has a material interest adverse to the Company or any of its subsidiaries.

Code of Ethics

 Our Board of Directors has adopted a code of ethics that applies to our officers, directors and employees (“Code of Ethics”). A copy of our Code of Ethics will be furnished without charge to any person upon written request. Requests should be sent to: Secretary, Sigma Labs, Inc., 100 Cienega Street, Suite C, Santa Fe, New Mexico 87501.

 Nominations of Directors

 There are no material changes to the procedures by which security holders may recommend nominees to our Board of Directors.

 Board Committees

 Pursuant to our Bylaws, our Board of Directors may establish committees of one or more directors from time-to-time, as it deems appropriate. Our common stock is quoted on the OTC Bulletin Board under the symbol “SGLB.” The OTC Bulletin Board does not maintain any standards requiring us to establish or maintain an audit, nominating or compensation committee. As of March 31, 2014, our Board of Directors does not maintain any audit, nominating or compensation committee, or any other committees.

Technical Advisory Board

On August 26, 2013, the Company established a Technical Advisory Board to advise and consult with the Board of Directors and management of Sigma Labs with respect to technical and engineering matters relating to the Company's operations. The following individuals are members of the Technical Advisory Board: Dr. Vivek Dave (Chairman), who is the Company's Chief Scientist; Allen Mason, former interim-chairman of the board of directors of the Company; Jim Williams, who serves as faculty emeritus of the Department of Materials Science & Engineering at The Ohio State University, Damon Giovanielli, a former director of the Company; and Chuck Farrar, who serves as the Director of the Engineering Institute at the Los Alamos National Laboratory.

Finance Committee

On October 31, 2013, the Company established a Finance Committee to advise and consult with the Board and management from time to time regarding prospective strategic transactions, including financing transactions. The following individuals are members of the Finance Committee: Mark Cola; Tom O'Mara; and Erin Basta, Sigma Labs' Operations Manager.

 The Company has no compensatory plans or arrangements whereby any executive officer would receive payments from the Company or a third party upon his or her resignation, retirement or termination of employment, or from a change in control of the Company or a change in the officer’s responsibilities following a change in control. The Company has not entered into any written employment agreements, change-of-control, severance or similar agreements with any of our directors or executive officers.

 Summary Compensation Table.

 The following table sets forth certain information concerning the compensation for services rendered to us in all capacities for the fiscal years ended December 31, 2012 and 2013 of the person who served as our principal executive officer during the fiscal year ended December 31, 2013 (the "named executive officer”).  No other executive officers of the Company earned annual compensation during the fiscal year ended December 31, 2013 that exceeded $100,000.

(1) Actual amounts paid.

Equity Awards

 There were no options, warrants or other security awards outstanding for the named executive officer as of December 31, 2013 or 2012.

Unwritten Employment Arrangement with President and Chief Executive Officer

Mark Cola, our President and Chief Executive Officer, has entered into an "at will" unwritten employment arrangement with the Company.

Under Mr. Cola's employment arrangement, Mr. Cola was entitled to receive a monthly salary of $9,484.80, effective January 1, 2012, which represented an agreed upon reduction by Mr. Cola of his base salary in 2011 as a cost saving measure. As a further cost saving measure, on March 1, 2012, Mr. Cola agreed with the Company to further reduce his salary to $6,000 per month, effective retroactively to February 16, 2012.  Under his employment arrangement, Mr. Cola is eligible to receive medical and dental benefits, life insurance, and long term and short term disability coverage. Further, Mr. Cola is eligible to participate in the Company's 2011 Equity Incentive Plan and 2013 Equity Incentive Plan as an employee and director of the Company. The Company did not agree to pay bonuses to any executive officer in 2013.

Director Compensation

No member of our Board of Directors receives compensation solely for his services as a director, except that the Company issued Tom O'Mara shares of common stock in conjunction with Mr. O'Mara's appointment as a director. Directors are entitled to receive compensation for services unrelated to their service as a director to the extent that they provide such unrelated services to the Company. The following table sets forth certain information concerning the compensation paid to directors for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2013. No directors were compensated during the year ended December 31, 2012.

(1) In 2013, the Company paid Mr. O'Mara fees in the amount of $1,500 in connection with services performed by Mr. O'Mara as a member of the Company's finance committee.

(2) In October 2013, in conjunction with the appointment of Mr. O'Mara as a member of the Company’s Board of Directors, the Company issued 500,000 shares of the Company’s common stock to Mr. O'Mara, pursuant to the Company’s 2011 Equity Incentive Plan, valued at $78,000 or $0.156 per share. Of these shares, 300,000 vested immediately and 200,000 are currently unvested.

