UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

(Mark One)

Or

Commission File Number 000-53071

TARGETED MEDICAL PHARMA, INC.

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

(310) 474-9809

(Registrant’s telephone number, including area code)

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

Securities registered under Section 12(g) of the Act: Common Stock, $0.001 par value per share

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

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

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 year (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 [X] 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 (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding year (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files). Yes [X] 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. [X]

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.

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

The aggregate market value of the voting and non-voting common equity held by non-affiliates of the Registrant as of June 30, 2013 was $12,151,915.

Shares outstanding of the Registrant’s common stock:

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

Portions of the registrant’s Proxy Statement related to its 2014 Annual Stockholders’ Meeting to be filed subsequently are incorporated by reference into Part III of this Annual Report on Form 10-K. Except as expressly incorporated by reference, the registrant’s Proxy Statement shall not be deemed to be part of this report.

TARGETED MEDICAL PHARMA, INC.

FORM 10-K

FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2013

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PART I

Item 1. Business.

DESCRIPTION OF BUSINESS

Targeted Medical Pharma, Inc. (the “Company” or “TMP”), also doing business as Physician Therapeutics (“PTL”), is a specialty pharmaceutical company that develops and commercializes nutrient-based and pharmaceutical-based therapeutic systems. We began our operations as Targeted Medical Foods, a California general partnership, which was converted into a California limited liability company in 2002, to develop medical food products. In 2006, Targeted Medical Foods reorganized as a Delaware corporation and changed its name to Targeted Medical Pharma, Inc. In 2007, we formed Complete Claims Processing Inc., a California corporation and our wholly-owned subsidiary (“CCPI”), as a specialty billing and collection services company to provide billing and collection services relating to our products dispensed by physician clients and to physician clients of some of our distributors.

We develop and sell a line of patented prescription medical food products that are currently sold in the United States through a network of distributors and directly to physicians who dispense medical foods and other pharmaceutical products through their office practices. Our proprietary patented technology uses a five component system to allow uptake and use of important neurotransmitter precursors to produce the neurotransmitters that control autonomic nervous system function such as sleep and pain perception. The neurotransmitters addressed by our patents include nitric oxide, acetylcholine, serotonin, norepinephrine, epinephrine, dopamine and histamine. The technology addresses neuron specificity and elimination of attenuation, or tolerance that is characterized by the need for increased dosage. The combination of the neurotransmitters and their precise proportions allows for a wide range of products. There are seven issued patents and nine pending applications that cover aspects of the inventions.

We presently ship product to 23 states: Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Hawaii, Illinois, Kansas, Kentucky, Maryland, Massachusetts, Missouri, Montana, Nevada, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Texas, Washington and Wisconsin, although the vast majority (approximately 77%) of our sales of products are in the state of California.

We believe that medical foods will continue to grow in importance over the coming years. There is an increasing prevalence of chronic diseases that are candidates for treatment with neurotransmitter-based medical foods, such as sleep disorders, Gulf War Illness, cognitive dysfunction, macular degeneration, and pulmonary disorders. Additionally, the aging population will see an increased incidence of intolerance to traditional drugs related to changes in metabolic function that lead to increased and more dangerous drug side effects. Congress, the Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”), the Center for Medicare & Medicaid Services and private insurance companies are focusing increased efforts on pharmacovigilance (the branch of the pharmaceutical industry which assesses and monitors the safety of drugs either in the development pipeline or which have already been approved for marketing) to measure and reduce these adverse health consequences. In our experience there is a high level of acceptance of medical foods as a therapy by patients, and the medical community is increasingly accepting that these therapeutic agents are viable alternatives to prescription drugs.

Medical foods are neither dietary nor nutritional supplements. From a regulatory standpoint, the FDA took steps in 1988 to encourage the development of medical foods by regulating this product category under the Orphan Drug Act. The term medical food, as defined in Section 5(b) of the Orphan Drug Act is a “food which is formulated to be consumed or administered enterally under the supervision of a physician and which is intended for the specific dietary management of a disease or condition for which distinctive nutritional requirements, based on recognized scientific principles, are established by medical evaluation.” This definition was incorporated by reference into the Nutrition Labeling and Education Act of 1990.

These regulatory changes have reduced the costs and time associated with bringing medical foods to market, as beforehand medical foods were categorized as drugs until 1972 and then as “foods for special dietary purposes” until 1988. The field of candidates for development into medical foods is always expanding due to constant advances in the understanding of the science of nutrition and disease, coupled with advances in food technology increasing the number of products that can be formulated and commercialized.

We distribute our products through an internal sales staff and a network of independent distributors to approximately 750 physicians in the United States. With recent reductions in physician reimbursements for medical services by Medicare, workers compensation and private insurance companies, many physicians are actively seeking additional sources of practice revenues. We act on behalf of the dispensing physician to secure contracts with third party payers and, through our proprietary patented software, can bill for dispensed drugs and medical food products. The average wholesale price (“AWP”) for medical food is set by us under the terms of our federal re-labeler license. The AWP price is the price billed to the physician and the insurance company. Certain applicable timely payment discounts and distributor discounts can reduce the net payable to us on behalf of the physician or distributor.

The traditional process for prescribing and delivering medications to patients is inefficient, unnecessarily costly and error-prone. Physicians write virtually all of the approximately four billion annual prescriptions, resulting in errors and necessitating millions of telephone inquiries from pharmacies for clarification and correction. The pharmacist or managed care organization checks this information only after the physician writes the prescription. The inability of pharmacists and managed care organizations to communicate with physicians at the time the physician is writing the prescription has made it difficult to manage pharmaceutical costs. The existing process further inconveniences the patient, who must travel from the physician’s office to a pharmacy and must often wait for the prescription to be filled.

We have developed and marketed ten core medical foods and 35 convenience-packed therapeutic systems consisting of a medical food and a generic pharmaceutical, which physicians can prescribe and dispense together.

A convenience-packed product is a box containing a 30-day supply of a generic pharmaceutical and a 30-day supply of a medical food product. The box is appropriately labeled and contains separate plain-English inserts providing patient information about the generic pharmaceutical and the medical food.

Our convenience-packed therapeutic systems address pain syndromes, sleep disorders, hypertension and metabolic syndrome. We developed these convenience-packed products at the request of physician clients to allow for the administration of the appropriate FDA-approved dose of a drug co-administered with a medical food that optimizes the use of the approved drug product under its approved labeling. Most often, the optimal dose co-administered with a medical food is the lowest FDA-approved and recommended dose that maintains the efficacy and reduces the side effects of the drug. Clinical practice, observation studies and independent controlled clinical trials have shown that co-administration of a pharmaceutical with a medical food product allows the physician to select the optimal dose of both agents. To date, three independent, double blind randomized controlled trials have been conducted using co-administration of a drug and a medical food product.

The trials included the study of trazadone with the medical food product Sentra PM to measure responses in patients with sleep disorders. Another study included the co-administration of naproxen with the medical food product Theramine to measure responses in patients with chronic, established back pain. The third study used the co-administration of ibuprofen with the medical food product Theramine to measure the responses in patients with chronic, established back pain. These clinical trials were on specific convenience-packed products Trazamine, Theraproxen and Theraprofen. These double blind controlled trials yielded positive results in the areas of pain and sleep disorders. In these trials, drug side effects were reduced at the lowered drug doses. We have also performed a cost effectiveness analysis of gastrointestinal side-effect reduction comparing Theramine to NSAIDS. The analysis shows that substantial savings to the health care system can be achieved by shifting pain management to Theramine base management and reducing the incidence of gastrointestinal hemorrhage that is associated with NSAID administration. All convenience-packed drugs are within the FDA-approved label dose. These convenience packs are registered in the FDA National Drug Code (NDC) database and, in our experience, all convenience-packed products have been routinely reimbursed by third party payers.

The market for the sale of prepackaged medications to physicians for on-site point-of-care dispensing includes medications distributed for general medical practice, occupational health, workers compensation, and urgent care and pain clinics. On-site dispensing offers healthcare providers the opportunity to improve financial performance by adding an incremental source of revenue and reducing expenses related to prescription transmission, communications with pharmacists and billing and processing. From a patient’s perspective, the dispensing of medications at the point-of-care provides an increased level of convenience, privacy and treatment compliance. Patients who do not wish to receive medicines dispensed at the point-of-care are able to access our products through selected pharmacies who order product directly from us.

We support our physician clients with a proprietary pharmacy claims processing service specifically designed for billing and collecting insurance reimbursement from private insurance, workers compensation and Medicare for our medical food products, therapeutic systems, generic and branded drugs. CCPI provides this service to physician offices for the specific purpose of optimizing insurance reimbursement for dispensed products.

We have developed a proprietary billing process and supporting software (collectively referred to as “PDRx”) that facilitates physician dispensing, provides inventory control and assists regulatory reporting. The dispensed products include our medical foods and generic pharmaceuticals. PDRx directly communicates dispensing data from the physicians’ offices to our management servers in real-time. This allows our employees and physician clients to use PDRx from computers or smart devices with internet access. This technology is hosted on company-owned and managed servers and accessed only through a secure gateway, allowing for compliance with all laws and regulations relating to protected health information.

This system also allows information to be delivered directly to us for purposes of future sales and educational content. Each physician’s use of controlled substances is documented and reported to the Drug Enforcement Administration as required by law. This system is covered by a patent application that we expect to mature into an issued patent in the near future. Our billing system utilizes a combination of two unique identifying numbers and a computer recognition algorithm to bill third party payers on behalf of the physician. With respect to our billing system, on February 5, 2013, the USPTO issued us US Pat. No. 8,370,172. Additionally, US Pat. Application. No. 12/966,720 having a filing date of December 13, 2010 is pending and the Company is awaiting communication from USPTO, which is expected within six months. The functional utility of this computer related system is currently protected by US Pat. No. 8,370,172, US Pat. Application No. 12/966,720, and US Pat. Application No. 13/759,007 filed February 4, 2013.

Additional patent applications for medical foods convenience-packed products are in the process of being written and filed. Specifically, the Company has filed for three patent applications at the USPTO covering technology for stimulating in vivo differentiation of stem and progenitor cells for producing red blood cells, growth hormone, and testosterone. Specifically, these three patent applications cover compositions and methods for augmenting and sustaining amino acid delivery for stimulating in vivo differentiation of stem and progenitor cells for producing red blood cells, growth hormone, and testosterone. Further, these three patent applications include additional disclosure covering other embodiments for stimulating in vivo differentiation of stem and progenitor cells to produce additional tissue and cell types. We are awaiting receipt of the examination results of these three patent applications from the USPTO, which we expect to receive with respect to each of the three applications on or before June 1, 2014.

Our Business Strategy

Our objective is to become a leading provider of solutions based on our patented therapeutic systems for improved patient outcomes and point-of-care tools designed to automate the physician’s work flow.

Our strategy to achieve this objective includes the following:

Distinguishing Characteristics of Our Products and Services

We sell ten core medical food products using patented technology that uses amino acids to produce and modulate neurotransmitters in specific diseases. Convenience packs contain a pharmaceutical and a medical food product as a therapeutic system.

Each medical practice is involved in the management of patients with specific diseases. A formulary of medical food products and pharmaceutical therapies is developed for specific individual medical practices.

We manage the ordering, delivery, dispensing and tracking of branded and generic pharmaceuticals in each physician client’s practice.

PDRx is our proprietary computer program used to facilitate and track dispensed medical food and drug products in a physician client’s practice. PDRx facilitates a physician client’s management of inventory and the dispensing physician is alerted to replenish products as necessary.

CCPI is our wholly-owned subsidiary that manages the billing of our medical food and drug products to third party payers on behalf of a physician client or a physician client of a distributor utilizing CCPI’s billing and collection services.

CCPI manages the collections on claims submitted to third party payers on behalf of a physician client or a physician client of a distributor utilizing CCPI’s billing and collection services.

We submit a monthly report to each dispensing physician client that includes information about submitted claims and reimbursements received.

We provide physician client’s with electronic access to a drug knowledge database with comprehensive, up-to-date clinical and pricing information. This is important at point-of-care to determine what drugs and medical foods are covered under a specific insurance plan and the amount of co-payment and/or patient responsibility.

We maintain a Medical Science Liaison department to inform physician clients on the appropriate use of our medical food products and to teach ancillary staff the correct procedures for storing pharmaceutical products at the point-of-care site

In California all physicians who dispense Schedule II, Schedule III, and Schedule IV controlled substances must provide the dispensing information to the Department of Justice on a weekly basis through the Controlled Substance Utilization Review and Evaluation System (“CURES”). We track this dispensing history in our PDRx software and file the CURES report on behalf of the physician client.

Business Organization

We have two principal business operations: (i) the distribution of proprietary medical foods and (ii) billing and collection services relating to our products which is operated through our wholly-owned subsidiary, CCPI. Our principal business operations are organized as follows:

Physician Therapeutics (PTL)

The company distributes proprietary medical foods and generic and branded pharmaceuticals as PTL. In the past year we have dispensed our products in 23 states, which are: Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Hawaii, Illinois, Kansas, Kentucky, Maryland, Massachusetts, Missouri, Montana, Nevada, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Texas, Washington and Wisconsin, although the vast majority (approximately 77%) of our sales of product are in the state of California.

Complete Claims Processing, Inc. (CCPI)

CCPI is our wholly-owned subsidiary. CCPI provides billing and collection services relating to our products on behalf of dispensing physician clients to private insurance, workers compensation and Medicare claims. CCPI bills for medical foods, generic pharmaceuticals and branded pharmaceuticals that PTL sells. Neither PTL nor CCPI produce generic or branded pharmaceuticals. CCPI bills for all products that have recognized and appropriately registered NDC numbers.

Background of Physician Dispensing of Pharmaceuticals

A March 2009 study by Wolters Kluwer Pharma Solutions, Inc. found that the rate of unfilled prescriptions has increased, from both denials and abandonment. Health plan denials of commercial prescription claims in 2009 were 8.1% for new prescriptions and 4.2% for refills; denials of new brand name drug prescriptions (10.3% in 2009) were down 1.4% from 2008, but were up 22.5% since 2006 (denials are prescriptions that have been submitted to a pharmacy but rejected by a patient’s health plan). Abandoned prescriptions (those that are submitted to a pharmacy but are never picked up) as a percent of commercial prescription drug claims were 6.3% for new prescriptions and 2.6% for refills in 2009; for new brand name prescriptions, the abandonment rate was up 23% from 2008 and up 68% from 2006. Together, health plan denials and patient abandonment resulted in 14.4% of all new, commercial plan prescriptions going unfilled in 2009, up 5.5% from 2008. A 2009 study by Wolters Kluwer Pharma Solutions, Inc. found that the cost of drug-related morbidity, including poor adherence (not taking medication as prescribed by doctors) and suboptimal prescribing, drug administration, and diagnosis, is estimated to be as much as $289 billion annually, about 13% of total health care expenditures. The barriers to medication adherence are many: cost, side effects, the difficulty of managing multiple prescriptions, patients’ understanding of their disease, forgetfulness, cultural and belief systems, imperfect drug regimens, patients’ ability to navigate the health care system, cognitive impairments, and a reduced sense of urgency due to asymptomatic conditions. Wolters Kluwer Pharma Solutions, Inc., Pharma Insight 2009: Patients take More Power Over Prescription Decisions (March 2010).

Physician dispensing envisages a dual role for the physician - prescribing medication and dispensing medicines to patients at “point-of-care.” The conventional role of the physician is the prescription of medicine that is subsequently dispensed at a pharmacy. Although this physician-dispensing concept is currently being followed by a mere 10% of physicians in the country, it is gaining momentum because of the inherent benefits to both physicians and patients. A 1989 report by the Office of the Inspector General entitled “Physician Drug Dispensing, An Overview of State Regulation” indicated that approximately 5% of physicians in the United States dispensed drugs at the point of care. In a report entitled Physician Dispensing Market Overview, Knowledge Source Inc. estimates that the percentage of physicians selling prescription medication to their patients could grow from its current less than 10% to 25% in the next five to ten years. The benefits of point-of-care dispensing to physicians and patients are set forth below.

Benefits of Physician Dispensing:

In 44 out of 50 states in the U.S., physician dispensing of prescription drugs is legal subject to specified regulations. In six other states, there are restrictions on this practice and, in Utah, Texas, Montana and New York, the restrictions are severe enough that, in practical terms, physician dispensing is effectively prohibited altogether. Massachusetts and New Jersey have limitations on the number of units that may be dispensed at any one time.

Medical Foods Products Industry Overview

The science of nutrition was long overlooked and underdeveloped and now has shown that the sick and elderly have special nutritional needs that cannot be met by traditional adult diets. Medical nutrition has emerged as an attractive segment in the food industry today.

Recent research has shown that a number of diseases are associated with metabolic imbalances and that patients in treatment have specific nutritional requirements. Some examples are osteoporosis and osteopenia, insomnia, IBS, and heart disease. Many older Americans have or will develop chronic diseases that are amenable to the “therapeutic,” dietary management benefits of medical foods. Medical foods help address these diseases and conditions in a drug-free way with food-based ingredients, yet are a medical product taken under supervision by a physician. The term “medical foods” does not pertain to all foods fed to sick patients. Medical foods are foods that are specially formulated and processed (as opposed to a naturally occurring foodstuff used in a natural state) for patients who are seriously ill or who requires the product as a major treatment modality according to FDA regulations.

Medical foods consist of “natural” ingredients very similar to dietary ingredients used in supplements: vitamins, minerals, botanicals, and amino acids. They are the same constituents that occur naturally, but in a medical-foods formula they are concentrated in “therapeutic” amounts - beyond simply modifying or augmenting the diet. Medical foods are intended for a vulnerable population suffering from a particular chronic disease and so have special, extra-rigorous guarantees of safety. All ingredients must be Generally Recognized As Safe (“GRAS”) or be FDA-approved food additives. Medical foods are taken under the supervision of a physician who monitors and adjusts the food ‘dosage.’ In addition, under FDA guidelines and the one regulation, even though pre-market FDA approval is not required for a medical food, the official requirements and responsibilities for the manufacturer, in terms of safety, are greater than for supplements, including solid scientific support for the formula as a whole. For these reasons, medical foods have greater guarantees of efficacy than dietary supplements.

Competition

According to Kalorama Information Services, the size of the medical foods market is uncertain and information about this market is primarily contained in the larger clinical nutrition market data. Competition in the clinical nutrition market is dominated by a handful of companies, ranging from global nutritional manufacturers to leading pharmaceutical companies. In the US a number of small companies have emerged to address specific areas of disease with prescription Medical Foods. These companies include Nestle Nutrition, PamLab LLC, Primus Pharmaceuticals Inc., Neptune Technologies & Bioresources Inc., Abbot Nutrition, and Accera Inc. The majority of competitive participation is in developed regions such as the United States, Western Europe, and Japan. However, many companies are expanding into less developed regions, intensifying competition in less tapped markets. China, for example, is among the expanding competitive regions as companies continue to break into the growing demand for clinical nutrition in new world markets. Companies highlighted in the study published in Clinical Nutrition Products: World Markets, 3rd Edition, include:

We provide services in a segment of the healthcare industry that is highly fragmented and extremely competitive. Our actual and potential competitors in the United States and abroad may include major specialty pharmaceutical, biotechnology, packaged food and medical food companies such as Nestle Nutrition, PamLab LLC, Primus Pharmaceuticals Inc., Neptune Technologies & Bioresources Inc., Abbot Nutrition and Accera Inc. Many of our potential competitors have considerably greater financial, technical, marketing, research and other resources than we do, which may allow these competitors to discover important information and technology before we do. It is anticipated that competition will continue to increase due to such factors as increased consumer awareness and company publications. Our competitors may succeed in developing products that circumvent our technologies or product candidates. Also, our competitors may succeed in developing technologies or products that are more effective than those that will be developed by us or that would render our technology or product candidates less competitive or obsolete.

In addition, we are developing our product candidates to complement certain methods for treating various conditions. If those methods change, it is likely that the demand for our services and product candidates would significantly decline or cease altogether. The development of new or superior competing technologies or products, or a change in the methodology of treating the ailments that our products address, could affect our competitive position and harm our business. Moreover, these competitors may offer broader product lines and have greater name recognition than us and may offer discounts as a competitive tactic.