(3) In August 2013, the Company issued 1,000,000 shares of the Company’s common stock to Mr. Thacker, pursuant to the Company’s 2011 Equity Incentive Plan, in consideration of the additional services that Mr. Thacker provided management in connection with the Company's operations. Such shares were valued at $65,000 or $0.065 per share.

 ITEM 12.             SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT AND RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS.

 The following table sets forth certain information regarding beneficial ownership of our common stock as of March 31, 2014 (a) by each person known by us to own beneficially 5% or more of any class of our common stock, (b) by our named executive officer and each of our directors and (c) by all executive officers and directors of this company as a group. As of March 31, 2014, there were 603,891,061 shares of our common stock issued and 600,941,061 outstanding. Unless otherwise noted, we believe that all persons named in the table have sole voting and investment power with respect to all the shares beneficially owned by them.

* Less than 1%

(1) Unless otherwise indicated, the address of each person listed is c/o Sigma Labs, Inc., 100 Cienega Street, Suite C, Santa Fe, New Mexico 87501.

(2) For purposes of this table, shares are considered beneficially owned if the person directly or indirectly has the sole or shared power to vote or direct the voting of the securities or the sole or shared power to dispose of or direct the disposition of the securities. Shares are also considered beneficially owned if a person has the right to acquire beneficial ownership of the shares within 60 days of March 31, 2014.

(3) The shares shown are owned of record by The Mark & Amanda Cola Revocable Trust, U/A August 31, 2012.

(4) Of the shares shown, 200,000 are currently unvested.

(5) The address of Rockville Asset Management Ltd. is RM 6A, Unit K, Yihong Xuan, Zhujiang Di Jing, Yizhou Road in Guangzhou City, China, 510300.

(6) Of the shares shown, 14,259,259 represent shares underlying a nine-month warrant issued by the Company on January 10, 2014. 

 Equity Compensation Plans

 On March 9, 2011, the Company's Board of Directors approved the Company's 2011 Equity Incentive Plan, which was approved on March 31, 2011 by holders of at least a majority of the issued and outstanding shares of common stock of the Company.  See the discussion of the 2011 Equity Incentive Plan under the caption "Securities Authorized For Issuance Under Equity Compensation Plans" included under Item 5, Part II of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

 On March 15, 2013, the Company’s Board of Directors approved the Company’s 2013 Equity Incentive Plan. The 2013 Equity Incentive Plan was approved by holders of at least a majority of the issued and outstanding shares of common stock of the Company on October 10, 2013. See the discussion of the 2013 Equity Incentive Plan under the caption "Securities Authorized For Issuance Under Equity Compensation Plans" included under Item 5, Part II of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

 Certain Relationships and Related Transactions

Monica Yaple, the Company's Treasurer, has a consulting arrangement with Sigma Labs and its wholly owned subsidiaries to provide general accounting, bookkeeping and financial records management as well as quarterly and annual SEC filings, and preparation of annual tax returns. Under the consulting arrangement, the term of which is from June 1, 2013 to May 31, 2014, we agreed to pay Ms. Yaple $75/hour, provided that our financial obligation to Ms. Yaple during the term of the agreement shall not exceed $177,184. Ms. Yaple's consultant agreement also recognizes her responsibility as the Company's Treasurer and Principal Accounting Officer and as such affords her the responsibility and authority to ensure the Company complies with, implements and monitors financial controls in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles.

On August 26, 2013, the Company granted to Michael Thacker, a director and Secretary of the Company, 1,000,000 shares of common stock under the 2011 Equity Incentive Plan of the Company, valued at $0.065, in consideration of the additional services that Mr. Thacker provided management in connection with the Company's operations.

 Director Independence

 Our common stock is traded on the OTC Bulletin Board under the symbol “SGLB.OB.” The OTC Bulletin Board electronic trading platform does not maintain any standards regarding the “independence” of the directors on our company’s Board of Directors, and we are not otherwise subject to the requirements of any national securities exchange or an inter-dealer quotation system with respect to the need to have a majority of our directors be independent.

 In the absence of such requirements, we have elected to use the definition for “director independence” under the NASDAQ stock market’s listing standards, which defines an “independent director” as “a person other than an officer or employee of us or its subsidiaries or any other individual having a relationship, which in the opinion of our Board of Directors, would interfere with the exercise of independent judgment in carrying out the responsibilities of a director.” The definition further provides that, among others, employment of a director by us (or any parent or subsidiary of ours) at any time during the past three years is considered a bar to independence regardless of the determination of our Board of Directors.

 All of our Board members, except Mr. Cola, an employee-director, are deemed “independent” under the NASDAQ Stock Market’s listing standards.

 Audit Fees

 The aggregate fees accrued by Pritchett, Siler & Hardy, P.C. during the fiscal years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012 for professional services for the audits of our financial statements and the reviews of financial statements included in our SEC filings was $40,291 and $74,681, respectively.

Audit-Related Fees

Pritchett, Siler & Hardy, P.C. did not provide and did not bill and it was not paid any fees for, audit-related services in the fiscal year ended December 31, 2013 or 2012. Audit-related fees represent fees for assurance and related services that are reasonably related to the performance of the audit or review of our financial statements and not reported above under “Audit Fees.”

 Tax Fees

 Pritchett, Siler & Hardy, P.C. did not provide, and did not bill and was not paid any fees for tax compliance, tax advice, and tax planning services for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2013 or 2012.

 All Other Fees

 Pritchett, Siler & Hardy, P.C. did not provide, and did not bill and were not paid any fees for, any other services in the fiscal years ended December 31, 2013 or 2012.

PART IV

Our financial statements and related notes thereto are listed and included in this Annual Report beginning on page F-1. The following documents are furnished as exhibits to this Form 10-K. Exhibits marked with an asterisk are filed herewith. The remainder of the exhibits previously have been filed with the Commission and are incorporated herein by reference.

*   Indicates a management contract or compensatory plan or arrangement.

** Filed herewith.

SIGNATURES

In accordance with Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.

In accordance with the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the registrant in the capacities and on the dates indicated.

Index to Financial Statements

REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

Board of Directors

Sigma Labs, Inc. and Subsidiaries

Santa Fe, New Mexico

We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of Sigma Labs, Inc. and Subsidiaries, as of December 31, 2013 and 2012 and the related consolidated statements of operations, stockholders’ equity and cash flows for each of the years in the two-year period ended December 31, 2013. Sigma Labs, Inc. and Subsidiaries’ management is responsible for these consolidated financial statements. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these consolidated financial statements based on our audits.

We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. The Company is not required to have, nor were we engaged to perform, an audit of its internal control over financial reporting. Our audit included consideration of internal control over financial reporting as a basis for designing audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting. Accordingly, we express no such opinion. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements, assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.

In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of Sigma Labs, Inc. and Subsidiaries as of December 31, 2013 and 2012 and the results of its operations and its cash flows for each of the years in the two-year period ended December 31, 2013, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.

The accompanying consolidated financial statements have been prepared assuming Sigma Labs, Inc. and Subsidiaries will continue as a going concern. As discussed in Note 3 to the consolidated financial statements, Sigma Labs, Inc. and Subsidiaries has incurred losses since inception and has not yet achieved profitable operations. These factors raise substantial doubt about the ability of the Company to continue as a going concern. Management’s plans in regards to these matters are also described in Note 3. The financial statements do not include any adjustments that might result from the outcome of these uncertainties.

/s/ PRITCHETT, SILER & HARDY, P.C.

Salt Lake City, Utah

March 31, 2014

Sigma Labs, Inc. and Subsidiaries

Consolidated Balance Sheets

December 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements

Sigma Labs, Inc. and Subsidiaries

Consolidated Statements of Operations

Years Ended December 31, 2013 and 2012

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements

Sigma Labs, Inc. and Subsidiaries

Statement of Stockholders' Equity

Years Ended December 31, 2013 and 2012

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements

Sigma Labs, Inc. and Subsidiaries

Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows

Years Ended December 31, 2013 and 2012

Supplemental Schedule of Noncash Investing and Financing Activities:

For the year ended December 31, 2013

5,098,661 shares issued through a cashless exercise of warrants previously issued during 2011

1,000,000 shares issued relating to the Company's Equity Incentive Plan at $0.065 per share.

500,000 shares issued for consulting services at $0.063 per share.

4,250,000 shares issued for consulting services at $0.03 per share. Of these, 1,500,000 vested during the year and 2,750,000 were cancelled.

500,000 shares of unvested stock valued at $10,000 or $0.02 per share were cancelled.

2,000,000 shares issued for consulting services at $0.0227 per share. Of these, 1,000,000 vested during the years and 1,000,000 are unvested.

500,000 shares issued for consulting services at $0.0248 per share.

1,750,000 shares vested relating to the Company's Equity Incentive Plan, reducing deferred compensation by $35,000

500,000 shares issued for consulting services at $0.156 per share. Of these, 300,000 vested during the year and 200,000 are unvested.