Additionally, several development-stage companies are currently making or developing product candidates that compete with or will compete with our potential products. Competitors may succeed in developing, obtaining approval from the FDA or marketing technologies or products that are more effective or commercially attractive than our potential products or that render our technologies and current or potential products obsolete. Competitors may also develop proprietary positions that may prevent us from commercializing product candidates.

We believe that there are no competitors in medication management that offer a comprehensive solution with ease of use, accessibility, information content and financial opportunity for physicians comparable to ours, especially the availability of patented medical food and medical food convenience-packs. In the emerging market for medical food products we have gained a competitive position due to our adherence to the letter of the statute that requires physician supervision and prohibits sales directly to the consumer. By promoting the PTL brand to physicians we have been able to establish a presence in the medical community. Our patented products and clinical trials have validated the clinical utility of medical foods as standalone products as well as an adjunct to pharmaceuticals in certain specified disease states.

The medical foods sector is a small part of the greater market for clinical nutrition products worldwide. Because we have strived to abide by and exceed the legal requirements for medical food marketing we have set ourselves apart from our competitors. We have constituted an active Medical Advisory Board that consists of practicing physicians well versed in scientific research methods. We have also conducted a series of independent controlled clinical trials to validate the efficacy of our products. The results of two of these trials have been published in peer reviewed medical journals. We believe that the only other medical food company that has performed this level of scientific validation is Accera Inc., a company specializing in neurodegenerative diseases that currently markets a single medical food product.

Reimbursement for Medical Food Prescriptions

Domestic reimbursement groups in the United States include cash customers, private insurance, Medicare, Medicaid and Workers’ Compensation insurance. We have obtained the billing codes, National Drug Codes (“NDC”) and Average Wholesale Prices (“AWP”) for both our medical food products and convenience-packed pharmaceutical products, which enable our products to be submitted for insurance reimbursement. The NDC is a unique product identifier used in the United States for drugs intended for human use. The Drug Listing Act of 1972 requires registered drug establishments to provide the FDA with a current list of all drugs manufactured, prepared, propagated, compounded, or processed by it for commercial distribution. Drug products are identified and reported using the NDC. The NDC numbers and AWP pricing have been accepted by the registration authorities and are included in the listings of the major drug databases, including First DataBank, Medispan, Red Book and the FDA NDC database.

Private Insurance

The private insurance market covers most Americans who are employed along with their families. Employers either provide insurance to their employees or individuals will purchase insurance from a variety of private companies including Blue Cross/Blue Shield, Aetna, Cigna, Anthem and others. Pharmacy benefits are administered through Pharmacy Benefit Managers (“PBMs”) which are either part of the insurance company or administered through an independent company. Each PBM maintains formularies which determine which products are covered and therefore eligible for payment. Some plans have open formularies which allow payment for most products including medical foods. These are usually provided by either large employers or unions to their members. If the pharmacy plan denies payment for the medical foods, then the corresponding medical plan can be billed for payment. Payment usually occurs within 30 days of billing and an increasing percentage of private insurance plans now pay for our medical foods.

Medicare

Department of Health and Human Services data show that, as of February 16, 2010, approximately 41.8 million (90%) of the 46.5 million eligible Medicare beneficiaries, had drug coverage. The total number of beneficiaries in a Medicare Part D plans was 27.7 million (60%), including 17.7 million beneficiaries (38%) in stand-alone prescription drug plans and 9.9 million (21%) in Medicare Advantage drug plans. Another 14.2 million beneficiaries (31%) had coverage from either employer or union retiree plans including FEHB and TRICARE (8.3 million, or 18%) and drug coverage from the VA and other sources (5.9 million, or 13%). About 4.7 million Medicare beneficiaries (10%) had no drug coverage.

The Medicare Part D drug benefit shifted spending from the private sector and Medicaid to Medicare, making Medicare the nation’s largest public payer of prescription drugs (from 7% in 2005 to 60% in 2008). Medicare prescription drug spending as a share of total US prescription spending rose from 2% in 2005 to 22% in 2008. Medicare prescription drug spending totaled $52.1 billion in 2008, an increase of 13% over 2007.

Medicaid

Medicaid is the joint federal-state program that pays for medical assistance to 60 million low-income individuals and is the major source of outpatient pharmacy services to the nonelderly low-income population. Although prescription drugs is an optional service, all state Medicaid programs cover prescription drugs for most beneficiary groups, although there are important differences in state policies with regard to copayments, preferred drugs, and the number of prescriptions that can be filled. Since January 1, 2006, states have been required to make payments to Medicare to help finance Medicare drug coverage for those who are dually eligible for both Medicare and Medicaid. We currently intend to enter the Medicaid marketplace through a traditional pharmacy model.

Workers’ Compensation

The workers’ compensation market operates differently than the Medicare and commercial insurance markets. Injured workers are covered, in general, by state-administered workers’ compensation policies. The workers may select their own physician. Initial claims for reimbursement of professional and prescription expenses can be paid within 45 days but many claims are subject to a long collection cycle that may last in excess of five years. CCPI maintains an active claims submission and collection department.

While ultimate collectability of workers’ compensation claims is very high, most workers’ compensation claims are denied on first claim attempt and can take from 45 days to in excess of five years from the initial submission of a claim to collect. The initial denial begins a process of correspondence designed to clear denial objections; submission of workers’ compensation lien filings against insurer settlements on behalf of physicians and settlement hearings. Approximately 25% of claims are settled within one year of claim billed date and approximately 50% cumulatively are settled within four years of claim billed date. The majority of claims outstanding over four years are still active. Due to the uncertainty as to the timing and the amount of claims settlement and collections we do not recognize revenue until cash is received. Cash received and revenue recognized in any given year for PMM and Hybrid customers is comprised of collections on claims from that year and all prior years as applied to outstanding invoices.

Highlights of Growth Strategy

We believe that we can grow our business using the following strategies:

Our products are routinely reimbursed by third party payers such as private insurance, workers compensation and Medicare. Products are distributed primarily through dispensing physicians and selected pharmacies. In the physician dispensing environment revenues are redirected from reimbursement to pharmacies to the physician who is acting as both the prescriber and the dispenser of medical therapies.

The POD channel sells directly to physicians, who profit by prescribing and dispensing medical foods products, convenience packs and generic and branded pharmaceuticals. Current pricing pressure on healthcare insurance reimbursements has made physicians extremely receptive to carrying our products, which, in addition to their therapeutic value and scientifically-validated efficacy, provide much desired additional income for the physician. We believe a large number of physicians do not want to directly dispense to patients but are receptive to prescribing side effect free medications through both mail-order pharmacies and conventional pharmacy distribution systems.

TMP initiated a study involving military veterans who had served in the First and Second Gulf Wars and now suffer with post-traumatic stress syndrome (“PTSD”), a condition that has been difficult to treat. The study was an open label protocol looking at PTSD patients given Sentra AM and Sentra PM. Primary and secondary outcomes used several standardized questionnaires, captured via an online platform. The study began upon enrollment in August, 2011. Twenty five subjects completed the study by December 2011 and an interim analysis was performed. Patients showed a statistically significant improvement in all primary outcomes of a magnitude such that the safety monitoring committee for the study appointed by the Company stated that it was no longer ethical to withhold treatment because of the positive results. The study has been accepted for Publication.

In addition, the Company has initiated studies with the military joint command for use of the products within the active duty military. These protocols involve acute and chronic back pain. Narcotic use within the military is increasing because of these back pain syndromes and a side effect free back pain product would have substantial use within the military community. The protocols, which are more fully described below under “Clinical Trials,” are expected to begin in the second half of 2014 and will be performed at Fort Bragg. The Company’s products have been approved for purchase by the Federal Supply Schedule through 2017.

We have been heavily reliant on the worker’s compensation insurance market that provides reimbursement through both distributors and internally-managed physician accounts. Payment protocols under the workers compensation system delay payment up to five years or longer for reimbursement. The Medicare and private insurance markets generally reimburse in 20 to 60 days from the date that the bill is submitted, which would improve cash flow considerably. The market for patients with private insurance and Medicare is dramatically larger than the workers compensation market alone.

As additional clinical trials are conducted to support the scientific basis of prescribing our products in conjunction with generic and branded pharmaceuticals we plan to demonstrate the ability to increase effectiveness, reduce total cost of treatment, and reduce the attenuation of drugs while reducing the dangerous side effects of some drugs. It is estimated that more than 130 convenience-packed products can be created based on current products. The patent application for convenience packed products cites 136 different variations. In 2010 we were awarded three grants under the U.S. Government’s Qualifying Therapeutic Discovery Project (“QTDP”) program established under Section 48D of the Internal Revenue Code. Our grant awards were specifically related to the applications submitted for our research and development efforts addressing the nutritional management of diseases with safe, therapeutic formulations sourced from bioactive compounds and co-administered with generic drugs.

TMP has entered into an agreement to conduct a double blind randomized placebo controlled trial with the Defense Veterans Cooperative on Integrated Pain Management (“DVCIPM”) to look at the use of Theramine in soldiers with acute and chronic back pain. Narcotic usage leads to addiction and inability to remain on active duty related to side effects. The study, which is expected to begin in the second half of 2014, hopes to demonstrate that Theramine is a viable alternative for these patients and can reduce narcotic use in soldiers and veterans.

In November 2013 the University of Cincinnati instituted a double blind, placebo controlled investigator initiated trial on the use of Theramine in the treatment of chronic migraine headache. The trial is expected to last two years. Options for the treatment of chronic migraines are limited and have numerous side effects and Theramine could play a vital role in the treatment of this condition.

Beginning in late 2012 an open label investigator initiated clinical observation, augmented by Company data, was conducted on the benefits of amino acid based medical foods to address specific nutrient deficiencies in children with autism spectrum disease (“ASD”). Open label data in over 50 patients has demonstrated a reduction in aggressive behaviors and improvement in socialization and concentration based on observation.

A double blind placebo controlled trial examining the use of Clearwayz in the treatment of nasal congestion and snoring is ongoing. Results are expected during the second quarter of 2014.

Proposals involving investigator initiated trials for the treatment of fibromyalgia are being reviewed.

Studies are being designed examining the new oral pharyngeal delivery system with pain, sleep, cognition and autistic spectrum disorder.

In February 2013, the Company was issued patent number 8,370,172 that covers the use of a physician’s National Provider Identifier (“NPI”) in conjunction with a unique physician’s identification number that allows billing by computer systems using these unique identification numbers. The Company is developing a plan for enforcement of this issued patent and is in the process of interviewing potential patent attorneys. However, finalization of the plan for enforcement will be delayed until the Company makes a final determination on legal representation, which may not occur until late 2014. The patent may cover a large percentage of the 4 billion prescriptions dispensed in the United States each year. The Company’s strategy will initially focus on physicians that directly dispense products to patients and those physicians’ billing companies. Following this initial strategy, the Company may expand its enforcement to the other point-of-care physicians and billing systems. The Company is exploring direct infringers who may have been knowingly violating the patent application during the post-publication timeframe. The size and scope of this business is currently under exploration. The patent covers dispensing of medical foods, convenience kits and pharmaceuticals as prescribed by point of care physicians.

The Company has developed a nutrient-based system for stimulation of progenitor stem cell systems and filed patent applications for the general system and individual products. The initial products include stimulation of red blood cell progenitor cells, neurons, insulin producing progenitor cells and testosterone producing progenitor cells. The nutrient-based systems will be marketed as medical foods. The first initial prototype has been test marketed as a peripheral neuron stimulating system for use in diabetic neuropathy. Initial clinical trials were completed in the second half of 2013. Two clinical trials have been performed in normal subjects for oral stimulation of red blood cells and progenitor red blood cells as measured by reticulocyte formation. These products address large markets which are difficult to quantify at this time. The nutrient-based stimulation of stem cells does not require harvesting transformation and reinjection of transformed stem cells. The nutrient-based stimulation and transformation of stem cells contains an inhibitory off switch. It is anticipated that the red blood cell stimulating system will be available for marketing sometime in 2015.

Products and Services

Medical Foods

Medical foods are a distinct product category, different from both drugs and from dietary supplements, which are regulated by the FDA. The medical food category, defined by the Orphan Drug Act of 1988 and an FDA regulation, includes such criteria as: specially formulated, administered orally, with on-going physician supervision, and intended for patients with a disease or abnormal condition characterized by a distinctive nutritional requirement or metabolic imbalance. The precise statutory definition is as follows: “The term medical food means a food which is formulated to be consumed or administered enterally under the supervision of a physician and which is intended for the specific dietary management of a disease or condition for which distinctive nutritional requirements, based on recognized scientific principles, are established by medical evaluation.”

The FDA’s May 2007 Guidance for Industry states, “The term medical food is defined in section 5(b) of the Orphan Drug Act. The term medical food does not pertain to all foods fed to sick patients. Medical foods are foods that are specially formulated and processed (as opposed to a naturally occurring foodstuff used in a natural state) for the patient who is seriously ill or who requires the product as a major treatment modality. Medical foods are only for a patient receiving active and ongoing medical supervision wherein the patient requires medical care on a recurring basis for, among other things, instructions on the use of the medical food.” [Emphasis added.]

Medical foods are specially formulated and intended for the dietary management of a disease that has distinctive nutritional needs that cannot be met by normal diet alone. A medical food may not be intended for a condition that may be addressed by merely a change in the diet, e.g., a gluten-free diet for gluten sensitivity. Because they are highly specialized foods, and not dietary supplements, they are not exempt from the GRAS requirements. The FDA uses the GRAS term to designate ingredients for food as safe for use without further testing or review. The FDA maintains lists of such GRAS ingredients, both the form and dose. Ingredients in Medical Foods must be GRAS. Accordingly, all the ingredients in PTL products must be GRAS. This is the basis for the FDA’s position that medical foods do not require pre-approval. In addition, it is the GRAS designation that substantially reduces the development cost of PTL products. The largest proportion of expenditures for drug development is used to estimate safety since proving safety depends on the relative risk. Finding a 1 in 1,000,000 adverse event is very expensive but necessary if 20,000,000 people will take the drug. The primary ingredients in PTL products are amino acids that are GRAS. Thus, all of their ingredients must either have GRAS status or be FDA-approved food additives. Medical foods currently marketed in the United States include products for inborn errors of metabolism and nutrient management of such conditions as healing from burns, osteoporosis, AIDS, and kidney disease. In some cases a medical food may provide the sole nutrient/ food for a patient (e.g., a throat cancer victim). Medical foods are administered both in hospitals and in clinical practice, out-patient settings.

We have developed proprietary medical food formulations based on our patented Targeted Cellular Technology. The unifying foundation of our products is a focus on managing diseases and disorders caused in whole or in part by changes in nutritional requirements related to specific diseases that result in functional neurotransmitter depletion. These core medical food products are related to the production of the chemical messengers that are known as neurotransmitters. Neurotransmitters are intimately involved in the disease process and can be modulated through medically supervised nutritional management. Many pharmaceutical agents also operate through a neurotransmitter mechanism. Pharmaceutical agents act by blocking or manipulating neurotransmitter pathways, such as selective serotonin re-uptake inhibitors (“SSRIs”). Many diseases create accelerated utilization of certain nutrients that are not able to be replaced by the normal diet alone. Functional depletion of neurotransmitters is also associated with injury, prescription drug use, stress, and chemical exposure. Our medical foods are effective for the dietary management of such conditions by supplying the specific and distinctive nutrients that the patient needs.

Medical foods do not require approval from the FDA before marketing, thereby significantly reducing the entry cost compared to pharmaceuticals using neurotransmitter mechanisms. We market our medical foods as prescription-only products, requiring a physician prescription. Our products cannot be marketed directly to consumers but must, in contrast to over-the-counter products, have continuous physician supervision, which we enforce with our prescription-only labeling appellation, and sale and distribution only through physicians and pharmacies.

The manufacture of our medical foods is outsourced in its entirety to one manufacturer under a contract that was extended for an additional five years in December 2011. We currently market ten core medical food products listed below, each of which have a shelf life of three years.

Our product, Theramine accounted for more than 39% of sales in the year ended December 31, 2013 and 42% in the year ended December 31, 2012. Pain is a complex process that is mediated by neurotransmitters which transmit signals originating from a pain-inducing stimulus to specific centers in the brain where it is perceived. Pain is exacerbated by the presence of inflammation which increases sensitivity to pain-inducing stimuli. Patients with pain syndromes benefit from increased availability of the specific neurotransmitters involved in modulating the pain process complemented by antioxidants and anti-inflammatory agents that reduce inflammation. Theramine is formulated to provide specific neurotransmitters with well-defined roles in the modulation of pain and a blend of antioxidants, anti-inflammatory agents, and immunomodulators to moderate the effects of inflammation on the pain response.

Theramine provides neurotransmitters that address the pain cycle and the inflammatory cascade and target the neurotransmitters nitric oxide, GABA, serotonin and glutamate that have primary effects on inhibition of pain cycles. Theramine also targets the inflammatory cascade through the histidine/histamine axis, which provides anti-inflammatory ACTH release from the pituitary gland, with subsequent release of anti-inflammatory molecules. Theramine results in inhibition of the inflammatory cascade at its proximal portions. Thus, the complete cascade of the inflammatory systems is inhibited, including anti-inflammatory prostaglandins and T cell long-term inflammatory markers. NSAIDS such as ibuprofen, naproxen and Celebrex inhibit only prostaglandins.

In 2009, the Company completed a double-blind-controlled trial of patients with chronic established back pain. In this trial, Theramine was compared to naproxen both alone and with co-administration of the two agents. Theramine was shown to be more effective than naproxen in reducing back pain, and the two agents were better than naproxen alone. In addition, this trial showed that Theramine reduced the inflammatory marker C-reactive protein, while naproxen in low dose actually increased inflammatory markers. Reduction of back pain, using the Roland Morris index, was more than 76%, compared to no change with low dose naproxen.

The Company has completed a double blind controlled trial of Theramine and ibuprofen in 128 patients with chronic established back pain. There were three groups randomly assigned treatment. The groups included ibuprofen 200 mg daily alone, Theramine two capsules twice daily and Theramine with ibuprofen. The study duration was 28 days per patient. Ibuprofen reduced back pain by 20%, Theramine by 60% and Theramine with ibuprofen by over 80%. Ibuprofen increased both C-reactive protein and interleukin-6, inflammatory markers, while Theramine reduced these inflammatory markers. Ibuprofen inhibited amino acid uptake reducing amino acid turnover while Theramine improved amino acid uptake. Ibuprofen treatment increased the need for increased amino acid administration while Theramine improved amino acid utilization. Ibuprofen increased the nutritional requirement of back pain syndromes.

These data indicate that Theramine is both a potent pain reduction agent and an inhibitor of inflammation. The double-blind placebo-controlled data show there is no significant side effects of Theramine. We also completed an analysis of gastrointestinal hemorrhage associated with Theramine administration. A significant complication of the use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory agents such as naproxen and ibuprofen is gastrointestinal hemorrhage that are expensive to treat and can cause death. We have shown that in more than 46 million individual administrations of Theramine alone or in combination with other pain agents such as non-steroidal anti-inflammatory agents there has not been a single reported case of gastrointestinal hemorrhage. The expected incidence of such events in this cohort would have been between 400 and 4000 gastrointestinal hemorrhages. The elimination or significant reduction of gastrointestinal hemorrhage when Theramine is used compared to use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory agents such as naproxen and ibuprofen could significantly reduce health care costs.

In addition to Theramine, which is our leading product in terms of gross product sales, the products Sentra PM and GABAdone, both of which address chronic sleep disorders, are second and third, respectively, in terms of gross product sales. These two products elicit the production of serotonin, acetylcholine and GABA, the primary neurotransmitters responsible for the initiation and maintenance of sleep. The concentrations and proportion of the formula do not result in morning grogginess or memory loss common with the use of pharmaceutical sleep aids. A significant portion of Company sales arise from Sentra AM, a product that increases acetylcholine, the central neurotransmitter associated with alertness, cognitive function and memory. It is also a central neurotransmitter associated with amelioration of the symptoms of fibromyalgia.

Convenience-Packed Products

We have developed 35 convenience-packed products consisting of medical foods formulations and generic pharmaceuticals, which physicians can prescribe and dispense together to optimize drug dosages and achieve a therapeutic effect, while reducing drug side effects and costs. A convenience-packed product is a box containing a 30-day supply of a generic pharmaceutical and a 30-day supply of a medical food product. The box is appropriately labeled and contains separate plain-English inserts providing patient information about the generic pharmaceutical and the medical food. An example of a convenience kit is a box that contains a bottle of Theramine 90 capsules and a separate bottle of Naproxen 250mg, both representing a month’s supply of product.

We supply physician clients with the components of the convenience packs and they can dispense the components packaged together to their patients. We provide our physician clients an appropriately labeled box containing the medical food product and a package insert. The physician purchases the pharmaceutical and assembles the convenience pack at the time of dispensing. The PDRx system prints the box label and patient instructions.

Our convenience-packed products include therapies for pain syndromes, sleep disorders, hypertension, viral infections and metabolic syndrome. Three double blind controlled trials have been performed on these products with positive results showing that adjunctive therapy with a medical food product can reduce the drug dose while maintaining efficacy and reducing side effects. The use of pharmaceutical agents co-administered with medical foods allows the physician to select the optimal dose of the pharmaceutical. These double blind controlled trials yielded positive results in the areas of chronic, established back pain and sleep disorders. In these trials, drug side effects were reduced at the low drug doses and the potential for gastrointestinal hemorrhage was also reduced when nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (“NSAIDS”) were used as part of the convenience pack with the medical food Theramine. The convenience packed drugs are within the FDA-approved label dose. These convenience packs are registered in the FDA National Drug Code (“NDC”) database and all convenience-packed products have been routinely reimbursed by third party payers.

The results of one of the Theramine trials have been in the American Journal of Therapeutics online in November 2010 and in print March 2012. A pharmacoeconomic analysis of Theramine versus NSAID’s was published in the Journal of Pharmacy Research in May 2012. The results of a trial on Sentra PM in the Journal of Central Nervous System Disease in April 2012. Publication of other trial results are planned for the near future.

The results of a clinical trial on a stand-alone medical food product, GABAdone, were published in American Journal of Therapeutics in the March/April 2010 issue in an article titled “A Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Trial of an Amino Acid Preparation on Timing and Quality of Sleep.”

PDRx Software Dispensing Program

The following table illustrates our 35 convenience packs.

PDRx Software Dispensing Program

We have developed PDRx to facilitate physician dispensing, provide inventory control and assist regulatory reporting. The dispensed products include medical foods and generic pharmaceuticals. PDRx directly communicates dispensing data from the physicians’ offices to our management servers in real-time. This allows businesses to use PDRx from computers or smart devices with internet access. This technology is hosted on company-owned and managed servers and accessed only through a secure gateway, allow for compliance with all laws and regulations relating to protected health information.

PDRx also allows information to be delivered directly to us for purposes of future sales and educational content. Each physician’s use of controlled substances is documented and reported to the Drug Enforcement Administration as required by law. No fee is charged for the use of the PDRx software. Although the Company derives no revenue from a physician client’s use of the PDRx software, it enables CCPI to more efficiently process claims on behalf of a physician client.

A physician’s office can dispense a one-month supply of medications complete with dispensing label and patient instructions in approximately ten seconds. We have automatic surveillance programs that monitor physician dispensing rates and inventory. Using a max-min system, we can then generate a flag to physicians to reorder product as necessary.

Billing and Collections

CCPI is our wholly-owned subsidiary that provides billing and collection services relating to our products on behalf of dispensing physician clients to private insurance, Medicare, and workers’ compensation insurance. CCPI retains a percentage of all collections made for claims made on behalf of physicians in accordance with our billing services agreement and recognizes revenue upon collection of the claim. CCPI’s billing and collection services aid the physician in obtaining reimbursement for dispensed products. The physician is entitled to the residual amount of a claim after deducting CCPI’s fee and TMP’s product invoice. This business model allows physicians to participate in the revenue stream from dispensing of pharmaceuticals. Our billing system utilizes a combination of two unique identifying numbers and a computer recognition algorithm to bill third party payers on behalf of the physician. The following two patent applications for this process have been submitted:

1. US Pat. Application. No. 11/804,085 Filing date: May 17, 2007 Status: Request for Continued Examination and Response to office action filed on December 27, 2010. US Pat. No. 8,370,172 was issued February 5, 2013.

2. US Pat. Application. No. 12/966,720 (pending) Filing date: December 13, 2010 Status: The Company responded to an office action and is awaiting the next communication from USPTO, which is expected within the next six months. The functional utility of this system is currently protected by trade secret and by issued US Pat. No. 8,370,172 and this patent application and by US Pat. Application No. 13/759,007 filed February 4, 2013.

On November 20, 2012, TMP entered into an agreement with Cambridge Medical Funding Group (“CMFG”) to assign physicians account receivables under California Workman’s Compensation (“CMFG #1”). Subject to physician’s approval, Cambridge will pay 23% of the California Workman’s Compensation Fee Schedule on all approved claims. The physician’s fees and financial obligations due to TMP, for the purchase of TMP product and use of CCPI’s services, are satisfied directly by CMFG, usually within seven (7) days of transmission of the accounts receivable to CMFG. CMFG makes this payment directly to TMP, on behalf of the physician. TMP applies this payment to the physician’s financial obligations due to CCPI for the physician’s use of the Company’s medical billing and claims processing services, and the physician’s financial obligation due to TMP for the cost of the product. The Company recognizes revenue on the date that payment is due from CMFG. Under CMFG #1, the Company only receives the 23% advance payment, where such payment is without recourse or future obligation for TMP to repay the 23% advanced amount back to CMFG or the physician. Actual amounts collected on the assigned accounts receivable are shared between CMFG and the physician, where the first approximately 41% of amounts collected are disbursed to CMFG and additional amounts collected are shared at a ratio of 75:25, where 75% is disbursed to the physician and 25% is disbursed to CMFG. Under this model, physicians are paid on every dispensement rather than having to wait until claims are paid. Physicians have the option of remaining on the traditional Physician Managed model or switching to the CMFG #1 model. The CMFG #1 agreement contains a 30-day termination clause within the first 6 months that either party can exercise. It is possible that either party may cancel the agreement, which could adversely affect the Company’s cash flow and revenue.

Technology and Intellectual Property

Proprietary Technology

The proprietary Targeted Cellular Technology® (“TCT”) platform allows reduced concentrations of amino acids to generate effective amounts of nerve and brain cell messengers, known as neurotransmitters, to target specific cells in the body to optimize cell function. Amino acids are the building blocks of protein that allow the body to produce these neurotransmitters that regulate most bodily functions. Increasing the body’s own neurotransmitter production allows for improved sleep function, improved cognitive function, mitigation of pain, blood pressure regulation, improved lung function, appetite regulation and amelioration of complex medical syndromes with minimal potential for adverse effects. Our medical food products have effects similar to drugs in addressing the specific accelerated nutritional requirements of diseases. These products can be administrated alone or with traditional pharmaceuticals under medical supervision. Six years of clinical use and three double blind clinical trials have demonstrated that the adjunctive use of a medical food product with a traditional pharmaceutical can provide optimum drug dose that conforms to the lowest FDA labeled dose. We have received six patents on the TCT process, one on the CCPI claims billing and processing of medication claims by point-of-care physicians technology, and nine pending patent applications covering our TCT technology and CCPI claims billing and processing of medication claims by point-of-care physicians technology, and we maintain trademarks, trade secrets, and proprietary methods, as further set forth below.

Patents

The nutrient-based and pharmaceutical product development process involves extensive trade secrets and pending and issued patent protections. The patents related to the Targeted Cellular Technology platform were assigned from the inventors, Elizabeth Charuvastra, RN and William Shell M.D., who are also, respectively, former Chairman of our Board of Directors and our Chief Executive Officer.

The Company filed three patent applications at the USPTO covering technology for stimulating in vivo differentiation of stem and progenitor cells for producing red blood cells, growth hormone, and testosterone. Specifically, these three patent applications cover compositions and methods for augmenting and sustaining amino acid delivery for stimulating in vivo differentiation of stem and progenitor cells for producing red blood cells, growth hormone, and testosterone. Further, these three patent applications include additional disclosure covering other embodiments for stimulating in vivo differentiation of stem and progenitor cells to produce additional tissue and cell types. Additionally, the Company has recently filed a continuation patent application claiming benefit to the original CCPI claims billing and processing of medication claims by point-of-care physicians patent application to seek allowed claims for additional systems and methods directed to this technology. Further, the Company has filed a pending patent application covering additional embodiments of the CCPI claims billing and processing of medication claims by point-of-care physicians technology. This patent application claims priority benefit to the recently issued patent technology contained in issued US Pat. No. 8,370,172.

We currently own or have exclusive rights to the following issued patents and pending patent applications:

⁽¹⁾ The Company’s foreign counsel in Europe report that the patent application is in good order and an examination report for this patent application is expected within the next six months.

⁽²⁾ The Company filed a response to an office action that was issued by the Japanese Patent Office (“JPO”). The Company is awaiting the next communication from the JPO.

⁽³⁾ The Company’s foreign counsel in Europe report that the patent application is in good order and an examination report for this patent application is expected within the next six months.

⁽⁴⁾ The Company filed a response to an office action that was issued by the Japanese Patent Office (“JPO”). The Company is awaiting the next communication from the JPO.

⁽⁵⁾ A request to reconsider current USPTO decision was filed and the Company is awaiting the next communication from USPTO, which is expected within the next six months. This patent application contains method claims relating to the CCPI claims billing and processing of medication claims by point-of-care physicians technology.

⁽⁶⁾ This patent application was filed on February 4, 2013 and is a continuation patent application of the issued parent patent application (U.S. Pat. No. 8,370,172). It contains computer system and method claims that claim priority to the parent patent application. It also claims priority benefit to the parent patent application filing date. The Company is awaiting examination communication from USPTO, which is expected within four months.

⁽⁷⁾ This PCT patent application is abandoned. All desired national and regional patent applications claiming benefit to this PCT patent application have been filed and are listed above.

⁽⁸⁾ The Company expects to receive a communication from the USPTO on or before June 1, 2014.

⁽⁹⁾ The Company expects to receive a communication from the USPTO on or before June 1, 2014.

⁽¹⁰⁾ The Company expects to receive a communication from the USPTO on or before June 1, 2014.

⁽¹¹⁾ PCT patent application including claims of pending US Patent Application No. 13/115,963. National and/or regional phase patent applications may be filed based on this PCT patent application.

⁽¹²⁾ PCT patent application including claims of pending US Patent Application No. 13/115,965. National and/or regional phase patent applications may be filed based on this PCT patent application.

⁽¹³⁾ PCT patent application including claims of pending US Patent Application No. 13/115,967. National and/or regional phase patent applications may be filed based on this PCT patent application.

Trademarks

We utilize trademarks on all current products and believe that having distinguishing marks is an important factor in marketing our products. Currently, we have nine U.S. registered trademarks on the principal register at the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) and we have two common law trademarks. These marks are listed below. We believe that having distinctive marks for any additional products that we develop will also be an important marketing characteristic. We have not sought any foreign trademark protection for our products or product candidates at this time. U.S. trademark registrations generally are for fixed, but renewable, terms.

We currently own, or have exclusive rights to, the following registered trademarks:

We currently own, or have exclusive rights to, the following common law trademarks:

				Product(s)/Product
Mark		Owner		Candidate(s)
PHYSICIAN THERAPEUTICS		TMP		Wholesale distributorships featuring dietary supplements and medical foods; Wholesale distributor of medical foods and convenience packs
		TMP		Wholesale distributor of medical foods and convenience packs

Copyrights

We have developed a number of properties that we believe qualify for exclusivity in terms of the U.S. Copyright Act, among them:

Software Programs

Publications

Billing and Collections

CCPI is our wholly-owned subsidiary that provides billing and collection services relating to our products on behalf of dispensing physician clients to private insurance, Medicare, and workers’ compensation insurance. CCPI retains a percentage of all collections made for claims made on behalf of physicians in accordance with our billing services agreement and recognizes revenue upon collection of the claim. CCPI’s billing and collection services aid the physician in obtaining reimbursement for dispensed products. The physician is entitled to the residual amount of a claim after deducting CCPI’s fee and TMP’s product invoice. This business model allows physicians to participate in the revenue stream from dispensing of pharmaceuticals. Our billing system utilizes a combination of two unique identifying numbers and a computer recognition algorithm to bill third party payers on behalf of the physician. The following patent and pending patent applications for this technology have been filed or issued:

Medical Foods Manufacturing and Sources and Availability of Raw Materials

We outsource the manufacturing of our medical food products to a cGMP registered producer, Arizona Nutritional Supplements (“ANS”), under an exclusive contract that expires in December 2016. We have vetted a second manufacturing facility and have determined that we could immediately transfer manufacturing without a significant disruption in the business in the event that there is a disruption at our current manufacturing facility. cGMP refers to the current Good Manufacturing Practice Regulations promulgated by the FDA under the authority of the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act of 1938. These regulations, which have the force of law, require that manufacturers, processors, and packagers of drugs, medical devices, some food, and blood take proactive steps to ensure that their products are safe, pure, and effective. cGMP regulations address issues including recordkeeping, personnel qualifications, sanitation, cleanliness, equipment verification, process validation, and complaint handling. Currently, we provide the manufacturer with a formula and manufacturing specifications. ANS sources and purchases raw ingredients and manufactures the products to our specifications. All raw materials are subject to rigorous testing at the time of acquisition and during the manufacturing process for purity. Stability testing is also performed by the manufacturer. Products are then shipped to the distribution center.

The raw materials used in the manufacture of our medical foods are primarily amino acids, which are used in multiple products and are readily available from various sources. Small amounts of botanicals are used in formulations as co-factors. The raw ingredients for our medical foods are sourced from multiple vendors and we have not experienced any shortages in these materials.

Research and Development

We develop candidate formulas for potential medical food products in a process that involves extensive translational research of the existing medical and scientific literature and their applicability to various diseases. We have developed a database that contains in excess of 150,000 peer-reviewed published articles, which we have extracted from various national and international databases and identified as useful in our process of commercializing developments in neuroscience over the past 30 years.

With the database as the basis for formula development, our team of scientists then develops formulas and manufactures prototypes that undergo laboratory testing for safety and efficacy. One of our strengths is the selection of appropriate and relevant testing methodologies. Once a prototype has been created, a small batch is produced and crossover clinical trials are then performed to assess the ability of the new product to produce neurotransmitters using physiologic endpoints. Double blind controlled trials are then performed. The clinical trials are outsourced to an independent contract research organization (“CRO”) that indentifies and contracts with independent sites throughout the United States that gather appropriate data. Our Scientific Advisory Board reviews data analysis and supervises writing and publication of trial results. All clinical trials are performed with independent Institutional Review Board (“IRB”) approval. In addition, all trial protocols are submitted to the FDA for review. However, the FDA does not routinely review the submitted protocols because medical foods and the related studies do not require FDA pre-approval and our products are comprised of ingredients that have been categorized as GRAS by the FDA.

While there is no pre-approval mechanism at the FDA for medical food products, all such products must have validation of their effectiveness prior to being marketed. Because all medical food products are required to contain ingredients that are GRAS, there are no safety testing requirements. We validate the effectiveness of our products by clinical testing, including double blind, randomized clinical trials.

We file patents for new inventions through our scientists. We also publish both peer-reviewed and internally-generated publications. There are seven pending patent applications including five using TCT technology and two pending patent applications on the billing process. The five pending patent applications using TCT technology are foreign applications to extend the intellectual property protection beyond the United States where these five patents have already been issued.

Our research and development includes performance of early clinical studies and double blind placebo controlled trials. (Studies on therapeutic treatments for pain in human subjects do not permit IRB approval for the use of a placebo arm in clinical trials due to ethical considerations). We maintain an in-house research staff and outsource double-blind trials to an independent clinical research organization. All clinical trials are performed in the United States.

Sales and Marketing

We distribute products through a network of distributors and an internal sales force that sells products directly to dispensing physician clients. There are currently five distributors and two Hybrid customers selling our products to their networks and ten internal sales representatives who sell directly to physicians. Physicians purchase products from PTL for dispensing directly to their patients. Physician Therapeutics also, in limited circumstances, distributes generic and branded pharmaceuticals to physicians in 30-day prepack units that it purchases from wholesalers. This process is referred to as “point-of-care dispensing.” We believe that physicians find these solutions attractive because incorporating these systems into their office work flow can increase efficiency and profitability for the practice, reduce medication errors, improve patient compliance and improve the quality of patient care by reducing drug side effects.

Our propriety dispensing system, PDRx, allows physicians to dispense prescription products and generic pharmaceuticals directly to patients using the hardware and software provided in the PDRx system rather than by the patient taking a paper prescription to a pharmacy. In addition, physicians can elect to utilize CCPI’s billing and collection services relating to our products to collect reimbursement from private insurance, workers’ compensation or Medicare.

BUSINESS MODEL

Revenue Models

TMP markets medical foods and generic and branded pharmaceuticals through employed sales representatives, independent distributors, and pharmacies. Product sales are invoiced upon shipment at AWP, with varying rapid pay discounts, under six models: Physician Direct Sales, Distributor Direct Sales, Physician Managed, Hybrid, CMFG #1 and CMFG #2 Models.

Revenue Recognition

Under the following revenue models product sale revenues are recognized upon shipment:

Due to substantial uncertainties as to the timing and collectability of revenues derived from our Physician Managed, Hybrid and CMFG #2 models, which can take in excess of five years to collect, we have determined that these revenues do not meet the criteria for recognition, in accordance with The Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) Topic No. ASC 605, Revenue Recognition (“ASC 605”), upon shipment. These revenues are recorded when collectability is reasonably assured, which the Company has determined is when the payment is received, which is upon collection of the claim.

In the years ended December 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012, the Company issued billings (net of applicable discounts) to Physician Managed, Hybrid and CMFG #2 model customers aggregating $5.7 million and $11.9 million respectively, which were not recognized as revenues or accounts receivable in the accompanying consolidated financial statements at the time of such billings. Direct costs associated with these billings and billings to our direct and distributor customers are expensed as incurred in each reporting period. Direct costs associated with all billings aggregating $1.1 million and $1.3 million, were expensed in the accompanying consolidated financial statements at the time of such billings. However, in accordance with the revenue recognition policy described above, the Company recognized revenues from certain of the Physician Managed, Hybrid and CMFG #2 model customers when cash was collected aggregating $5.0 million and $4.4 million in 2013 and 2012, respectively.

Revenue recognized in any given year is comprised of cash received on all claims settled in that year regardless of the year in which the customer was billed or the claim originated. As of December 31, 2013 the Company had unrecognized revenue and accounts receivables from its Physician Managed, Hybrid and CMFG #2 Model customers totaling $8.3 million which are not reflected in the accompanying consolidated financial statements.

CCPI receives no revenue in the physician direct or distributor direct models because it does not provide collection and billing services to these customers. In the Physician Managed, Hybrid, CMFG #1 and CMFG #2 Models, CCPI has a billing and claims processing service agreement with the physician. That agreement includes a service fee defined as a percentage of collections on all claims. Because fees are only earned by CCPI upon collection of the claim and the fee is not determinable until the amount of the collection of the claim is known, CCPI recognizes revenue at the time that collections are received.

No returns of products are allowed except products damaged in shipment, which has been insignificant.

The rapid pay discounts to the AWP offered to the physician or distributor vary based upon the expected payment term from the physician or distributor. The discounts are derived from the Company’s historical experience of the collection rates from internal sources and updated for facts and circumstances and known trends and conditions in the industry, as appropriate. As described in the models above, we recognize provisions for rapid pay discounts in the same period in which the related revenue is recorded. These rapid pay discounts, have typically ranged from 40% to 88% of AWP and we have monitored our experience ratio periodically over the prior twelve months and have made adjustments as appropriate.