For the year ended December 31, 2012

5,000,000 shares of common stock issued for consulting services at $0.01 per share

1,500,000 shares of common stock issued for consulting services at $0.011 per share

7,000,000 unvested shares of common stock were cancelled, and deferred compensation was reduced by $140,000, or $0.02 per share

3,750,000 shares vested relating to the Company's 2011 Equity Incentive Plan, reducing deferred compensation by $75,000

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements

SIGMA LABS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

DECEMBER 31, 2013

NOTE 1 – Summary of Significant Accounting Policies

Nature of Business – On September 13, 2010 Sigma Labs, Inc., formerly named Framewaves, Inc., a Nevada corporation (the “Company”), acquired 100% of the shares of B6 Sigma, Inc. by exchanging 6.67 shares of Framewaves, Inc. restricted common stock for each issued and outstanding share of B6 Sigma, Inc. The acquisition has been accounted for as a “reverse purchase”, and accordingly the operations of Framewaves, Inc. prior to the date of acquisition have been eliminated.

B6 Sigma, Inc., incorporated February 5, 2010, was founded by a group of scientists, engineers and businessmen to develop and commercialize novel and unique manufacturing and materials technologies. Management believes the Company’s In Process Quality Assurance (IPQA®) technology is a technology that will fundamentally redefine manufacturing practices by embedding quality assurance in the manufacturing processes in real time. Management also anticipates that the Company’s core competencies will allow its clientele to combine advanced manufacturing with novel material to achieve breakthrough product potential in many industries including aerospace, defense, oil and gas, prosthetic implants, sporting goods, and power generation.

As of December 31, 2011, Sigma Labs, Inc. acquired 100% of the shares of Sumner & Lawrence Limited (“Sumner”), a New Mexico Corporation, and La Mancha Company, a New Mexico Corporation, in exchange for 35,000,000 shares of Sigma Labs, Inc. common stock. The operations of Sumner and La Mancha Company prior to the date of acquisition have been eliminated. La Mancha Company has since ceased all operations and has dissolved. Sumner is a private consulting company that provides services to the public and private sector. The Company plans to dissolve Sumner during fiscal 2014. 

Basis of Presentation – The accompanying consolidated financial statements have been prepared by the Company in accordance with Article 8 of U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission Regulation S-X. In the opinion of management, all adjustments (which include only normal recurring adjustments) necessary to present fairly the financial position, results of operations and cash flows at December 31, 2013 and 2012 and for the periods then ended have been made.

Reclassification – Certain amounts in prior-period financial statements have been reclassified for comparative purposes to conform to presentation in the current-period financial statements.

Principles of Consolidation – The consolidated financial statements for December 31, 2013 include the accounts of Sigma Labs, Inc., B6 Sigma, Inc., Sumner & Lawrence Limited and La Mancha Company. All significant intercompany balances and transactions have been eliminated.

Property and Equipment – Property and equipment are stated at cost. Expenditures for major renewals and betterments that extend the useful lives of property and equipment are capitalized upon being placed in service. Expenditures for maintenance and repairs are charged to expense as incurred. Depreciation is computed using the straight-line method over the estimated useful lives of the assets. The estimated life has been determined to be three years unless a unique circumstance exists, which is then fully documented as an exception to the policy.

Fair Value of Financial Instruments – The Company estimates that the fair value of all financial instruments does not differ materially from the aggregate carrying values of its financial instruments recorded in the accompanying consolidated balance sheets because of the short-term maturity of these financial instruments.

Income Taxes – The Company accounts for income taxes in accordance with ASC Topic No. 740, “Accounting for Income Taxes.”

The Company adopted the provisions of ASC Topic No. 740, “Accounting for Income Taxes,” at the date of inception on February 5, 2010. As a result of the implementation of ASC Topic No. 740, the Company recognized no increase in the liability for unrecognized tax benefits.

The Company has no tax positions at December 31, 2013 and 2012 for which the ultimate deductibility is highly certain but for which there is uncertainty about the timing of such deductibility.

The Company recognizes interest accrued related to unrecognized tax benefits in interest expense and penalties in operating expenses. During the year ended December 31, 2013, the Company recognized no interest and penalties. The Company had no accruals for interest and penalties at December 31, 2013 or 2012. All tax years starting with 2010 are open for examination.

Loss Per Share – The computation of loss per share is based on the weighted average number of shares outstanding during the period in accordance with ASC Topic No. 260, “Earnings Per Share.”