Allowance for doubtful accounts

Trade accounts receivable are stated at the amount management expects to collect from outstanding balances. Currently accounts receivable are comprised totally of amounts due from distributor customers, amounts due from Cambridge pursuant to our CMFG #1 model and receivables for our PDRx equipment. The carrying amounts of accounts receivable are reduced by an allowance for doubtful accounts that reflects management's best estimate of the amounts that will not be collected. We individually review all accounts receivable balances and based on an assessment of current creditworthiness, estimate the portion, if any, of the balance that will not be collected. We provide for probable uncollectible amounts through a charge to earnings and a credit to a valuation allowance based on our assessment of the current status of individual accounts. Balances that are still outstanding after we have used reasonable collection efforts are written off. Based on an assessment as of December 31, 2013 of the collectability of invoices 120 days or more past their due dates we established an allowance for doubtful accounts of $81,171.

Under the Company’s Physician Managed, Hybrid, CMFG #1 and CMFG #2 models, CCPI performs billing and collection services on behalf of the physician client and deducts the CCPI fee and product invoice amount from the reimbursement received by CCPI on behalf of the physician client before the reimbursement is forwarded to the physician client. Extended collection periods are typical in the workers compensation industry with payment terms extending from 45 days to in excess of five years. Approximately 25% of claims are settled within one year of claim billed date and approximately 50% cumulatively are settled within four years of claim billed date. The majority of claims outstanding over four years are still active. Due to the uncertainty as to the timing and the amount of claims settlement and collections we do not recognize revenue until cash is received. Cash received and revenue recognized in any given year from our Physician Managed, Hybrid and CMFG #2 models is comprised of collections on claims from that year and all prior years as applied to outstanding invoices.

The physician remains personally liable for purchases of product from TMP and, during this long collection cycle, TMP retains a security interest in all products sold to the physician along with the claims receivable that result from sales of the products. CCPI maintains an accounting of all managed accounts receivable on behalf of the physician and regularly reports to the physician. As described above, due to uncertainties as to the timing and collectability of revenues derived from these models, revenue is recorded when payment is received therefore no allowance for doubtful accounts is necessary.

In addition to the bad debt recognition policy above, it is also TMP’s policy to write down uncollectible loans and trade receivables when the payer is no longer in existence, is in bankruptcy or is otherwise insolvent. In such instances our policy is to reduce accounts receivable by the uncollectible amount and to proportionally reduce the allowance for doubtful accounts.

U.S. Distribution

There are currently five distributors and two Hybrid customers selling our products to their networks and ten internal sales representative employees who sell directly to physicians. The initial sales of our products were in the California workers compensation market.

Our sales currently are primarily in California (approximately 77% of total sales), but we also sell to physicians and distributors in Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Hawaii, Illinois, Kansas, Kentucky, Maryland, Massachusetts, Missouri, Montana, Nevada, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Texas, Washington and Wisconsin. The Company has a small presence in each of these states and is actively marketing through either distributors or sales representatives in these states. Marketing efforts entail distribution of updated medical food education materials and product sheets, both in hard copy and online. These materials focus on specific products and discuss context-specific use with accompanying support materials. The Company distributes this information at professional conferences, through direct mail materials, to pain and rehabilitation specialists, sleep centers and skilled nursing facilities. We primarily market to orthopedic surgeons, pain specialists, rheumatologists treating fibromyalgia and physical medicine specialists. With the initiation of physician dispensing and insurance reimbursement into the private insurance market, we have begun to address internal medicine, primary care medicine, and psychiatry, as well.

Marketing plans also include localized, region-specific Web sites for awareness and education about medical foods with links to the Company’s main Web site for more in-depth education. In addition, the Company is preparing press kits, which include information about the Company, management and product backgrounds. The Company is also developing presentations for use in varied mobile applications, such as flash drives, briefing dossiers, conference materials and iPad sales support. In addition, the Company has compiled road show and briefing materials on the Company’s medical food products to be presented by the Company’s Chief Executive Officer and other senior executives to invited medical groups and for one-on-one briefings with media personnel. The Company is also evolving its use of online media through the creation of small-space advertisements, quick advertisements linking back to the Company’s Web site and for use in targeted online publications.

We have been collecting reimbursement from the workers compensation systems in California and Florida since 2004. Revenue from our physician customers under PMM plus our distributors utilizing CCPI’s services for their physician customers under our Hybrid Model accounts for approximately 73% of our product revenue for the year ended December 31, 2013 and 69% of our product revenue for year ended December 31, 2012 while accounting for product billings of 79% and 87% of total product billings, respectively.

The Company’s initial sales efforts were to physician clients practicing within the workers’ compensation market because of the initial connections made with physicians in that market and because there were existing mechanisms for reimbursement. Workers’ compensation physicians were already performing in office dispensing of drugs and were amenable to introducing a new product line. Since 2009, we have developed a framework, business processes and technical infrastructure for obtaining reimbursement in the much larger commercial insurance reimbursement market. We have found success in this market over the last year and intend to focus our efforts toward this market in the coming year. We believe that we will see the mix of workers’ compensation to commercial move toward a more even split, especially as the Company expands its business out of California. California is one of the only states where physicians have workers’ compensation-only practices. The majority of physicians will treat a mixture of patients covered by various payers. As we expand our business into additional states, we expect to target physicians treating patients covered by private insurance by focusing on media outlets and conferences of particular interest to those types of practices.

Government Regulation

Statutory Definition and One FDA Regulation

Under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act of 1938 (“FFDCA”), products are regulated on the basis of their intended use. Their intended use is determined by the objective factors surrounding their use. Numerous categories and subcategories of products exist under the FFDCA, such as food, food additive, dietary supplement, GRAS food component, new drug, GRAS and Effective (“GRAS/E”) drug for over the counter use, and GRAS/E drug for use under the supervision of a physician. The categories overlap and products can fall within more than one category depending on their intended use.

The FDA has provided little guidance on the regulation of medical foods, as it is still a relatively new and evolving category of product under the FFDCA.

Our medical food products are defined and regulated by the FDA. The term medical food, as defined in Section 5(b) of the Orphan Drug Act is a “food which is formulated to be consumed or administered enterally, or by mouth, under the supervision of a physician and which is intended for the specific dietary management of a disease or condition for which distinctive nutritional requirements, based on recognized scientific principles, are established by medical evaluation.” The FDA advises that it considers the statutory definition of medical foods to “narrowly” constrain the types of products that fit within the category of food (see May 2007 Guidance, and Food Labeling; Reference Daily Intakes and Daily Reference Values; Mandatory Status of Nutrition Labeling and Nutrition Content Revision proposed rule.) This is a Final Rule, binding regulation, on nutrition labeling for conventional foods.

The one FDA regulation pertaining to medical foods exempts them from the nutrition labeling requirements that apply to conventional foods, but they are subject to special labeling requirements. Under 21 C.F.R. sec. 101.9 (j)(8),

(j) The following foods are exempt from this section or are subject to special labeling requirements:

(8) Medical foods as defined in section 5(b) of the Orphan Drug Act. A medical food is a food which is formulated to be consumed or administered enterally under the supervision of a physician and which is intended for the specific dietary management of a disease or condition for which distinctive nutritional requirements, based on recognized scientific principles, are established by medical evaluation. A food is subject to this exemption only if: (i) It is a specially formulated and processed product (as opposed to a naturally occurring foodstuff used in its natural state) for the partial or exclusive feeding of a patient by means of oral intake or enteral feeding by tube; (ii) It is intended for the dietary management of a patient who, because of therapeutic or chronic medical needs, has limited or impaired capacity to ingest, digest, absorb, or metabolize ordinary foodstuffs or certain nutrients, or who has other special medically determined nutrient requirements, the dietary management of which cannot be achieved by the modification of the normal diet alone; (iii) It provides nutritional support specifically modified for the management of the unique nutrient needs that result from the specific disease or condition, as determined by medical evaluation; (iv) It is intended to be used under medical supervision; and (v) It is intended only for a patient receiving active and ongoing medical supervision wherein the patient requires medical care on a recurring basis for, among other things, instructions on the use of the medical food.

Unlike for drugs and for dietary supplements, there is no overall regulatory schema for medical foods, or even a pending proposed rule, meaning that no FDA rulemaking is in progress. However, a very detailed Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (“ANPR”) entitled “Regulation of Medical Foods,” was published in the Federal Register on Nov. 29, 1996. This ANPR never progressed to a proposed rule, the Notice and Comment procedure, and an eventual Final Rule (binding regulation). However, in the view of our attorneys, it still represents (in conjunction with the May 2007 Guidance) FDA’s position and policy on medical foods. This ANPR was in effect withdrawn, because on April 22, 2003, the FDA published a proposal to withdraw numerous long-pending proposed rules, including this ANPR. The FDA cited as its reasons for withdrawal, first, that the subjects are not a regulatory priority, and agency resources are limited, second, the proposed rules have become outdated due to advances in the science or changes in the products or the industry regulated, or changes in legal or regulatory contexts; and, third, to eliminate uncertainty, so that the FDA or the private sector may resolve underlying issues in ways other than those in the proposals. In May 2007, the FDA issued its Guidance to Industry, presumably because the medical foods sector was growing, but it did not engage in a formal rulemaking procedure, either because it did not have the resources and/or because the medical foods category is still lower priority than drugs and medical devices.

Regulatory Requirements

Overview: Medical foods are FDA-regulated, but there is no complete set or schema of regulations. There is no pre-market approval, or even pre-market notification to the FDA required. Rather, it is the responsibility of the manufacturer and marketer to test for safety and efficacy before marketing and selling. The developer of a medical food must adhere closely to the statutory definition, and to the descriptions of a medical food in the one regulation regarding exemption from nutrition labeling, and in the May 2007 Guidance. (The parameters for a valid medical food are also spelled out in several FDA Warning Letters, such as those sent to Metagenics, Nestle Healthcare.) In the absence of a specific regulatory schema, we and our regulatory counsel have paid close attention to the numerous contrasts with both dietary supplements and with prescription drugs. (See regulation, FDA May 2007 Guidance, and the Warning Letter to Garden of Life.) All elements of the medical food product must indicate that the “intended use” of the product is for the dietary management of a disease, and not for the cure or prevention of a disease.

Threshold Issue: The manufacturer must demonstrate that the disease or condition to be targeted, scientifically and medically, is a disease with distinctive (or unique) nutritional requirements (ANPR 1996). The FDA has stated that this is a “narrow category,” (2007 Guidance, recent Warning Letter to Bioenergy) and that whether a product is valid for this category depends on the published medical science of the disease and its origins. The targeted disease or condition may be, or caused by, a metabolic imbalance or deficiency or the accelerated requirements for a certain nutrient caused by a disease state. Thus, we and our Scientific Advisory Committee begin with a comprehensive in-house report documenting the distinctive nutritional requirements of the disease as the crucial first step in research and development.

Formulation: A medical food may not be a single ingredient formula - otherwise, that product would be a dietary supplement for a nutrient deficiency. (FDA Field Guides) A medical food formula must go beyond a mere modification of the diet. (FDA regulation; 2007 Guidance) The formula must meet/satisfy the distinctive nutritional requirements, not merely ameliorate the symptoms. For example, Glucosamine or MSM, or an herb’s “active” constituent may indeed help osteoarthritis. But first the Company must demonstrate that these nutrients are the distinctive nutritional requirements for osteoarthritis. The test is: Does this formula bring the patient from the abnormal condition or disease state (with distinctive nutritional requirements) back to the equilibrium of a healthy state?

Safety: There are no particular or mandated FDA pre-market safety studies required of the formula as a whole. However, all ingredients must be either GRAS or approved food-additives. (See FDA letter to Industry (2001) regarding no botanicals or “novel” ingredients permitted in “functional foods”; and the ANPR. Since medical foods are typically taken with prescription drugs, the developer must assess whether any medical food/drug interactions pose a risk assessment. Many ingredients have been determined by the FDA to be GRAS and are listed as such by regulation. Other ingredients may achieve self-affirmed GRAS status through a panel of experts on that particular substance that author a GRAS Report. The standard for an ingredient to achieve GRAS status requires not only technical demonstration of non-toxicity and safety, but also general recognition and agreement on that safety by experts in the field. All ingredients used us in our medical foods are either FDA-approved food additives or have GRAS status. Note that the GRAS requirement for ingredients (above) is arguably a higher safety standard than the risk/benefit analysis required for pharmaceuticals. Like any evolving area, especially where no premarket approval is required, the FDA reserves the right to raise questions about the qualification of products within any category as well as the labeling and manufacturing safety of those products. A variety of informal and formal legal options exist for the Agency to raise these issues. For medical foods, the FDA has taken little regulatory action, although questions about the manufacture and labeling of such products have arisen.

Efficacy: No particular FDA pre-market efficacy studies are required by the FDA or by Congressional statute, similar to or comparable to Phase 2 & 3 trials for prescription drugs. But a company must have clinical trials or other tests to demonstrate that the formula, when taken as directed, meets the distinctive nutritional requirements of the particular disease. The test for effectiveness may be amelioration of the “endpoints of the disease”. In terms of the standard for substantiation of claims, the FDA has stated that the level of evidence must be at least as high as that to support an unqualified health claim, which is “significant scientific agreement.”

Manufacturing: There are no “good manufacturing practice” (“GMP”) regulations for medical foods in particular. Drug GMPs are not required, nor are the relatively new dietary supplement GMPs required; only food GMPs are required. But note the “medical foods paradox” spelled out in the ANPR. The paradox is that medical foods are intended for a vulnerable patient population, under a physician’s care, and yet there are no specific FDA regulations for this category of product, whereas there are very specific and rigorous regulations and requirements for the manufacture and labeling of conventional foods. The manufacture of our medical foods is outsourced in its entirety under a contract that expires in December 2016. We use a state of the art facility, which manufactures only nutritional supplements and medical foods.

Labeling: As for all food labels, printing must be legible, and many required elements must be conspicuous:

“Medical foods are foods and therefore their label must contain a statement of identity (the common or usual name of the product) (21 CFR 101.3), an accurate statement of the net quantity of contents (21 CFR 101.105), the name and place of business of the manufacturer, packer, or distributor (21 CFR 101.5), and a complete list of ingredients, listed by their common or usual name and in descending order of predominance (21 CFR 101.4). In addition, all words, statements, and other information required by or under authority of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) to appear on a label or labeling of a medical food must appear with prominence and conspicuousness (21 CFR 101.15). . . . Medical foods also must be labeled in conformance with the principal display panel requirements (21 CFR 101.1), the information panel requirements (21 CFR.101.2), and the misbranding of food requirements (21 CFR 101.18).”

Marketing: A medical food is a food product thus, the FDA does not regulate advertisements and promotional activities according to the pharmaceutical statutes and regulations; there is no side effects Disclaimer or fair balancing required, e.g., in DTC advertising of drugs on television. However, the FDA has a very broad definition of “labeling”; thus all promotional materials, including websites, are under the authority, monitoring and enforcement of FDA. The Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) also has joint jurisdiction with the FDA over food products, per a 1983 Memorandum of Understanding. Thus, all advertising claims, both express and implied, must be true, accurate, well-substantiated, and not misleading. All websites, print ads, infomercials, exhibit booth materials, testimonials, and endorsements must be reviewed by the regulatory counsel with both an FDA and an FTC perspective. A company must be careful re-disseminating “off-label use” materials, i.e., as a drug or a drug alternative.

Enforcement: Enforcement is post-market, mostly via annual FDA inspections of food facilities, including packaging, distribution facilities, and fulfillment houses, as well as the manufacturer. (Field Guides for Compliance) But see FDA Warning Letters sent to Efficas: FDA also gathers material at trade shows/ conferences, and examines websites. FTC has joint jurisdiction, and performs sophisticated Internet searches, both randomly and at the request of the FDA or of a competitor.

Medical Foods and Pharmaceuticals

Medical foods are distinguished from the broader category of foods for special dietary use and from foods that make health claims by the requirement that medical foods be intended to meet distinctive nutritional requirements of a disease or condition, be used under medical supervision and intended for the specific dietary management of a disease or condition. To be considered a medical food, a product must, at a minimum, meet the following criteria: the product must be a food for oral or tube feeding; the product must be labeled for the dietary management of a specific medical disorder, disease or condition for which there are distinctive nutritional requirements; and the product must be intended to be used under medical supervision (see regulation, above). Additionally, we are licensed by the FDA as a pharmaceutical re-packager and the Company is permitted to purchase and re-distribute scheduled medications and package and re-label products. We are subject to periodic inspections of facilities, marketing materials and products by FDA inspectors; these are routine inspections conducted without prior notice every one or two years

Claims for both medical foods and drugs must be supported by scientific data or clinical data. Medical foods may also have intrinsic safety obtained through GRAS status of the ingredients, including the common use of the food or food component in people. For GRAS/E products that have been used for a material time and extent or under the supervision of a physician the support for the use can be provided by scientific or clinical data. No premarket approval by FDA is required. By contrast, the safety and therapeutic claims of a product labeled for a new drug use, one that is not GRAS/E, must be pre-approved by the FDA through extensive clinical testing in animals and then humans.

Thus, for a medical food the FDA requires scientific data and often human clinical studies to substantiate claims but preapproval by the Agency to market the product is not required. Claims for both medical foods and drugs must be supported by solid laboratory and clinical data. Medical foods have intrinsic safety obtained through GRAS status of the ingredients, including use of the food or food additive in millions of people. By contrast, the safety and therapeutic claims of a product labeled a drug must be pre-approved by the FDA through extensive clinical testing in animals and then humans.

For a medical food, the FDA implies that human clinical studies are required, per the FDA’s ANPR (above), and based on the manufacturer’s and marketer’s responsibility that any health/medical product be demonstrated to be efficacious before it is marketed and sold. This is a fundamental principle under both the FDA and the FTC, for all health-related products

Medical foods are administered and supervised by physicians, allowing a range of existing human studies to be used to support claims. The standard for medical foods allows use of published science from a variety of sources to support disease and nutritional functional deficiency claims. Our ingredients and formulas are well-researched and supported by voluminous scientific literature, in-house Monographs, and clinical trials.

We have followed the regulatory compliance counsel from the beginning of its research and development on medical foods.

Point-of-Care Dispensing by Physicians

In 44 out of 50 states in the U.S., physician dispensing of prescription drugs is legal subject to specified regulations. In six other states, there are restrictions on this practice and, in Utah, Texas, Montana and New York, the restrictions are severe enough that, in practical terms, physician dispensing is effectively prohibited altogether. Massachusetts and New Jersey have limitations on the number of units that may be dispensed at any one time.

Many of the states allowing physician dispensing for profit have regulations relating to licensure, storage, labeling, record keeping and the degree of supervision required by the physician over support personnel who assist in the non-judgmental tasks associated with physician dispensing, such as retrieving medication bottles and affixing labels. We regularly monitor these laws and regulations, in consultation with legal counsel and the governing agencies, to assist customers in understanding them so that they can materially comply.

Stark II

Congress enacted significant prohibitions against physician self-referrals in the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993. This law commonly referred to as “Stark II,” applies to physician dispensing of outpatient prescription drugs that are reimbursable by Medicare or Medicaid. Stark II, however, includes an exception for the provision of in-office ancillary services, including a physician’s dispensing of outpatient prescription drugs, provided that the physician meets the requirements of the exception.

Good Manufacturing Practices

The Company is subject to regulation by and licensure with the FDA, the DEA and various state agencies. Among the regulations applicable to the Company are the FDA’s good manufacturing practices. Medical foods must comply with all applicable requirements for the manufacture of foods, including the Current Good Manufacturing Practices regulations and Registration of Food Facilities requirements. Ingredients used in medical foods must be approved food additives or a food additive that is subject to an exemption for investigational use if the ingredients are not GRAS.