Accounts Receivable and Allowance for Doubtful Accounts - Trade accounts receivable are carried at original invoice amount less an estimate made for doubtful accounts. We determine the allowance for doubtful accounts by identifying potential troubled accounts and by using historical experience and future expectations applied to an aging of accounts. Trade accounts receivable are written off when deemed uncollectible. Recoveries of trade accounts receivable previously written off are recorded as income when received. The allowance for doubtful accounts at December 31, 2013 and 2012 was $4,884 and $4,884 respectively.

Long-Lived and Intangible Assets – Long-lived assets and certain identifiable definite life intangibles to be held and used by the Company are reviewed for impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of an asset may not be recoverable. The Company continuously evaluates the recoverability of its long-lived assets based on estimated future cash flows and the estimated liquidation value of such long-lived assets, and provides for impairment if such undiscounted cash flows are insufficient to recover the carrying amount of the long-lived assets. If impairment exists, an adjustment is made to write the asset down to its fair value, and a loss is recorded as the difference between the carrying value and fair value. Fair values are determined based on quoted market values, discounted cash flows or internal and external appraisals, as applicable. Assets to be disposed of are carried at the lower of carrying value or estimated net realizable value. During 2013, an impairment of $87,340 was recorded to reduce the value of customer contacts intangible assets of Sumner as management plans to discontinue servicing the related contracts in 2014. No impairment was recorded in the year ended December 31, 2012.

Recently Enacted Accounting Standards – The FASB established the Accounting Standards Codification (“Codification” or “ASC”) as the source of authoritative accounting principles recognized by the FASB to be applied by nongovernmental entities in the preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States (“GAAP”). Rules and interpretive releases of the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) issued under authority of federal securities laws are also sources of GAAP for SEC registrants.

Recent Accounting Standards Updates (“ASU”) through ASU No. 2014-07 contain technical corrections to existing guidance or affects guidance to specialized industries. These updates have no current applicability to the Company or their effect on the financial statements would not have been significant.

Cash Equivalents - The Company considers all highly liquid investments with an original maturity of three months or less at date of purchase to be cash equivalents.

Concentration of Credit Risk - The Company maintains its cash in bank deposit accounts, which, at times, may exceed federally insured limits. The Company has not experienced any losses in such accounts and believes it is not exposed to any significant credit risk on cash and cash equivalents.

Organization Expenditures – Organizational expenditures are expensed as incurred for Securities Exchange Commission (SEC) filings, but capitalized and amortized for income tax purposes.

Stock Based Compensation – The Company recognizes compensation costs to employees under ASC Topic No. 718, “Compensation – Stock Compensation.” Under ASC Topic No. 718, companies are required to measure the compensation costs of share-based compensation arrangements based on the grant-date fair value and recognize the costs in the financial statements over the period during which employees are required to provide services. Share based compensation arrangements include stock options, restricted share plans, performance based awards, share appreciation rights and employee share purchase plans. As such, compensation cost is measured on the date of grant at their fair value. Such compensation amounts, if any, are amortized over the respective vesting periods of the option grant.

Equity instruments issued to other than employees are recorded on the basis of the fair value of the instruments, as required by ASC Topic No. 505, “Equity Based Payments to Non-Employees.” In general, the measurement date is when either (a) a performance commitment, as defined, is reached or (b) the earlier of (i) the non-employee performance is complete or (ii) the instruments are vested. The measured value related to the instruments is recognized over a period based on the facts and circumstances of each particular grant as defined in the FASB Accounting Standards Codification.

Amortization - Utility patents are amortized over a 17 year period. Patents which are pending are not amortized. Customer contacts intangible asset is being amortized over a 3 year period.

Accounting Estimates - The preparation of financial statements in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect certain reported amounts of assets and liabilities, the disclosures of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements, and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from those estimated by management.

Revenue Recognition – The Company’s revenue is derived primarily from providing services under contractual agreements. The Company recognizes revenue in accordance with ASC Topic No. 605 based on the following criteria: Persuasive evidence of an arrangement exists, services have been rendered, the price is fixed or determinable, and collectability is reasonably assured.

NOTE 2 – Stockholders’ Equity

Common Stock

The Company has authorized 750,000,000 shares of common stock, $0.001 par value.

On September 13, 2010 the Company closed a share exchange transaction (the “Reorganization”) with the shareholders of B6 Sigma, Inc., a Delaware corporation (“B6 Sigma”), which resulted in B6 Sigma becoming a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company. Each share of B6 Sigma, Inc. common stock outstanding as at the closing of the Reorganization was exchanged for 6.67 shares of the Company’s common stock. At the closing, B6 Sigma, Inc. also acquired and cancelled 110,700,000 (post-split) shares of the Company’s common stock from three shareholders for the sum of $195,000. Upon the closing of the Reorganization, the Company ceased to be a “Shell” company (as such term is defined in Rule 12b-2 under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended). As a condition to the closing of the Reorganization, B6 Sigma, Inc. also closed a private offering of $1,000,000 of its common stock contemporaneously with the closing of the Reorganization, which included the conversion of $300,000 of previously issued convertible notes and related interest by B6 Sigma, Inc. into the private offering of common stock.