Anti-Kickback Statute and HIPAA Criminal Laws

We are subject to various federal and state laws pertaining to health care fraud and abuse. The federal Anti-Kickback Statute makes it illegal for any person, including a pharmaceutical, biologic, or medical device company (or a party acting on its behalf), to knowingly and willfully solicit, offer, receive or pay any remuneration, directly or indirectly, in exchange for, or to induce, the referral of business, including the purchase, ordering or prescription of a particular item or service, or arranging for the purchase, ordering, or prescription of a particular item or service for which payment may be made under federal healthcare programs such as Medicare and Medicaid. In 1996, under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (“HIPAA”), the Anti-Kickback Statute was expanded to be made applicable to most federal and state-funded health care programs. The definition of remuneration has been broadly interpreted to include any item or service of value, including but not limited to gifts, discounts, the furnishing of free supplies or equipment, commercially unreasonable credit arrangements, cash payments, waivers of payments or providing anything at less than its fair market value. Several courts have interpreted the Anti-Kickback Statute’s intent requirement to mean that if any one purpose of an arrangement involving remuneration is to induce referrals of business reimbursable by a federal healthcare program, the statute has been violated. Penalties for violations include criminal penalties, civil sanctions and administrative actions such as fines, imprisonment and possible exclusion from Medicare, Medicaid and other federally-funded healthcare programs. In addition, some kickback allegations have been held to violate the federal False Claims Act, which is discussed in more detail below.

The federal Anti-Kickback Statute is broad and prohibits many arrangements and practices that may be lawful in businesses outside of the healthcare industry. Recognizing that the Anti-Kickback Statute is broad and may technically prohibit many innocuous and beneficial arrangements, Congress created several exceptions in the Social Security Act and has authorized the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”) to publish regulatory “safe harbors” that exempt certain practices from enforcement action under the Anti-Kickback Statute prohibitions. For example, there are safe harbors available for certain discounts to purchasers, personal services arrangements and various other types of arrangements. However, safe harbor protection is only available for transactions that satisfy all of the narrowly defined safe harbor provisions applicable to the particular remunerative relationship. We seek to comply with such safe harbors whenever possible. Conduct and business arrangements that do not strictly comply with all the provisions of an applicable safe harbor, while not necessarily illegal, face an increased risk of scrutiny by government enforcement authorities and an ongoing risk of prosecution.

In addition, many states have adopted laws similar to the federal Anti-Kickback Statute. Some of these state prohibitions apply to referral of patients for healthcare services reimbursed by any third-party payer, not only the Medicare and Medicaid programs or other governmental payers. At least one state, California, also has adopted a law requiring pharmaceutical companies to implement compliance programs to prevent and deter conduct that may violate fraud and abuse laws that comply with the voluntary industry guidelines and the Office of Inspector General (“OIG”) compliance guidance. While we believe we have structured our business arrangements to comply with these laws, it is possible that the government could find that such arrangements violate these laws, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

HIPAA created two new federal crimes: health care fraud and false statements relating to health care matters. The health care fraud statute prohibits knowingly and willfully executing a scheme to defraud any health care benefit program, including private payers. A violation of this statute is a felony and may result in fines, imprisonment or exclusion from federal and state health care programs such as Medicare and Medicaid. The false statements statute prohibits knowingly and willfully falsifying, concealing or covering up a material fact or making any materially false, fictitious or fraudulent statement in connection with the delivery of or payment for health care benefits, items or services. A violation of this statute is a felony and may result in fines or imprisonment. Additionally, HIPAA granted expanded enforcement authority to HHS and the U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”) and provided enhanced resources to support the activities and responsibilities of the OIG and DOJ by authorizing large increases in funding for investigating fraud and abuse violations relating to health care delivery and payment.

HIPAA Compliance and Privacy Protection

HIPAA established for the first time comprehensive federal protection for the privacy and security of health information. The HIPAA standards apply to three types of organizations, or Covered Entities: health plans, health care clearing houses, and health care providers who conduct certain health care transactions electronically. Covered Entities must have in place administrative, physical and technical standards to guard against the misuse of individually identifiable health information. Additionally, some state laws impose privacy protections more stringent than HIPAA’s. There are also international privacy laws, such as the European Data Directive, that impose restrictions on the access, use, and disclosure of health information. All of these laws may impact our business. We are a Covered Entity subject to HIPAA privacy and security standards. Our activities must also comply with other applicable privacy laws. Our failure to comply with these privacy laws or significant changes in the laws restricting our ability to obtain tissue specimens and associated patient information could significantly impact our business and our future business plans. We maintain strict procedures and policies to remain compliant with these patient confidentiality requirements.

HITECH Act

The Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health (“HITECH”) Act promotes the adoption and meaningful use of health information technology. The HITECH Act addresses the privacy and security concerns associated with the electronic transmission of health information, in part, through several provisions that strengthen the civil and criminal enforcement of the HIPAA rules.

The HITECH Act establishes four categories of violations that reflect increasing levels of culpability and four corresponding tiers of penalty amounts that significantly increase the minimum penalty amount of each violation. The maximum penalty amount is $1,500,000 for repeated violations of the same provision. In addition, the HITECH Act permits the imposition of penalties if the Covered Entity did not know, and with the exercise of reasonable diligence, would not have known, of the violation. Such violations are now punishable under the lowest tier of penalties. In addition, the HITECH Act prohibits the imposition of penalties for violations corrected within a 30-day period so long as those violations were not due to willful neglect.

False Claims Laws

Pursuant to various federal and state false claims laws, the submission of false or fraudulent claims for payment may lead to civil money penalties, criminal fines and imprisonment, and/or exclusion from participation in Medicare, Medicaid and other federally funded health care programs. These false claims statutes include the federal False Claims Act, which allows the federal government or private individuals to bring suit alleging that an entity or person knowingly submitted (or caused another person or entity to submit or conspired to submit) a false or fraudulent claim for payment to the federal government or knowingly used (or caused to be used) a false record or statement to obtain payment from the federal government. The federal False Claims Act may also be violated if a person files a false statement in order to reduce, avoid, or conceal an obligation to pay money to the federal government, or engages in conduct that may violate the Anti-Kickback Statute. Several pharmaceutical and medical device companies have settled claims based on the federal False Claims Act for conduct involving, among other examples, providing free product to purchasers with the exception that federally-funded health programs would be billed for the product, or instances in which a manufacturer has marketed its product for unapproved and non-reimbursable purposes. A person who files suit may be able to share in amounts recovered by the government in connection with such suits. Such suits, known as qui tam actions, have increased significantly in recent years and have increased the risk that a health care company will have to defend a false claims action, enter into settlements that may include corporate integrity agreements requiring disclosures to the federal government, pay fines or be excluded from the Medicare and/or Medicaid programs as a result of an investigation arising out of such an action. The scope of the federal false Claims Act was significantly expanded in both the Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act of 2009, Pub. L. No. 111-21 (2009), and in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010, Pub. L. No. 111-148 (2010). In addition, a number of states have enacted similar laws prohibiting the submission of false or fraudulent claims to a state government. We are not aware of any qui tam actions pending against us. However, no assurance can be given that such actions may not be filed against us in the future, or that any non-compliance with such laws would not have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

State Regulatory Requirements

Each state has its own regulations concerning physician dispensing, restrictions on the corporate practice of medicine, anti-kick back and false claim regulations. In addition, each state has a board of pharmacy that regulates the sale and distribution of drugs and other therapeutic agents. Some states require that a physician obtain a license to dispense prescription products. When considering the commencement of business in a new state, we solicit the opinion of healthcare counsel regarding the expansion of operations into that statement and utilize local counsel when necessary.

Other United States Regulatory Requirements

In the United States, the research, manufacturing, distribution, sale, and promotion of drug and biological products are subject to regulation by various federal, state, and local authorities in addition to the FDA, including the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (formerly the Health Care Financing Administration), other divisions of the United States Department of Health and Human Services (e.g., the Office of Inspector General), the United States Department of Justice and individual United States Attorney offices within the Department of Justice, and state and local governments. Pricing and rebate programs must comply with the Medicaid rebate requirements of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990 and the Veterans Health Care Act of 1992, each as amended. If products are made available to authorized users of the Federal Supply Schedule of the General Services Administration, additional laws and requirements apply. All of these activities are also potentially subject to federal and state consumer protection, unfair competition, and other laws. In addition, we may be subject to federal and state laws requiring the disclosure of financial arrangements with health care professionals.

California Board of Pharmacy

We maintain an active Wholesale Pharmacy License in California. A wholesaler permit is required before any company selling dangerous drugs or devices for resale or distribution in California may do business in California.

Foreign Regulatory Requirements

We may be subject to widely varying foreign regulations, which may be quite different from those of the FDA, governing clinical trials, manufacture, product registration and approval, and pharmaceutical sales. Whether or not FDA approval has been obtained, we must obtain a separate approval for a product by the comparable regulatory authorities of foreign countries prior to the commencement of product marketing in these countries. In certain countries, regulatory authorities also establish pricing and reimbursement criteria. The approval process varies from country to country, and the time may be longer or shorter than that required for FDA approval.

Reimbursement and Pricing Controls

In many of the markets where we would commercialize a product, the prices of pharmaceutical products are subject, by law, to direct price controls and to drug reimbursement programs with varying price control mechanisms. Public and private health care payers control costs and influence drug pricing through a variety of mechanisms, including the setting of reimbursement amounts for drugs and biological products covered by Medicare Part B based on their Average Sales Prices calculated by manufacturers in accordance with the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act, as amended, through negotiating discounts with the manufacturers, and through the use of tiered formularies and other mechanisms that provide preferential access to certain drugs over others within a therapeutic class. Payers also set other criteria to govern the uses of a drug that will be deemed medically appropriate and therefore reimbursed or otherwise covered. In particular, many public and private health care payers limit reimbursement and coverage to the uses of a drug that are either approved by the FDA or that are supported by other appropriate evidence (for example, published medical literature) and appear in a recognized drug compendium. Drug compendia are publications that summarize the available medical evidence for particular drug products and identify which uses of a drug are supported or not supported by the available evidence, whether or not such uses have been approved by the FDA. For example, in the case of Medicare coverage for physician-administered oncology drugs, the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993, with certain exceptions, prohibits Medicare carriers from refusing to cover unapproved uses of an FDA-approved drug if the unapproved use is supported by one or more citations in the American Hospital Formulary Service Drug Information, the American Medical Association Drug Evaluations, or the United States Pharmacopoeia Drug Information. Another commonly cited compendium, for example under Medicaid, is the DRUGDEX Information System.

The foregoing description of laws and regulations affecting health care companies is not meant to be an all-inclusive discussion of aspects of federal and state fraud and abuse laws that may affect our business, results of operations and financial condition. Health care companies operate in a complicated regulatory environment. These or other statutory or regulatory initiatives may affect our revenues or operations. No assurance can be given that our practices, if reviewed, would be found to be in compliance with applicable fraud and abuse laws (including false claims laws and anti-kickback prohibitions), as such laws ultimately may be interpreted, or that any non-compliance with such laws or government investigations of alleged non-compliance with such laws would not have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

Employees

The Company had 57 full-time employees as of March 28, 2014 of whom 31 were in product development, operations and engineering, 12 in sales and marketing and 14 in general, administrative and executive management, 6 part time employee, and two independent contractors. It is general practice in our industry to retain the services of independent contractors to perform tasks related to computer programming and network administration. None of these employees and contractors are covered by a collective bargaining agreement and our management considers relations with employees and service partners to be good.

Facilities

We lease approximately 4,594 square feet of office space in Los Angeles, California to house our administrative, marketing and product development activities. We pay $13,183 per month in rent in Los Angeles, under a lease that expires February 28, 2015. In addition, we lease several smaller storage spaces on a month-to-month basis. In general, we believe that our properties are well-maintained, adequate and suitable for their purposes.

Item 1A. Risk Factors.

FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

This Annual Report on Form 10-K contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. All statements other than statements of historical fact are, or may be deemed to be, forward-looking statements. Such forward-looking statements include statements regarding, among others, (a) our expectations about possible business combinations, (b) our growth strategies, (c) our future financing plans, and (d) our anticipated needs for working capital. Forward-looking statements, which involve assumptions and describe our future plans, strategies, and expectations, are generally identifiable by use of the words “may,” “will,” “should,” “expect,” “anticipate,” “approximate,” “estimate,” “believe,” “intend,” “plan,” “budget,” “could,” “forecast,” “might,” “predict,” “shall” or “project,” or the negative of these words or other variations on these words or comparable terminology. This information may involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties, and other factors that may cause our actual results, performance, or achievements to be materially different from the future results, performance, or achievements expressed or implied by any forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements are based on our current expectations and assumptions regarding our business, potential target businesses, the economy and other future conditions. Because forward-looking statements relate to the future, by their nature, they are subject to inherent uncertainties, risks and changes in circumstances that are difficult to predict. Our actual results may differ materially from those contemplated by the forward-looking statements as a result of various factors, including, without limitation, the risks outlined under “Risk Factors”. We caution you therefore that you should not rely on any of these forward-looking statements as statements of historical fact or as guarantees or assurances of future performance. We undertake no obligation to update any forward-looking statements or other information contained herein.

Risks Related to Our Business

Our recurring operating losses have raised substantial doubt regarding our ability to continue as a going concern.

Our recurring operating losses raise substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern. As a result, our independent registered public accounting firms included an explanatory paragraph in their reports on our financial statements as of and for the years ended December 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012 with respect to this uncertainty. The perception of our ability to continue as a going concern may make it more difficult for us to obtain financing for the continuation of our operations and could result in the loss of confidence by investors, suppliers and employees.

We have significant working capital requirements and have historically experienced negative working capital balances. If we experience such negative working capital balances in the future, it could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

The Company has negative working capital and will be dependent upon additional financing to meet capital needs and repay outstanding debt. Since January of 2011 the Company has relied on loans from related parties to fund its operating cash flow deficits. There is no assurance that we will generate the necessary net income or operating cash flows to meet our working capital requirements and pay our debt as it becomes due in the future due to a variety of factors, including the cyclical nature of the staffing industry and other factors discussed in this “Risk Factors” section. If we are unable to do so, our liquidity would be adversely affected and we would consider taking a variety of actions, including attempting to reduce fixed costs (for example, further reducing the size of our administrative work force), curtailing or reducing planned capital additions, raising additional equity, borrowing additional funds, refinancing existing indebtedness or taking other actions. There can be no assurance, however, that we will be able to successfully take any of these actions, including adjusting expenses sufficiently or in a timely manner, or raising additional equity, increasing borrowings or completing a refinancing on any terms or on terms that are acceptable to us. Our inability to take these actions as and when necessary would materially adversely affect our liquidity, results of operations and financial condition.

Our products and facility and the facilities of our manufacturers are subject to federal laws and regulations. Failure to comply with any law or regulation could result in penalties and restrictions on our manufacturers’ ability to manufacture and our ability to distribute products. If any such action were to be imposed, it could have a material adverse effect on our business and results of operations.

Although medical foods do not require pre-market approval by the FDA, manufacturers of medical foods must be registered with the FDA under a provision promulgated by the Public Health Security and Bioterrorism Preparedness and Response Act of 2002 (the “Bioterrorism Act”). Manufacturers of medical foods are subject to periodic inspection by the FDA. The manufacture of our medical foods is outsourced in its entirety to a third party manufacturer. We are evaluating additional manufacturers for selection as second source or back-up providers. Our medical foods have been reviewed by the FDA on several occasions. The inspection process includes a review of our facility, sampling of our products and a review of labeling and other patient and promotional materials related to our products. The most recent routine facilities inspection by the Southwest Regional Office of the FDA was conducted in January 2011. No deficiencies in the facility or operations were noted during the inspection. Even if the results of the current inspection are positive, there is no certainty that the FDA will favorably review new medical food products we introduce or our manufacturers’ facilities in the future. If the outcome of the inspection is negative or if we or our manufacturers fail to comply with any law or regulation, we could be subject to penalties and restrictions on our manufacturers’ ability to manufacture and distribute products. Any such action may result in a material adverse effect on our business and results of operations. For a more complete discussion of the laws and regulations to which we are subject, please see the section of this report titled “Description of Business - Government Regulation”.

If we are unable to secure reimbursement for our products from insurance companies on behalf of our physician clients, or if the collection cycle is protracted, revenue and cash flow from product sales by PTL and the billing and collection fee CCPI charges to our physician clients may be adversely affected.

The collection cycle in the workers’ compensation portion of our business, which has historically accounted for up to approximately 75% of claims managed by CCPI, may take from 45 days to in excess of five years after the initial submission of a claim by CCPI and may involve denials and an extensive appeals process. In the event a reimbursement claim is denied and we appeal the denial, there can be no assurance that we will be successful in such appeal. In the event a reimbursement is delayed, we may be required to wait in excess of five years before we are paid for the cost of product sold to our physician clients. In addition, because PMM, Hybrid Model and CCPI fee revenue is dependent on collections from insurance companies for physician clients, delays or difficulties with these collections will reduce collection revenue. In addition, collection issues on behalf of our physician clients may lead to dissatisfaction of our clients in our collection program and curtailed use of our products in their practice, which may adversely affect the growth of our business and our results of operations.

Since the collection cycle for the reimbursement of our products has been protracted, cash flow from the products sold and support services provided to our physician clients may be adversely affected and we may be unable to sustain the growth of our Company at its current rate without additional financing.

In the event the collection cycle for the reimbursement claims we make on behalf of our physician clients continues to be protracted, revenue from the products sold and support services provided to physician clients, which is the most lucrative part of our business, may be adversely affected. A prolonged collection cycle also reduces our cash flow and requires us to seek additional financing to support our operations. Such additional financing may not be available on terms acceptable to us or at all. If we raise funds by issuing additional securities, the newly issued securities may further dilute your ownership interest. If adequate funds are not available, then we may be required to delay, reduce or eliminate product development or marketing programs. Our inability to take advantage of opportunities in the industry because of capital constraints may have a material adverse effect on our business and our prospects.

The Company had previously entered into agreements with the Internal Revenue Service and the California Franchise Tax Board for payment of amounts owed for its 2010 federal and state taxes. We filed amended 2010 tax returns reflecting a change in our accounting method. The IRS has completed its examination of our 2010 through 2012 income tax returns. Although the IRS did not agree with our change in accounting method it concluded that our income tax liability for the three year period was only $26,000. We anticipate that the California Franchise Tax Board will arrive at a similar conclusion as the IRS and expect that we will not have to pay the original amounts.

The Company filed its 2010 federal and state tax returns in April 2011 and June 2011, respectively, without including payment for amounts due and has not made estimated tax payments for the 2011 and 2012 tax years. The Company had entered into agreements with the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) and the California Franchise Tax Board (“FTB”) to extend the payment of these taxes over a mutually agreeable period of time. In aggregate, we have paid $550,000 to the IRS and $350,000 to the California Franchise Tax Board. Our 2010 federal and state tax returns reflected an amount owed to the IRS and California Franchise Tax Board of approximately $3,600,000 and $1,000,000, respectively. We were unable to pay the remaining installment payments.

As a result of our assessment that for certain sales’ collectability at the time of the sale could not be reasonably assured, these sales did not meet the criteria of a sale for tax purposes. The Company recalculated its 2010 and 2011 tax liabilities and determined that no income taxes are owed for either year. We filed amended tax returns for 2010 in June of 2012 and in September 2012 filed our 2011 returns using a change in accounting method consistent with our financial results restatement. We understood that filing such returns would likely result in tax audits on the part of both agencies. The IRS commenced its audit in November 2012. In March 2014 the IRS completed its examination. The IRS did not accept the Company’s assertion that certain sales did not meet the criteria of a sale for tax purposes, however; in part as a result of the utilization of NOL’s generated during 2011 and 2012, the IRS concluded that the Company’s aggregate tax liability for tax years 2010 through 2012 was only $26,000. In February 2013, the FTB notified the Company by letter that it would take no action on our amended California return until the IRS completed its examination. The FTB has not formally suspended collection and enforcement efforts but has continued to extend its Notice of Suspension deadlines on a quarterly basis pending the outcome of the eventual audit. As a result of the completion of the IRS examination the Company will initiate discussions with the FTB. There can be no assurances that the FTB will accept the conclusion of the IRS and will not pursue collection and enforcement efforts.

A significant portion of the Company’s billings and revenues are derived from the sale of a single product.

In the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 and 2011, the Company derived 39%, 42%, and 43% of its billings respectively from the sale of Theramine. While we continue to see a significant demand for Theramine from our physician clients we cannot assure you that the demand will continue. A decline in sales of Theramine to our physician clients may have an immediate adverse effect on our financial results.

A substantial portion of the Company’s billings and revenues are derived from a limited number of physician clients and the loss of any one or more of them may have an immediate adverse effect on our financial results.

In the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 and 2011, 11%, 36% and 46%, respectively, of the Company’s billings were derived from individual customers representing 10% or more of the total billings. The Company does not receive purchase volume commitments from clients and physicians may stop purchasing our products and services with little or no warning. The loss of any one or more of these customers may have an immediate adverse effect on our financial results.

There is no certainty that our products will continue to be reimbursed by private insurance, Medicare and workers compensation insurers. If these entities do not continue to reimburse for the costs of our products, this could have a material adverse effect on our business and results of operations.

In order for private insurance, Medicare and workers compensation insurers to reimburse the cost of our products, we must, among other things, maintain registration of the products in the National Drug Code (“NDC”) registry, maintain our re-labeler license, maintain our company formulary approval by Pharmacy Benefits Managers and maintain recognition by insurance companies and the Center For Medicare and Medicaid Services (“CMS”) of the Department of Health and Human Services that our products are covered by various agencies. There is no certainty that we will be able to maintain these requirements for insurance reimbursement of our products. If our physician clients do not continue to be reimbursed for dispensing our products, they may choose not to purchase them and our business and results of operations may be adversely affected. If physician clients are unable to obtain adequate reimbursement for dispensing our products, they may not be able to pay us for outstanding product invoices currently included in our accounts receivable. While the physician client remains responsible for payment of product invoices in accordance with our agreement regardless of reimbursement, pursuing legal remedies for the collection of these amounts may be costly and take considerable time and we would likely lose some of physician clients as customers.

If we are forced to reduce our prices, our business, financial condition and results of operations may suffer.

We may be subject to pricing pressures with respect to our future sales arising from various sources, including practices of health insurance companies, Internet pharmacies, and pharmacy benefits managers, including those operating outside the United States, and government action affecting pharmaceutical reimbursement under Medicare. Our physician clients and the other entities with which we have a business relationship are affected by changes in regulations and limitations in governmental spending for Medicare and Medicaid programs. Recent government actions could limit government spending for the Medicare and Medicaid programs, limit payments to physicians and other providers and increase emphasis on competition and other programs that potentially could have an adverse effect on our customers and the other entities with which we have a business relationship. If our pricing experiences significant downward pressure, our business will be less profitable and our results of operations may be adversely affected. In addition, because cash from sales funds our working capital requirements, reduced profitability could require us to raise additional capital to support our operations.

If we are unable to successfully introduce new products or services or fail to keep pace with medical advances and developments in billing services, our business, financial condition and results of operations may be adversely affected.

The successful implementation of our business model depends on our ability to adapt to evolving technologies and industry standards and introduce new products and services. We cannot assure you that we will be able to introduce new products on schedule, or at all, or that such products will achieve market acceptance. Moreover, competitors may develop competitive products that could adversely affect our results of operations. A failure by us to introduce planned products or other new products or to introduce these products on schedule may have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

If we cannot adapt to changing technologies, our products and services may become obsolete, and our business could suffer. Because the Internet and healthcare information markets are characterized by rapid technological change, we may be unable to anticipate changes in our current and potential customers’ requirements that could make our existing technology obsolete. Our success will depend, in part, on our ability to continue to enhance our existing products and services, develop new technology that addresses the increasingly sophisticated and varied needs of our prospective customers, license leading technologies and respond to technological advances and emerging industry standards and practices on a timely and cost-effective basis. The development of our proprietary technology entails significant technical and business risks. We may not be successful in using new technologies effectively or adapting our proprietary technology to evolving customer requirements or emerging industry standards, and, as a result, our business may suffer.

If physicians do not accept our products and services, or delay in deciding whether to purchase our products and services, our business, financial condition and results of operations may be adversely affected.

Our business model depends on our ability to sell our products and services. Acceptance of our products and services requires physicians to adopt different behavior patterns and new methods of conducting business and exchanging information. We cannot assure you that physicians will integrate our products and services into their workflow or those participants in the healthcare market will accept our products and services as a replacement for traditional methods of delivering pharmaceutical therapies and billing for those products. Achieving market acceptance for our products and services will require substantial sales and marketing efforts and the expenditure of significant financial and other resources to create awareness and demand by participants in the healthcare industry. If we fail to achieve broad acceptance of our products and services by physicians, and other healthcare industry participants or if we fail to position our products and services as a preferred therapies and medication management and pharmaceutical healthcare delivery, our business, financial condition and results of operations may be adversely affected.

If our principal suppliers fail or are unable to perform their contracts with us, we may be unable to meet our commitments to our customers. As a result, our reputation and our relationships with our customers may be damaged and our business and results of operations may be adversely affected.

We currently purchase a majority of the generic pharmaceuticals that we repackage from H.J. Harkins Co., Inc. (“Pharma Pac”) and manufacture all our medical food products at Arizona Nutritional Supplements Inc. These companies are subject to FDA regulation and they are responsible for compliance with current Good Manufacturing Practices. Although our agreements provide that our suppliers will abide by the FDA manufacturing requirements, we cannot control their compliance. If they fail to comply with FDA manufacturing requirements, the FDA could prevent Arizona Nutritional Supplements Inc. from manufacturing our products or, in the case of Pharma Pac, from selling its products to us. Although we believe that there are a number of other sources of supply of medications and manufacturers of medical food products, if these suppliers are unable to perform under our agreements, particularly at certain critical times such as when we add new physician clients that will require a large production of one or more products, we may be unable to meet our commitments to our customers. If this were to happen, our reputation as well as our relationships with our customers may suffer and our business and results of operations may be adversely affected. We are evaluating additional manufacturers for selection as second source or back-up providers.

If our software products fail to perform properly due to undetected errors or similar problems, our business could suffer.

Complex software such as our PDRx system often contains undetected defects or errors. It is possible that such errors may be found after introduction of new software or enhancements to existing software. We continually introduce new solutions and enhancements to our products, and, despite testing by us, it is possible that errors might occur in our software. If we detect any errors before we introduce an upgrade or an enhancement, we might have to delay deployment for an extended period of time while we address the problem. If we do not discover errors that affect software or any upgrades or enhancements until after they are deployed, we would need to provide revisions to correct such errors. Errors in our software could result in harm to our reputation, lost sales, delays in commercial release, product liability claims, delays in or loss of market acceptance of our products and services and unexpected expenses and diversion of resources to remedy errors. Furthermore, our customers might use our products and software together with products from other companies. As a result, when problems occur, it might be difficult to identify the source of the problem and errors might cause us to incur significant costs, divert the attention of our technical personnel from our solution development efforts, impact our reputation and cause significant customer relations problems.

Factors beyond our control could cause interruptions in our operations, which may adversely affect our reputation in the marketplace and our business, financial condition and results of operations.

To succeed, we must be able to distribute our products and operate our support systems without interruption. We use certain third party suppliers to manufacture, supply and ship our medical food, branded and generic drug products to customers. If these third party suppliers fail to perform, we could experience an interruption in supplying our products to physician clients. In addition, although we have established a co-location site for our support services and we have disaster recovery programs in place, our operations could be vulnerable to interruption by damage from a variety of sources, many of which are not within our control, including without limitation: (1) power loss and telecommunications failures; (2) software and hardware errors, failures or crashes; (3) computer viruses and similar disruptive problems; and (4) fire, flood and other natural disasters. Any significant interruptions in the provision of our products or our services may damage our reputation in the marketplace and have a negative impact on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

If our security is breached, we could be subject to liability, and customers could be deterred from using our services.

The Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health (“HITECH”) Act of 2009 controls all protocols for securely transmitting protected healthcare information over the Internet, via email and facsimile, including information protected by the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (“HIPAA”). Our business relies on using the Internet to transmit protected healthcare information. Regulations change rapidly and, if we cannot adapt our systems in a timely fashion, we could be liable for civil and criminal penalties. The HITECH Act provides a tiered system for assessing the level of each HIPAA privacy violation and, therefore, its penalty:

The HITECH Act also allows states’ attorneys general to levy fines and seek attorney’s fees from covered entities on behalf of victims. Courts now have the ability to award costs.

It is also possible that third parties could penetrate our network security or otherwise misappropriate patient information and other data. If this happens, our operations could be interrupted, and we may be subject to liability and regulatory action. We may need to devote significant additional financial and other resources to protect against security breaches or to alleviate problems caused by breaches. We could face financial loss, litigation and other liabilities to the extent that our activities or the activities of third-party contractors involve the storage and transmission of confidential information like patient records or credit information.

We may be liable for use of data we provide. If the data is incorrect, we could be liable for product liability or other claims that may be in excess of, or not covered by, our product liability insurance. This may harm our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We provide data for use by healthcare providers in treating patients. Third-party contractors provide us with some of this data. If this data is incorrect or incomplete, adverse consequences may occur and give rise to product liability and other claims against us. In addition, certain of our services provide applications that relate to patient clinical information, and a court or government agency may take the position that our delivery of health information directly to licensed practitioners exposes us to liability for wrongful delivery or handling of health information. While we maintain product liability insurance coverage in an amount that we believe is sufficient for our business, we cannot assure you that this coverage will prove to be adequate or will continue to be available on acceptable terms, if at all. A claim brought against us that is uninsured or under-insured could harm our business, financial condition and results of operations. Even unsuccessful claims could result in substantial costs and diversion of management resources.

If we incur costs exceeding our insurance coverage in lawsuits that are brought against us in the future, it could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

If we were to become a defendant in any lawsuits involving the manufacture and sale of our products and if our insurance coverage were inadequate to satisfy these liabilities, it may have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Our business depends on our intellectual property rights, and if we are unable to protect them, our competitive position may suffer.

Our business plan is predicated on our proprietary systems and technology. Accordingly, protecting our intellectual property rights is critical to our continued success and our ability to maintain our competitive position. We protect our proprietary rights through a combination of patents, trademark, trade secret and copyright law, confidentiality agreements and technical measures. We generally enter into non-disclosure agreements with our employees and consultants and limit access to our trade secrets and technology. We cannot assure you that the steps we have taken will prevent misappropriation of our technology. Misappropriation of our intellectual property would have an adverse effect on our competitive position. In addition, we may have to engage in litigation in the future to enforce or protect our intellectual property rights or to defend against claims of invalidity, and we may incur substantial costs and the diversion of management’s time and attention as a result.

If we are deemed to infringe on the proprietary rights of third parties, we could incur unanticipated expense and be prevented from providing our products and services.

We could be subject to intellectual property infringement claims as the number of our competitors grows and our products and applications’ functionality overlaps with competitive products. While we do not believe that we have infringed or are infringing on any proprietary rights of third parties, we cannot assure you that infringement claims will not be asserted against us or that those claims will be unsuccessful. We could incur substantial costs and diversion of management resources defending any infringement claims whether or not such claims are ultimately successful. Furthermore, a party making a claim against us could secure a judgment awarding substantial damages, as well as injunctive or other equitable relief that could effectively block our ability to provide products or services. In addition, we cannot assure you that licenses for any intellectual property of third parties that might be required for our products or services will be available on commercially reasonable terms, or at all.

We may not be able to protect our Intellectual Property.

The Company has 7 issued patents and 9 additional pending patent applications related to its products. Our success, competitive position, and future revenues will depend in part on our ability to obtain and maintain patent protection for our products, methods, processes, and other technologies; to preserve our trade secrets; to obtain trademarks for our name, logo and products; to prevent third parties from infringing our proprietary rights; and to operate without infringing the proprietary rights of third parties. To counter infringement or unauthorized use by third parties, we may be required to file infringement claims, which can be expensive and time-consuming. If we infringe the rights of third parties, we could be prevented from selling our products, forced to pay damages, and forced to incur substantial costs in defending litigations.

The patent process is subject to numerous risks and uncertainties, and there can be no assurance that we will be successful in protecting our products by obtaining and defending patents. These risks and uncertainties include the following:

In addition, the United States Patent and Trademark Office, and patent offices in other jurisdictions have often required that patent applications concerning pharmaceutical and/or biotechnology-related inventions be limited or narrowed substantially to cover only the specific innovations exemplified in the patent application, thereby limiting the scope of protection against competitive challenges. Thus, even if we or any of our licensors are able to obtain patents, the patents may be substantially narrower than anticipated.

If we are unable to maintain existing relationships and create new relationships with pharmacy benefits managers and managed care payers, our business, financial condition and results of operations may be adversely affected.

We rely on pharmacy benefits managers to reimburse our physician clients for prescription medications dispensed in their offices. While many of the leading pharmacy benefit managers currently reimburse our physicians for in-office dispensing, none of these payers is under a long-term obligation to do so. If we are unable to increase the number of pharmacy benefits managers that reimburse for in-office dispensing, or if some or all of the payers who currently reimburse physicians decline to do so in the future, utilization of our products and services would decrease and, therefore, our business, financial condition and results of operations may be adversely affected.

Our business depends in part on and will continue to depend in part on our ability to establish and maintain additional strategic relationships. Our failure to establish and maintain these relationships could make it more difficult to expand the reach of our products, which may have a material adverse effect on our business.

To be successful, we must continue to maintain our existing strategic relationships, such as our relationship with Arizona Nutritional Supplements, which manufactures our medical food products, and Pharma Pac, which provides our generic pharmaceuticals, and distributor relationships. We also must continue to establish additional strategic relationships with leaders in a number of pharmaceutical, healthcare and healthcare information technology industry segments. This is critical to our success because we believe that these relationships contribute towards our ability to extend the reach of our products and services to a larger number of physicians and physician groups and to other participants in the healthcare industry; develop and deploy new products and services; further enhance the Physician Therapeutics brand in the U.S. and the Targeted Medical Pharma brand internationally; and generate additional revenue and cash flows. Entering into strategic relationships is complicated because strategic partners may decide to compete with us in some or all of our markets. In addition, we may not be able to maintain or establish relationships with key participants in the healthcare industry if we conduct business with their competitors. We depend, in part, on our strategic partners’ ability to generate increased acceptance and use of our products and services. If we lose any of these strategic relationships or fail to establish additional relationships, or if our strategic relationships fail to benefit us as expected, we may not be able to execute our business plan, and our business, financial condition and results of operations may suffer.

We must attract quality management in order to manage our growth. Failure to do so may result in slower expansion.

In order to support the growth of our business, we will need to expand our senior management team. We have an active recruitment program for managers, middle managers and senior managers. There is no assurance that we will be capable of attracting quality managers and integrating those individuals into our management system. Without experienced and talented management, the growth of our business may be adversely impacted.

Competition for our employees is intense, and we may not be able to attract and retain the highly skilled employees we need to support our business. Without skilled employees, the quality of our product development and services could diminish and the growth of our business may be slowed, which may have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Our ability to provide high-quality products and services to our clients depends in large part upon our employees’ experience and expertise. We must attract and retain highly qualified personnel with a deep understanding of the pharmaceutical and healthcare information technology industries. In addition, we invest significant time and expense in training our employees, increasing their value to clients as well as to competitors who may seek to recruit them, which increases the cost of replacing them. If we fail to retain our employees, the quality of our product development and services could diminish and the growth of our business may be slowed. This may have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

If we lose the services of our key personnel, we may be unable to replace them, and our business, financial condition and results of operations may be adversely affected.

Our success largely depends on the continued skills, experience, efforts and policies of our management and other key personnel and our ability to continue to attract, motivate and retain highly qualified employees. In particular, the services of William E. Shell, M.D, our Chief Executive Officer, are integral to the execution of our business strategy. We have an employment agreement with Dr. Shell that will expire, if not renegotiated, in December 2014. We believe that the loss of the services of Dr. Shell could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. We cannot assure you that Dr. Shell will continue to provide his services to the Company. We do not maintain key man insurance for any of our key employees.

Our failure to compete successfully could cause our revenue or market share to decline.

The market for our products and services is competitive and is characterized by rapidly evolving industry standards, technology and user needs and the frequent introduction of new products and services. Some of our competitors, which include major pharmaceutical companies with alternatives to our products, may be more established, benefit from greater name recognition and have substantially greater financial, technical and marketing resources than us. Moreover, we expect that competition will continue to increase as a result of consolidation in both the pharmaceutical and healthcare industries. If one or more of our competitors or potential competitors were to merge or partner with another of our competitors, the change in the competitive landscape could adversely affect our ability to compete effectively. We compete on the basis of several factors, including distribution of products and services, reputation, scientific validity, reliability, accuracy and security, client service, price, and industry expertise and experience. We also face competition from providers of other medication repackaging services and bulk pharmaceutical distributors. There can be no assurance that we will be able to compete successfully against current and future competitors or that the competitive pressures that we face will not materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Our future success depends upon our ability to grow, and if we are unable to manage our growth effectively, we may incur unexpected expenses and be unable to meet our customers’ requirements.

We will need to expand our operations if we successfully achieve market acceptance for our products and services. We cannot be certain that our systems, procedures, controls and existing space will be adequate to support expansion of our operations. Our future operating results will depend on the ability of our officers and key employees to manage changing business conditions and to implement and improve our technical, administrative, financial control and reporting systems. We may not be able to expand and upgrade our systems and infrastructure to accommodate these increases. Difficulties in managing any future growth could have a significant negative impact on our business, financial condition and results of operations because we may incur unexpected expenses and be unable to meet our customers’ requirements.

In order to expand our business into additional states, we will need to comply with regulatory requirements specific to such state and there can be no assurance that we will be able to initially meet such requirements or that we will be able to maintain compliance on an on-going basis.

Each state has its own regulations concerning physician dispensing, restrictions on the corporate practice of medicine, anti-kick back and false claims. In addition, each state has a board of pharmacy that regulates the sale and distribution of drugs and other therapeutic agents. Some states require a physician to obtain a license to dispense prescription products. When considering the commencement of business in a new state, we solicit the opinion of healthcare counsel regarding the expansion of operations into that state and utilize local counsel when necessary. However, there can be no assurance that we will be able to comply with the regulations of particular states into which we intend to expand or that we will be able to maintain compliance with the states in which we currently distribute our products. Our inability to maintain compliance with the regulations of states into which we currently ship our products or expand our business into additional states may adversely affects our results of operations.

Our agreement with the Cambridge Medical Funding Group may be terminated by either party upon 30-day notice within the first six months.

The Cambridge Medical Funding Group agreement allows for payment within 7 to 10 days for all products dispensed and billed for participating physicians in California Workers’ Compensation. The agreement between Cambridge Medical Funding Group, the Company and the physician contains a 30-day termination clause pursuant to which either party may terminate within the first 6 months. It is possible that either party may cancel the agreement, which could adversely affect the Company’s cash flow and revenue.

Risks Related to Our Industry

We and our suppliers and manufacturers are subject to a number of existing laws, regulations and industry initiatives and the regulatory environment of the healthcare industry is continuing to change. If it is determined that we or our suppliers or manufacturers are not in compliance with the laws and regulations to which we are subject, our business, financial condition and results of operations may be adversely affected.

As a participant in the healthcare industry, our operations and relationships, and those of our customers, are regulated by a number of federal, state and local governmental entities and our products must be capable of being used by our customers in a manner that complies with those laws and regulations. Inability of our customers to do so could affect the marketability of our products or our compliance with our customer contracts, or even expose us to direct liability on a theory that we had assisted our customers in a violation of healthcare laws or regulations. Because of our direct business relationships with physicians and because the healthcare technology industry as a whole is relatively young, the application of many state and federal regulations to our business operations is uncertain. Indeed, there are federal and state fraud and abuse laws, including anti-kickback laws and limitations on physician referrals and laws related to off-label promotion of prescription drugs that may be directly or indirectly applicable to our operations and relationships or the business practices of our customers. It is possible that a review of our business practices or those of our customers by courts or regulatory authorities could result in a determination that may adversely affect us. In addition, the healthcare regulatory environment may change in a way that restricts our existing operations or our growth. The healthcare industry is expected to continue to undergo significant changes for the foreseeable future, which could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. We cannot predict the effect of possible future legislation and regulation.