Following issuance of the Reorganization shares to the B6 Sigma shareholders and the stock cancellation, the Company had 313,067,400 (post-split) shares of its common stock issued and outstanding. In connection with the closing of the Reorganization, the shareholders of the Company approved a 150:1 forward stock split, and a change of the name of the corporation to Sigma Labs, Inc. Additionally, following completion of the Reorganization, B6 Sigma became a wholly owned subsidiary.

On January 6, 2011, the Company issued an aggregate of 1,100,000 shares of the Company’s common stock to two consultants as noncash compensation for services rendered valued at $22,000 or $0.02 per share.

In January 2011, the Company commenced a private offering of up to 75,000,000 shares of common stock, $0.001 par value per share, at an issue price of $0.02 per share of common stock. On April 15, 2011, the Company closed the private offering, pursuant to which the Company issued 55,875,000 shares of the Company’s common stock. Gross proceeds amounted to $1,117,500.

The placement agent received a total of $105,735 in commissions. The direct cost associated with the stock offering has been reflected as a reduction to Additional Paid-in-Capital. Net proceeds from the sale of stock were $1,011,765. The Company also issued to the agent five year warrants to purchase up to 7,931,250 shares of the Company’s common stock. Such warrants had an exercise price of $0.025 per share and are valued at $158,625. During July 2013, such warrants were exercised using the cashless exercise option resulting in 5,098,661 shares being issued.

The fair value of the warrants issued was estimated at the date of grant using the Black-Scholes option-pricing model with the following assumptions: risk free interest rate of 2.14%; Volatility of 470 and an expected life of five years. It is assumed that no dividends will be paid during the periods of calculation, resulting in a respective weighted-average fair value per warrant of $0.02. Management believes the resulting warrant values are reasonable.

On March 9, 2011, our Board of Directors adopted the 2011 Equity Incentive Plan (the “Equity Plan”). On March 31, 2011, the holders of at least a majority of the issued and outstanding shares of common stock of the Company approved the Equity Plan. Pursuant to the Equity Plan, the Company is authorized to grant options, restricted stock and stock appreciation rights to purchase up to 31,000,000 shares of common stock to its employees, officers, directors, consultants and advisors. The Equity Plan provides for awards of incentive stock options, non-statutory stock options, and rights to acquire restricted stock. Incentive stock options granted under the Equity Plan are intended to qualify as “incentive stock options” within the meaning of Section 422 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”). Non-statutory stock options granted under the Equity Plan are not intended to qualify as incentive stock options under the Code.

In April 2011, the Company issued an aggregate of 3,625,000 shares of the Company’s common stock to one consultant and two professionals as noncash compensation for services rendered to the Company, which services were valued at $72,500 or $0.02 per share.

On May 16, 2011, the Company issued 1,000,000 shares of the Company’s common stock to a consultant as noncash compensation for services rendered valued at $20,000 or $0.02 per share.

On December 31, 2011, the Company issued 35,000,000 shares of the Company’s common stock to acquire 100% of the shares of Sumner & Lawrence Limited and La Mancha Company.

On June 7, 2012, the Company issued 5,000,000 shares of the Company’s common stock to two consultants as noncash compensation for services rendered valued at $50,000 or $0.01 per share.

On December 12, 2012, the Company issued 1,500,000 shares of the Company’s common stock to three consultants as noncash compensation for services rendered valued at $16,500 or $0.011 per share.

On January 31, 2013, the Company issued 250,000 shares of the Company’s common stock to a consultant as noncash compensation for services to be rendered valued at $7,500 or $0.03 per share.

On February 14, 2013, the Company issued 4,000,000 shares of the Company’s common stock to a consultant as noncash compensation for services to be rendered valued at $120,000 or $0.03 per share. Of these shares, 1,250,000 (valued at $37,500) vested during the six months ended June 30, 2013 and 2,750,000 (valued at $82,500) were cancelled in June 2013.

On May 10, 2013, the Company issued 500,000 shares of the Company’s common stock to a consultant as noncash compensation for services rendered valued at $12,400 or $0.0248 per share.