Any failure to comply with all applicable federal and state confidentiality requirements for the protection of patient information may result in fines and other liabilities, which may adversely affect our results of operations.

As part of the operation of our business, our physician clients provide to us patient-identifiable medical information. HIPAA grants a number of rights to individuals as to their identifiable confidential medical information (called “Protected Health Information”) and restricts the use and disclosure of Protected Health Information. Failure to comply with these confidentiality requirements may result in penalties and sanctions. In addition, certain state laws may impose independent obligations upon us and our physician clients with respect to patient-identifiable medical information. Moreover, various new laws relating to the acquisition, storage and transmission of patient medical information have been proposed at both the federal and state level. Any failure to comply may result in fines and other liabilities, which may adversely affect our results of operations.

While physician dispensing of medications for profit is allowed in most states, it is limited in a few states. It is possible that certain states may enact further legislation or regulations prohibiting, restricting or further regulating physician dispensing. Similarly, while in a July 2002 Opinion the American Medical Association’s Council on Ethical and Judicial Affairs (CEJA) provides, in relevant part, that “Physicians may dispense drugs within their office practices provided such dispensing primarily benefits the patient.” Although the AMA Code of Medical Ethics does not have the force of law, a negative opinion could in the future adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Congress enacted significant prohibitions against physician self-referrals in the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993. This law, commonly referred to as “Stark II,” applies to physician dispensing of outpatient prescription drugs that are reimbursable by Medicare or Medicaid. Stark II, however, includes an exception for the provision of in-office ancillary services, including a physician’s dispensing of outpatient prescription drugs, provided that the physician meets specified requirements. We believe that the physicians who use our system or dispense drugs distributed by us are aware of these requirements, but we do not monitor their compliance and have no assurance that the physicians are in material compliance with Stark II. If it were determined that the physicians who use our system or dispense pharmaceuticals purchased from us were not in compliance with Stark II, it could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

As a distributor of prescription drugs to physicians, we are subject to the federal anti-kickback statute, which applies to Medicare, Medicaid and other state and federal programs. The federal anti-kickback statute prohibits the solicitation, offer, payment or receipt of remuneration in return for referrals or the purchase, or in return for recommending or arranging for the referral or purchase, of goods, including drugs, covered by the programs. The federal anti-kickback statute provides a number of statutory exceptions and regulatory “safe harbors” for particular types of transactions. We believe that our arrangements with our customers are in material compliance with the anti-kickback statute and relevant safe harbors. Many states have similar fraud and abuse laws, and we believe that we are in material compliance with those laws. If, however, it were determined that we, as a distributor of prescription drugs to physicians, were not in compliance with the federal anti-kickback statute, we could be subject to liability, and our operations could be curtailed. Moreover, if the activities of our customers or other entity with which we have a business relationship were found to constitute a violation of the federal anti-kickback law and we, as a result of the provision of products or services to such customer or entity, were found to have knowingly participated in such activities, we could be subject to sanction or liability under such laws, including civil and/or criminal penalties, as well as exclusion from government health programs. As a result of exclusion from government health programs, neither products nor services could be provided to any beneficiaries of any federal healthcare program.

Increased government involvement in healthcare could adversely affect our business.

U.S. healthcare system reform under the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement and Modernization Act of 2003, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010. U.S. and other initiatives at both the federal and state level, could increase government involvement in healthcare, lower reimbursement rates and otherwise change the business environment of our customers and the other entities with which we have a business relationship. While no federal price controls are included in the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement and Modernization Act, any legislation that reduces physician incentives to dispense medications in their offices could adversely affect physician acceptance of our products. We cannot predict whether or when future healthcare reform initiatives at the federal or state level or other initiatives affecting our business will be proposed, enacted or implemented or what impact those initiatives may have on our business, financial condition or results of operations. Our customers and the other entities with which we have a business relationship could react to these initiatives and the uncertainty surrounding these proposals by curtailing or deferring investments, including those for our products and services. Additionally, government regulation could alter the clinical workflow of physicians, hospitals and other healthcare participants, thereby limiting the utility of our products and services to existing and potential customers and curtailing broad acceptance of our products and services. Additionally, new safe harbors to the federal Anti-Kickback Statute and corresponding exceptions to such law may alter the competitive landscape, as such new safe harbors and exceptions allow hospitals and certain other donors to donate certain items and services used in electronic prescription systems and electronic health records systems. These new safe harbors and exceptions are intended to accelerate the adoption of electronic prescription systems and electronic health records systems, and therefore provide new and attractive opportunities for us to work with physicians’ offices. In addition, the federal government and state governments, including Florida, have imposed or may in the future impose pedigree requirements for pharmaceutical distribution. Our medications business is required to comply with any current regulations relating to pharmaceutical distribution and will be required to comply with any future regulations and such compliance may impose additional costs on our business.

Consolidation in the healthcare industry could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Many healthcare industry participants are consolidating to create integrated healthcare delivery systems with greater market power. As provider networks and pharmacy benefits managers consolidate, thus decreasing the number of market participants, competition to provide products and services like ours will become more intense, and the importance of establishing relationships with key industry participants will become greater. These industry participants may try to use their market power to negotiate price reductions for our products and services. Further, consolidation of management and billing services through integrated delivery systems may decrease demand for our products. If we were forced to reduce our prices, our business would become less profitable unless we were able to achieve corresponding reductions in our expenses.

Risks Related to Our Common Stock

There is an active public trading market for our common stock, however the market is illiquid. Until an active, liquid public trading market is established, you may not be able to sell your common stock if you need to liquidate your investment.

Our common stock is currently trading on the OTCBB tier of the over-the-counter securities market under the symbol “TRGM,” however the public market for our common stock is illiquid. A liquid trading market may not develop or, if developed, may not be sustained. The lack of a liquid market may impair your ability to sell your shares of common stock at the time you wish to sell them or at a price that you consider reasonable. The lack of a liquid market may also reduce the market value of your common stock and increase the volatility of prices paid for shares of our common stock. An illiquid market may also impair our ability to raise capital by selling shares of common stock and may impair our ability to acquire other companies or assets by using shares of our common stock as consideration.

In the event a liquid market develops for our common stock, the market price of our common stock may be volatile and may decline in value.

In the event a liquid market develops for our common stock, the market price of our common stock may be volatile and may decline in value. Some of the factors that may materially affect the market price of our common stock are beyond our control, such as changes in financial estimates by industry and securities analysts, conditions or trends in the industry in which we operate or sales of our common stock. These factors may materially adversely affect the market price of our common stock, regardless of our performance. In addition, the public stock markets have experienced extreme price and trading volume volatility. This volatility has significantly affected the market prices of securities of many companies for reasons frequently unrelated to the operating performance of the specific companies. These broad market fluctuations may adversely affect the market price of our common stock. Between the commencement of trading on October 17, 2012 and March 28, 2014 our stock has traded as high as $5.75 and as low as $0.49 per share.

We have incurred increased costs as a public company which may affect our profitability. These costs are still substantial and have added to our losses. The fees paid to outside board members and the incremental audit and legal costs make up the majority of these costs currently.

Prior to the Reorganization, Targeted Medical Pharma operated as a private company in California. As a public company, we incur significant legal, accounting and other expenses that we did not incur as a private company. We are subject to the SEC’s rules and regulations relating to public disclosure. SEC disclosures generally involve a substantial expenditure of financial resources. In addition, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, as well as rules subsequently implemented by the SEC, required changes in corporate governance practices of public companies. Compliance with these rules and regulations has significantly increased our legal and financial compliance costs and has made certain activities more time-consuming and costly. For example, we are required to adopt policies regarding internal controls and disclosure controls and procedures. Management may need to increase compensation for senior executive officers, engage senior financial officers who are able to adopt financial reporting and control procedures, allocate a budget for an investor and public relations program, and increase our financial and accounting staff in order to meet the demands and financial reporting requirements as a public reporting company. Such additional personnel, public relations, reporting and compliance costs may negatively impact our financial results.

As a result of being a fully reporting company, we are obligated to develop and maintain proper and effective internal controls over financial reporting and we are subject to other requirements that are burdensome and costly. We may not complete our analysis of our internal controls over financial reporting in a timely manner, or these internal controls may not be determined to be effective, which may adversely affect investor confidence in our Company and, as a result, the value of our common stock.

We are required, pursuant to Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to furnish reports by management on, among other things, the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting for each fiscal year. These assessments need to include disclosure of any material weaknesses identified by our management in our internal control over financial reporting, as well as a statement that our auditors have issued an attestation report on our management’s assessment of our internal controls.

To comply with these requirements, we may need to acquire or upgrade our systems, including information technology, implement additional financial and management controls, reporting systems and procedures and hire additional legal, accounting and finance staff. If we are unable to establish our financial and management controls, reporting systems, information technology and procedures in a timely and effective fashion, our ability to comply with our financial reporting requirements and other rules that apply to reporting companies could be impaired. In addition, if we are unable to conclude that our internal control over financial reporting is effective or that our disclosure controls and procedures are effective, as we were unable to do for the year ended December 31, 2012, we could lose investor confidence in the accuracy and completeness of our financial reports.

Failure to comply with the new rules might make it more difficult for us to obtain certain types of insurance, including director and officer liability insurance, and we might be forced to accept reduced policy limits and coverage and/or incur substantially higher costs to obtain the same or similar coverage. The impact of these events could also make it more difficult for us to attract and retain qualified persons to serve on our board of directors, on committees of our board of directors, or as executive officers.

Any market that develops in shares of our common stock will be subject to the penny stock restrictions which will create a lack of liquidity and make trading difficult or impossible.

SEC Rule 15g-9 establishes the definition of a “penny stock,” for purposes relevant to us, as any equity security that has a market price of less than $5.00 per share or with an exercise price of less than $5.00 per share, subject to a limited number of exceptions. If the price of our shares of common stock remain below $5.00 per share, our shares will continue to be considered as penny stocks. This classification severely and adversely affects the market liquidity for our common stock. For any transaction involving a penny stock, unless exempt, the penny stock rules require that a broker-dealer approve a person’s account for transactions in penny stocks and the broker-dealer receive from the investor a written agreement to the transaction setting forth the identity and quantity of the penny stock to be purchased.

In order to approve a person’s account for transactions in penny stocks, the broker-dealer must obtain financial information and investment experience and objectives of the person and make a reasonable determination that the transactions in penny stocks are suitable for that person and that person has sufficient knowledge and experience in financial matters to be capable of evaluating the risks of transactions in penny stocks.

The broker-dealer must also deliver, prior to any transaction in a penny stock, a disclosure schedule prepared by the SEC relating to the penny stock market, which sets forth:

Disclosure also has to be made about the risks of investing in penny stocks in both public offerings and in secondary trading and commissions payable to both the broker-dealer and the registered representative, current quotations for the securities and the rights and remedies available to an investor in cases of fraud in penny stock transactions. Finally, monthly statements have to be sent disclosing recent price information for the penny stock held in the account and information on the limited market in penny stocks.

Our stockholders may experience significant dilution if future equity offerings are used to fund operations or acquire complementary businesses.

If our future operations or acquisitions are financed through the issuance of equity securities, our stockholders could experience significant dilution. In addition, securities issued in connection with future financing activities or potential acquisitions may have rights and preferences senior to the rights and preferences of our common stock. We also established an incentive compensation plan for our management and employees. We have granted and expect to grant options to purchase shares of our common stock to our directors, employees and consultants and we will grant additional options in the future. The issuance of shares of our common stock upon the exercise of these options will also result in dilution to our stockholders.

Our outstanding options, warrants, and convertible debt may have an adverse effect on the market price of our common stock.

As of December 31, 2013 we had outstanding options to purchase 2,794,841 shares of common stock and outstanding warrants to purchase 4,256,465 shares of common stock. Therefore, the sale, or even the possibility of the sale, of the shares of common stock underlying these options and warrants could have an adverse effect on the market price for our securities or on our ability to obtain future financing. If and to the extent these options and warrants are exercised, you may experience dilution in your holdings.

We do not anticipate paying dividends in the foreseeable future; you should not buy our stock if you expect dividends.

We currently intend to retain our future earnings to support operations and to finance expansion and, therefore, we do not anticipate paying any cash dividends on our common stock in the foreseeable future.

We could issue “blank check” preferred stock without stockholder approval with the effect of diluting then current stockholder interests and impairing their voting rights, and provisions in our charter documents and under Delaware law could discourage a takeover that stockholders may consider favorable.

Our certificate of incorporation provides for the authorization to issue up to 20,000,000 shares of “blank check” preferred stock with designations, rights and preferences as may be determined from time to time by our board of directors. Our board of directors is empowered, without stockholder approval, to issue a series of preferred stock with dividend, liquidation, conversion, voting or other rights which could dilute the interest of, or impair the voting power of, our common stockholders. The issuance of a series of preferred stock could be used as a method of discouraging, delaying or preventing a change in control. For example, it would be possible for our board of directors to issue preferred stock with voting or other rights or preferences that could impede the success of any attempt to change control of our company.

Provisions in our charter documents and Delaware law may inhibit a takeover of us, which could limit the price investors might be willing to pay in the future for our common stock and could entrench management.

We are also subject to anti-takeover provisions under Delaware law, which could delay or prevent a change of control. Together these provisions may make more difficult the removal of management and may discourage transactions that otherwise could involve payment of a premium over prevailing market prices for our securities.

Our current management can exert significant influence over us and make decisions that are not in the best interests of all stockholders.

As of December 31, 2013 our executive officers and directors beneficially own as a group approximately 56.6% of our outstanding shares of common stock, which excludes 2,423,965 shares of common stock issuable upon exercise of warrants and 2,259,941 shares of common stock issuable upon exercise of options held by our officers and directors, of which 2,423,965 warrants and 2,109,941 options are currently exercisable. As a result, these stockholders will be able to assert significant influence over all matters requiring stockholder approval, including the election and removal of directors and any change in control. In particular, this concentration of ownership of our outstanding shares of common stock could have the effect of delaying or preventing a change in control, or otherwise discouraging or preventing a potential acquirer from attempting to obtain control. This, in turn, could have a negative effect on the market price of our common stock. It could also prevent our stockholders from realizing a premium over the market prices for their shares of common stock. Moreover, the interests of the owners of this concentration of ownership may not always coincide with our interests or the interests of other stockholders and, accordingly, could cause us to enter into transactions or agreements that we would not otherwise consider.

Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments.

Not applicable.

Item 2. Properties.

The Company leases approximately 4,594 square feet of general office space at 2980 Beverly Glen Circle, Los Angeles, CA 90077. The Company and its subsidiary’s principal executive offices are located in such space. In addition, we lease several smaller storage spaces on a month-to-month basis. In general, we believe that our properties are well-maintained, adequate and suitable for their purposes.

Item 3. Legal Proceedings.

On or about January 31, 2011, Steven B. Warnecke was hired as the Company’s Chief Financial Officer and resigned less than five (5) months later. At the time he resigned, he cited personal reasons for his resignation. He subsequently claimed that the Company breached its Employment Agreement with him. Mr. Warnecke commenced an arbitration proceeding (the “Arbitration”). In December 2013, the Company settled the claims for $255,000 in connection with a confidential mediation with a retired Justice of the California Court of Appeal.

Item 4. Mine Safety Disclosures.

Not applicable.

PART II

Item 5. Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities.

Market Information

The Company’s common stock is quoted on the OTCQB tier of the over-the-counter securities market under the symbol “TRGM”. The Company’s common stock began trading on the OTCQB on October 17, 2012. The following table sets forth the high and low bid information for the period since the Company’s common stock began trading:

As of March 28, 2014, the Company’s common stock was trading at $0.84.

Record Holders

As of March 28, 2014, there were approximately 300 stockholders of record of our shares of common stock. A number of holders of TMP common stock are “street name” or beneficial holders, whose shares of record are held by banks, brokers, and other financial institutions

Dividends

The Company has not declared any cash dividends since inception and does not anticipate paying any dividends in the foreseeable future. The payment of dividends is within the discretion of the Board of Directors and will depend on the Company’s earnings, capital requirements, financial condition, and other relevant factors. There are no restrictions that currently limit the Company’s ability to pay dividends on its common stock other than those generally imposed by applicable state law.

Securities Authorized for Issuance Under Equity Compensation Plans

On January 31, 2011, the Company’s Board of Directors and stockholders approved the 2011 Targeted Medical Pharma, Inc. Stock Incentive Plan (the “Plan”)), pursuant to which 3,000,000 shares of common stock are reserved for issuance pursuant to awards under the Plan. On August 26, 2013, subject to stockholder approval, the Company’s Board of Directors approved a 2,000,000 share increase in the number of shares issuable under the Plan. As of December 31, 2013, there were 2,794,841 options outstanding and 1,792,697 shares available for future issuance.

Recent Sales of Unregistered Securities

On April 22, 2013, AFH Holding converted $287,648, which represented the remaining principal balance of its notes, into 287,648 shares of the Company’s common stock. Additionally, between June 4, 2013, and November 25, 2013, the William Shell Survivor’s Trust converted $2,000,000 of its notes into 1,769,629 shares of the Company’s common stock. These securities were sold in reliance upon the exemption provided by Section 4(a)(2) of the Securities Act and the safe harbor of Rule 506 under Regulation D promulgated under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Securities Act”). No advertising or general solicitation was employed in offering the securities, the sales were made to a limited number of persons, all of whom represented to the Company that they are accredited investors, and transfer of the securities is restricted in accordance with the requirements of the Securities Act.

On November 6, 2013, the Company issued 160,000 shares of common stock as a deposit on a service contract. The shares were valued at $0.85 per share based on the fair market value of the common stock on the date of issuance. The Common Stock was valued at approximately $136,000. These shares were issued in reliance upon the exemption provided by Section 4(a)(2) of the Securities Act.

On December 20, 2013, the Company entered into a subscription agreement with an accredited investor in a private placement exempt from the registration requirements of the Securities Act. The Company issued and sold to the accredited investor 416,667 shares of its common stock. The issuance resulted in aggregate gross proceeds to the Company of $250,000. These securities were sold in reliance upon the exemption provided by Section 4(a)(2) of the Securities Act and the safe harbor of Rule 506 under Regulation D promulgated under the Securities Act. No advertising or general solicitation was employed in offering the securities, the sales were made to a single person, who represented to the Company that it is an accredited investor, and transfer of the securities is restricted in accordance with the requirements of the Securities Act.

During the year ended December 31, 2013, the Company issued an aggregate of 98,455 shares of its common stock pursuant to agreements with former employees and consultants to the Company. The Common Stock was valued at $86,540. These shares were issued in reliance upon the exemption provided by Section 4(a)(2) of the Securities Act.

Between June 28, 2013 and October 1, 2013, the Company issued 1,812,500 warrants to purchase shares of common stock at $2.00 per share pursuant to a $3.2 million loan with Cambridge Medical Funding Group. The warrants were valued at approximately $925,521 and will be amortized as non-cash interest expense over the term of the debt using the effective interest method. These securities will be issued pursuant to Section 4(a)(2) of the Securities Act. These warrants were issued in reliance upon the exemption provided by Section 4(a)(2) of the Securities Act.

Issuer Repurchases of Equity Securities

Not applicable.

Item 6. Selected Financial Data.

Not applicable.

Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.