On May 23, 2013, the Company issued 2,000,000 shares of the Company’s common stock to a consultant as noncash compensation for services to be rendered valued at $45,400 or $0.0227 per share. Of these shares, 1,000,000 (valued at $22,700) vested immediately and 1,000,000 (valued at $22,700) remain unvested and are reflected as deferred compensation as of December 31, 2013.

On July 18, 2013, the Company completed a private placement of 120,000,000 shares of common stock, resulting in aggregate gross proceeds of $1,200,000. Offering costs were approximately $30,054.

During July 2013, warrants previously issued during 2011 in connection with a private placement were exercised using the cashless exercise option resulting in 5,098,661 shares being issued.

On August 12, 2013, the Company issued 500,000 shares of the Company’s common stock to a consultant as noncash compensation for services rendered valued at $31,500 or $0.063 per share.

On August 26, 2013, the Company issued 1,000,000 shares of the Company’s common stock to a director pursuant to the Company’s 2011 Equity Incentive Plan valued at $65,000 or $0.065 per share.

On October 31, 2013, in conjunction with the appointment of a director as a member of the Company’s Board of Directors, the Company issued 500,000 shares of the Company’s common stock to the director as noncash compensation valued at $78,000 or $0.156 per share. Of these shares, 300,000 (valued at $46,800) vested immediately and 200,000 (valued at $31,200) remain unvested and are reflected as deferred compensation as of December 31, 2013.

The Company has authorized 750,000,000 shares of common stock, $0.001 par value. At December 31, 2013, there were 559,766,061 shares issued and 556,816,061 shares outstanding, reflecting 2,950,000 issued but unvested shares pursuant to the Company’s 2011 Equity Incentive Plan. At December 31, 2012, there were 429,167,400 shares issued and 425,167,400 shares outstanding, reflecting 4,000,000 issued but unvested shares pursuant to the Company’s 2011 Equity Incentive Plan.

On March 15, 2013, the Company’s Board of Directors approved the Company’s 2013 Equity Incentive Plan. The 2013 Equity Incentive Plan was approved by holders of at least a majority of the issued and outstanding shares of common stock of the Company on October 10, 2013. Pursuant to the Equity Incentive Plan, the Company is authorized to grant "incentive stock options" and "non-qualified stock options", grant or sell common stock subject to restrictions or without restrictions, and grant stock appreciation rights to employees, officers, directors, consultants and advisers of the Company and its subsidiaries. A total of 30,000,000 shares of common stock of the Company are reserved for issuance under the 2013 Equity Incentive Plan. As of December 31, 2013, no equity awards have been issued under the 2013 Equity Incentive Plan.

Deferred Compensation

During April 2011, the Company issued to five employees an aggregate of 20,000,000 shares of the Company’s common stock, subject to restrictions, pursuant to the 2011 Equity Incentive Plan. Such shares were valued at the fair value of $400,000 or $0.02 per share. This compensation is being expensed over the vesting period.

During the year ended December 31, 2012, 7,000,000 shares of unvested common stock valued at $140,000 (previously included in deferred compensation) were cancelled or forfeited.

During the year ended December 31, 2012, an additional 3,750,000 shares of common stock valued at $75,000 vested and were recorded to expense and as a reduction to deferred compensation.

As of December 31, 2012, the balance of unvested compensation cost expected to be recognized was $80,000 and is recorded as a reduction of stockholders’ equity.

During the year ended December 31, 2013, 500,000 shares of unvested common stock valued at $10,000 (previously included in deferred compensation) were cancelled or forfeited.

During the year ended December 31, 2013, an additional 1,750,000 shares of common stock valued at $35,000 vested and were recorded to expense and as a reduction to deferred compensation.

During the year ended December 31, 2013, 4,250,000 shares of common stock were issued to consultants at $0.03 per share, 500,000 shares were issued to a consultant at $0.0248 per share, 2,000,000 shares were issued to a consultant at $0.0227 per share, 500,000 shares were issued to a consultant at $0.063 per share, 1,000,000 shares were issued to a consultant at $0.065 per share and 500,000 shares were issued to a director at $0.156 per share. The unvested portion of the shares at December 31, 2013 (1,200,000 unvested shares) increased deferred compensation by $53,900.

As of December 31, 2013, the balance of unvested compensation cost expected to be recognized is $88,900 and is recorded as a reduction of stockholders’ equity. The unvested compensation is expected to be recognized over the weighted average period of approximately 1 year (through April 8, 2014).

Preferred Stock

The Company is authorized to issue 10,000,000 shares of preferred stock, $0.001 par value. There were none issued and outstanding at December 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012.

NOTE 3 – Going Concern

The Company has sustained losses since its inception. The ability of the Company to continue as a going concern is dependent on expanding income opportunities. Management anticipates that additional contracts will allow the Company to achieve profitable operations. There is no assurance that the Company will be successful in raising additional capital or in achieving profitable operations. The financial statements do not include any adjustments that might result from the outcome of these uncertainties.

NOTE 4 – Income Taxes

The Company accounts for income taxes in accordance with ASC Topic No. 740. This standard requires the Company to provide a net deferred tax asset or liability equal to the expected future tax benefit or expense of temporary reporting differences between book and tax accounting methods and any available operating loss or tax credit carryforwards.

The Company has available at December 31, 2013, unused operating loss carryforwards of approximately $2,693,959, which may be applied against future taxable income and which expire in various years through 2033. However, if certain substantial changes in the Company’s ownership should occur, there could be an annual limitation on the amount of net operating loss carryforward which can be utilized. The amount of and ultimate realization of the benefits from the operating loss carryforwards for income tax purposes is dependent, in part, upon the tax laws in effect, the future earnings of the Company and other future events, the effects of which cannot be determined. Because of the uncertainty surrounding the realization of the loss carryforwards, the Company has established a valuation allowance equal to the tax effect of the loss carryfowards of approximately $404,094 and $293,200 at December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively, and, therefore, no deferred tax asset has been recognized for the loss carryforwards. The change in the valuation allowance is approximately $110,894 and $103,611 for the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively.

Deferred tax assets are comprised of the following:

The reconciliation of the provision for income taxes computed at the U.S. federal statutory tax rate to the Company’s effective tax rate for the period ended December 31, 2013 and 2012 is as follows:

NOTE 5 – Loss Per Share

The following data show the amounts used in computing loss per share and the effect on income and the weighted average number of shares of dilutive potential common stock for the periods ended December 31, 2013 and 2012:

Dilutive loss per share was not presented as the Company had no common equivalent shares for all periods presented that would affect the computation of diluted loss per share or its effect is anti-dilutive.

NOTE 6 – Furniture and Equipment

The following is a summary of property and equipment, purchased, used and depreciated over a three-year period, less accumulated depreciation, as of December 31, 2013 and 2012:

Depreciation expense on property and equipment was $10,587 and $21,832 for the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012.

NOTE 7 – Intangible Assets

The Company’s intangible assets consist of Patents, Patent Pending Applications and Customer Contacts.

Provisional patent applications are not amortized until a patent has been granted. Once a patent is granted, the Company will amortize the related costs over the estimated useful life of the patent. If a patent application is denied, then the costs will be expensed at that time.

The customer contacts were acquired in a business acquisition on December 31, 2011 (See Note 10) and will be amortized over their estimated useful life of 3 years.

The following is a summary of definite-life intangible assets less accumulated amortization as of December 31, 2013 and 2012:

Amortization expense on intangible assets was $89,513 and $88,347 for the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012. In addition, an impairment of customer contacts in the amount of $87,340 was recorded in the year ending December 31, 2013.

The estimated aggregate amortization expense for each of the succeeding years ending December 31 is as follows:

NOTE 8 – Commitments and Contingencies

Operating Leases – The Company leases office and laboratory space under operating leases. Expense relating to these operating leases was $47,989 for the year ended December 31, 2013. The future minimum lease payments required under non-cancellable operating leases at December 31, 2013 was approximately $36,000. All the future minimum lease payments are currently due during 2014.

NOTE 9 – Concentrations

Revenues – During the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, the Company had the following significant customers. The loss of the revenues generated by these customers would have a significant effect on the operations of the Company.

Accounts Receivable – The Company had the following significant customers who accounted for more than 10% each of the Company’s accounts receivable balance at December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively.

NOTE 10 – Subsequent Events

The Company has evaluated subsequent events from the balance sheet date through the date the financial statements were issued and determined there are the following items to disclose:

In January 2014, the Company issued 43,750,000 shares of stock to an investor for a total purchase price of $3,500,000. In connection with the purchase and sale of the shares, the Company agreed to issue to the investor a warrant to purchase up to 14,259,259 shares of the Company’s common stock, at an exercise price of $0.15 per share. The warrant has a term of nine months from the date of issuance (January 10, 2014). A warrant was also issued to a consultant to purchase up to 2,187,500 shares of common stock at $.08 per share.

In February 2014, the Company issued 375,000 shares of stock to a consultant, subject to restrictions. The shares were valued at $0.126 or $47,250.

In March 2014, Management decided to discontinue servicing the contracts previously held by Sumner. As a result, the intangible asset “customer contacts” has been reduced in value with an offsetting impairment expense.