CAUTIONARY NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

This Annual Report on Form 10-K contains forward-looking statements. All statements other than statements of historical fact are, or may be deemed to be, forward-looking statements. Such forward-looking statements include statements regarding, among others, (a) our expectations about possible business combinations, (b) our growth strategies, (c) our future financing plans, and (d) our anticipated needs for working capital. Forward-looking statements, which involve assumptions and describe our future plans, strategies, and expectations, are generally identifiable by use of the words “may,” “will,” “should,” “expect,” “anticipate,” “approximate,” “estimate,” “believe,” “intend,” “plan,” “budget,” “could,” “forecast,” “might,” “predict,” “shall” or “project,” or the negative of these words or other variations on these words or comparable terminology. This information may involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties, and other factors that may cause our actual results, performance, or achievements to be materially different from the future results, performance, or achievements expressed or implied by any forward-looking statements. These statements may be found in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Forward-looking statements are based on our current expectations and assumptions regarding our business, potential target businesses, the economy and other future conditions. Because forward-looking statements relate to the future, by their nature, they are subject to inherent uncertainties, risks, and changes in circumstances that are difficult to predict. Our actual results may differ materially from those contemplated by the forward-looking statements as a result of various factors, including, without limitation, the risks outlined under “Risk Factors” in this 10-K, changes in local, regional, national or global political, economic, business, competitive, market (supply and demand) and regulatory conditions and the following:

We caution you therefore that you should not rely on any of these forward-looking statements as statements of historical fact or as guarantees or assurances of future performance. All forward-looking statements speak only as of the date of this Annual Report on Form 10-K. We undertake no obligation to update any forward-looking statements or other information contained herein unless required by law.

Information regarding market and industry statistics contained in this Annual Report is included based on information available to us that we believe is accurate. It is generally based on academic and other publications that are not produced for purposes of securities offerings or economic analysis. Forecasts and other forward-looking information obtained from these sources are subject to the same qualifications and the additional uncertainties accompanying any estimates of future market size, revenue and market acceptance of products and services. Except as required by U.S. federal securities laws, we have no obligation to update forward-looking information to reflect actual results or changes in assumptions or other factors that could affect those statements. See the section entitled “Risk Factors” for a more detailed discussion of risks and uncertainties that may have an impact on our future results.

Recent Developments

On June 28, 2013, the Company entered into an agreement to secure $3.2 million from the securitization of certain aged receivables through an agreement with CMFG. CMFG funded $750,000 less fees and escrow amounts on June 29, 2013, and funded the balance on October 1, 2013. Based in Glen Rock, New Jersey, CMFG provides specialized finance solutions to hospitals, surgical centers and medical providers, funds receivables and provides guaranteed upfront payments to these providers.

We filed amended tax returns for 2010 in June of 2012. We understood that filing such returns would likely result in tax audits on the part of both the IRS and FTB. The IRS commenced an audit of the Company’s 2010 income tax return in November 2012. In March 2014 the IRS completed its examination. The IRS did not accept the Company’s assertion that certain sales did not meet the criteria of a sale for tax purposes, however; in part as a result of the utilization of NOL’s generated during 2011 and 2012, the IRS concluded that the Company’s aggregate tax liability for tax years 2010 through 2012 was only $26,000. As of December 31, 2013, we have recorded $900,863 in prepaid federal and state income taxes on our balance sheet. As a result of the successful conclusion of the IRS examination, the Company expects to receive a refund from the IRS of approximately $550,000.

 The Company posted increased revenues, gross profit, net income and a reduction in net loss before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization, stock based compensation, and non-recurring expenses (Adjusted EBITDA) from the prior quarter ended September 30, 2013.

Improved financial results from the prior quarter ended September 30, 2013 

TARGETED MEDICAL PHARMA, INC. AND SUBSIDIARY

Consolidated Statements of Operations

For the Years Ended December 31, 2013 and 2012

Revenue

During the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, the Company recognized total revenue of $9,555,562 and $7,296,401, respectively. Total revenue included product revenues from the Company’s TMP segment and service revenues from the Company’s CCPI segment. Total revenues were comprised as follows:

Product sales are invoiced upon shipment at AWP under six models, as described in Note 3 to our consolidated financial statements: Physician Direct Sales, Distributor Direct Sales, Physician Managed, Hybrid, CMFG #1 and CMFG #2 Models (collectively, the “Cambridge Models”). Due to substantial uncertainties as to the timing and collectability of revenues derived from our Physician Managed, Hybrid and CMFG #2 Models, which can take in excess of five years to collect, we have determined that these revenues do not meet the criteria for recognition, in accordance with ASC 605, upon shipment. These revenues are recorded when collectability is reasonably assured, which the Company has determined is when the payment is received, regardless of the year originally invoiced (the “Cash Method”). Conversely, product sales under the Company’s Physician Direct Sales, Distributor Direct Sales and CMFG #1 Models are recognized upon shipment (the “Accrual Method”). As a result, the Company’s basis of recognizing revenue is a hybrid of the cash and accrual methods.

The Company recognized product revenue for the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, of $8,505,667 and $6,440,058, respectively. The distribution of product revenue between the Cash Method and the Accrual Method of revenue recognition is as follows:

The increase in total product revenue is attributed to an increased emphasis on collection efforts at CCPI combined with an increase in customers. In addition to product revenue, which is recognized in the TMP segment, the Company also recognizes service revenue from billing and collection services in its CCPI segment. The Company recognized service revenue for the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, of $1,049,895 and $856,343, respectively. In each of the Physician Managed, Hybrid, and CMFG #2 Models, CCPI provides billing and collection services. In consideration for its services, CCPI receives a service fee that is based upon a percentage of gross collections. Because fees are only earned by CCPI upon collection of the claim, and the fee is not determinable until the amount of the collection of the claim is known, CCPI recognizes revenue at the time claims are paid. Under the CMFG #1 Model (under which CCPI also provides billing and collection services) CCPI recognizes revenue upon receipt of the 23% advance payment from CMFG. The increase in service revenue of $193,552 (from $856,343 for the year ended December 31, 2012 to $1,049,895 for the year ended December 31, 2013) is attributed to an overall increase in aggregate collections which was slightly offset by a lesser amount of services fees earned pursuant to the CMFG #1 Model.

Cost of Product Sold

The reported cost of product sold for the year ended December 31, 2013 decreased $282,680 to $1,054,194 from $1,336,874 for the year ended December 31, 2012. The cost of product sold as a percentage of reported product revenue decreased to 12.4% for the year ended December 31, 2013, compared to 20.8% for the year ended December 31, 2012. This decreased percentage is primarily the result of two factors: (i) an increase in cash collections from our Physician Managed and Hybrid Models, and (ii) the acceptance of the CMFG #1 Model which resulted in lower margins on 15% of the Company’s total revenues. Since the Company recognizes the cost of product sold on all products shipped, regardless of whether the sale resulted from a Cash Method or an Accrual Method customer, the cost of product sold as a percent of product billings (shipments) is more relevant for comparison purposes.

The actual cost of product sold as a percent of product billings during the year ended December 31, 2013, was 11.5% compared with 9.6% in the prior year due to the acceptance of the CMFG #1 Model. During the year ended December 31, 2013, the Company generated $1,334,086 in revenue under the CMGF #1 Model. If these revenues had been recognized under the Physician Managed or Hybrid Models the Company would have recognized approximately an additional $1,300,000. Thus, the existence of the CMFG #1 Model resulted in product sales with a lesser amount of gross profit. The difference between these figures and the 12.4% and 20.8% described above is attributable to the timing differences caused by our revenue recognition policy. The following table illustrates the timing impact of the Company’s revenue recognition policy on cost of product sold:

Cost of Services Sold

The cost of services sold for the year ended December 31, 2013, increased $70,594 to $1,935,111 from $1,864,517 for the year ended December 31, 2012. Cost of services sold consists primarily of salaries and employee benefits, which was relatively unchanged during the preceding two years. During the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, salaries and employee benefits were $1,514,047 and $1,516,959, respectively. The increase over the year ended December 31, 2012, is exclusively due to an increase in the utilization of third party collection services.

Operating Expenses

Operating expenses for the year ended December 31, 2013, increased $172,384 to $10,407,203 from $10,234,819 for the year ended December 31, 2012. Despite this increase, operating expenses as a percentage of total revenue decreased from 140% of revenue to 109% of revenue in part due to timing differences between the recognition of expenses and revenues. Operating expenses consist of research and development expense (which increased $94,765), and selling, general and administrative expenses (which increased $77,619). Changes in these items are further described below.

Research and Development Expense

Research and development expenses for the year ended December 31, 2013 increased $94,765, to $228,605 from $133,840 for the year ended December 31, 2012. The level of expense varies from year to year depending on the number of clinical trials that we have in progress. During the year ended December 31, 2013, the Company entered into a clinical study with the University of Cincinnati Physicians Company, LLC, an Ohio nonprofit, limited liability company, on the effects of Theramine in the prevention of migraine headaches. The financial obligations attributed to this clinical study were the primary cause of the increase in research and development expenses during the years.

Selling, General and Administrative Expense

Selling, general and administrative expenses (“SG&A”) were $10,178,598 and $10,100,979 for the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively. As reflected in the table below, the increase in SG&A for the year ended December 31, 2013, when compared to the year ended December 31, 2012, was primarily the result of various fluctuations in the following four expense categories: salaries and employee benefits, professional fees, insurance and depreciation and amortization.

The $83,756 decrease in salaries and employee benefits is primarily attributed to a reduction in stock based compensation expense of $402,394 which is partially offset by an increase in compensation expense of $324,524 which is attributed to certain severance agreements.

During the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, we recorded $751,818 and $1,154,212, respectively, related to the grants of stock options and restricted stock awards to our employees and non-employee directors. Therefore, excluding the decrease of $402,394 ($1,154,212 - $751,818) from stock based compensation, salaries and employee benefits increased by $318,638.

The Company entered into severance agreements with two former employees during the year ended December 31, 2013. As a result of these severance agreements, the Company recognized $357,000 in compensation expense. At the same time, actual gross wages, inclusive of payroll taxes, for these two employees were $52,476 less during the year ended December 31, 2013. As a result, the net increase in salaries and employee benefits associated with these two employees was $304,524.

The second largest component of our SG&A is professional fees. During the year ended December 31, 2013, the Company experienced an increase in professional fees from three distinct projects. First, the Company filed a Form S-1 registration statement, which was declared effective on April 19, 2013. The cost associated with the Company’s Form S-1 resulted in an increase in legal fees of $100,000. Second, in conjunction with entering into the June 28, 2013 agreement with CMFG, as amended, the Company incurred a $128,000 professional services fee. Finally, during January 2013, the Company engaged a consultant for assistance in attaining Medicaid approval of four of the Company’s products: Theramine®, Sentra AM®, Sentra PM® and AppTrim®. The Company expects that this consulting engagement will continue through the second quarter of 2014. During the year ended December 31, 2013, the Company recognized $120,000 in fees related to this consulting contract. The increase in professional fees related to these three projects of $348,000 was almost entirely offset by negotiated reductions in outstanding legal fees in excess of $300,000. As a result, professional fees remained relatively unchanged from the prior year.

Insurance expense increased by $131,760 during the year ended December 31, 2013 compared to the year ended December 31, 2012. The increase is primarily related to an increase in premiums associated with the Company’s Directors and Officers insurance policy, which increased by approximately $100,000 from the previous year.

Property and equipment are stated at cost and are depreciated using the straight line method over the estimated useful lives of the assets, which generally range between 3 and 7 years. During the year ended December 31, 2013, depreciation and amortization decreased by $15,393. The decrease in depreciation and amortization is attributed to the timing of when assets were placed in service.

General and administrative expense experienced an increase of $28,302 during the year ended December 31, 2013 over the prior year. Travel related expenses are a large component of general and administrative expenses and represented an increase of $152,076. During the year ended December 31, 2013, the Company’s sales force made a significant effort to conduct in person meetings with existing and potential customers which resulted in an increase in the Company’s travel expenses. The offsetting decrease in general and administrative expenses is a combination of several types of expenses, none of which are significant individually.

Other Income and Expenses

Other income and expense includes income from the reversal of interest and penalties relating to the Company’s 2010 income tax returns, interest expense, amortization of discounts on notes payable and changes in the fair value of the Company’s warrant derivative liability. During the year ended December 31, 2013, the Company reported other income of $170,230 compared with an expense of $6,632,311 during the prior year.

Interest expense decreased by $2,210,466, resulting in interest income of $10,889 in the year ended December 31, 2013, as compared to an expense of $2,199,577 in the year ended December 31, 2012. The decrease was primarily due to the expensing of discounts on notes payable issued with warrants, a non-cash expense, which decreased by $1,613,693 from $1,994,812 during the year ended December 31, 2012 to $381,119 during the year ended December 31, 2013. The remaining decrease in interest expense was due to the Company’s reversal of $752,281 in interest and penalties relating to its 2010 income tax returns. As discussed in the “Recent Developments” section in Item 7 above, in March 2014 the IRS completed its examination. The IRS concluded that the Company’s aggregate income tax liability for tax years 2010 through 2012 was approximately $26,000, significantly less than the $550,000 in prior year income tax payments. Accordingly, the Company reversed the interest and penalties that were recorded in the year ended December 31, 2011.

Changes in the fair value of the Company’s warrant derivative liability resulted in income of $159,341 in the year ended December 31, 2013, compared with an expense of $4,432,734 in the prior year. In July 2012 the Company issued 1,158,981 warrants with anti-dilution ratcheting provisions. At December 31, 2012 and 2013, only 95,000 of these warrants were outstanding. This income represents a reduction in the warrant derivative liability during the year ended December 31, 2013, in connection with the remaining 95,000 warrants.

Current and Deferred Income Taxes

The Company filed its 2010 federal and state tax returns in April 2011 and June 2011, respectively, without including payment for amounts due and has not made estimated tax payments for the 2011 and 2012 tax years. The Company had entered into agreements with the Internal Revenue Service and the California Franchise Tax Board to extend the payment of these taxes over a mutually agreeable period of time. In aggregate, we have paid $550,000 to the IRS and $350,000 to the California Franchise Tax Board. Our 2010 federal and state tax returns reflected an amount owed to the IRS and California Franchise Tax Board of approximately $3,600,000 and $1,000,000, respectively. We were unable to pay the remaining installment payments.

As a result of our assessment that for certain sales’ collectability at the time of the sale could not be reasonably assured, these sales did not meet the criteria of a sale for tax purposes. The Company recalculated its 2010 and 2011 tax liabilities and determined that no income taxes are owed for either year. We filed amended tax returns for 2010 in June of 2012 and in September 2012 filed our 2011 returns using a change in accounting method consistent with our financial results restatement. We understood that filing such returns would likely result in tax audits on the part of both agencies. The IRS commenced its audit in November 2012. In March 2014 the IRS completed its examination. The IRS did not accept the Company’s assertion that certain sales did not meet the criteria of a sale for tax purposes, however; in part as a result of the utilization of NOL’s generated during 2011 and 2012, the IRS concluded that the Company’s aggregate tax liability for tax years 2010 through 2012 was only $26,000. In February 2013, the FTB notified the Company by letter that it would take no action on our amended California return until the IRS completed its examination. The FTB has not formally suspended collection and enforcement efforts but has continued to extend its Notice of Suspension deadlines on a quarterly basis pending the outcome of the eventual audit. As a result of the completion of the IRS examination the Company will initiate discussions with the FTB. There can be no assurances that the FTB will accept the conclusion of the IRS and will not pursue collection and enforcement efforts.

We had no current income tax benefit in the years ended December 31, 2013 or 2012, respectively. Deferred income tax expense for the years ended December 31, 2013, increased $8,852,840 to $5,666,902 from a benefit of $3,185,938 for the year ended December 31, 2012. The increase was the result of a decision by the Company to fully reserve its net deferred tax assets of $7,369,719.

The ultimate realization of deferred tax assets is dependent upon the existence, or generation, of taxable income in the periods when those temporary differences and net operating loss carryovers are deductible. Management considers the scheduled reversal of deferred tax liabilities, taxes paid in carryover years, projected future taxable income, available tax planning strategies, and other factors in making this assessment. Based on available evidence, management believes it is less likely than not that all of the deferred tax assets will be realized. Accordingly, the Company has established a 100% valuation allowance of $7,369,719

Net Loss

Net loss for the year ended December 31, 2013, was $9,337,618 compared to a net loss of $9,586,182 for the year ended December 31, 2012. The decreased net loss was a result of a combination of increased revenues, decreased other expenses and an increase in income tax expense as described above.

FINANCIAL CONDITION

Our negative working capital of $8,631,105 as of December 31, 2013 decreased $1,084,804 from our December 31, 2012 negative working capital of $9,715,909. Our operating losses in 2013 were funded primarily by a loan from CMFG, which resulted in net proceeds to the Company of $3,035,600 pursuant to CMFG #2.

As reflected in the Company’s consolidated statement of cash flows for the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, the Company’s reported net loss is comprised of non-cash charges of $7,044,756 and $4,836,681, respectively. A summary of these non-cash charges is as follows:

Unrecognized Accounts Receivable

As of December 31, 2013, we have $8.3 million in unrecognized accounts receivable and unrecognized revenues that potentially will be recorded as revenue in the future as our CCPI subsidiary secures claims payments on behalf of our Cash Method customers. Except for collection expenses incurred by CCPI, all expenses associated with these unrecognized accounts receivable, including cost of products sold, have already been expensed in our financial statements. In addition, for federal and state income tax purposes the Company has recognized these unrecognized accounts receivable as revenues. Therefore, the Company will not incur current tax liabilities for these unrecognized accounts receivable when they are collected.

For the year ended December 31, 2013, the Company performed its regular analysis of outstanding invoices comprising unrecognized accounts receivables; specifically, the underlying outstanding insurance claims for each physician customer which is the source of future payment of these outstanding invoices. The analysis takes into account the value of claims outstanding, the age of these claims, and historical claims settlement and payment patterns. At December 31, 2013, the Company determined that collections on its unrecognized accounts receivable would approximate $8.3 million. The analysis also took into account the impact of the agreements with CMFG, particularly the agreement dated June 28, 2013, as amended, regarding future collections. In exchange for loans of $3.2 million the Company assigned its interest in certain pre-2013 workers compensation claims to CMFG and agreed to share approximately 50% of future collections proceeds from settlement of such claims. At December 31, 2013, cumulative payments made to CMFG pursuant to the CMFG #2 Model were $407,216. The Company allocated these payments as debt repayment of $292,716 and interest expense of $114,500. Thus, at December 31, 2013, the remaining principal amount due to CMFG was $2,907,284. The Company expects CMFG will receive aggregate future payments of approximately $4.2 million. As a result of this updated and expanded analysis, of the total amount of $8.3 million in unrecognized accounts receivable, the Company expects to retain approximately $4.1 million, net of estimated amounts of future proceeds belonging to CMFG pursuant to CMFG #2. See the “Business Model” discussion above and the discussions of “Revenue Recognition”, and “Allowance for Doubtful Accounts” under the “Critical Accounting Policies” discussion below.

LIQUIDITY AND CAPITAL RESOURCES

We have historically financed operations through cash flows from operations as well as equity transactions and related party loans. As noted above, we entered into an agreement with CMFG that provided for loans of $3.2 million of which $750,000, less fees and escrow amounts, was received on June 28, 2013. The balance of $2.45 million was received on October 1, 2013. Due to the uncertainty of our ability to meet our current operating and capital expenses, in their report on our audited annual financial statements as of and for the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, our independent auditors included an explanatory paragraph regarding concerns about our ability to continue as a going concern. Our financial statements contain additional note disclosures describing the circumstances that led to this disclosure by our independent auditors. There is substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern as the continuation and expansion of our business is dependent upon either obtaining future equity financings or achieving profitable operations in order to repay the existing short-term debt and to provide a sufficient source of operating capital. No assurances can be made that the Company will be successful in obtaining equity financing needed to continue to fund its operations, or that the Company will achieve profitable operations and positive cash flow. Our inability to take these actions as and when necessary would materially adversely affect our liquidity, results of operations and financial condition.

The Company filed its 2010 federal and state tax returns in April 2011 and June 2011, respectively, without including payment for amounts due. The 2010 federal and state tax returns reflected an amount owed to the IRS and California Franchise Tax Board of approximately $3,600,000 and $1,000,000, respectively. The Company had entered into agreements with the Internal Revenue Service and the California Franchise Tax Board to extend the payment of these taxes over a mutually agreeable period of time. In aggregate, we have paid $550,000 to the IRS and $350,000 to the California Franchise Tax Board.

As a result of our assessment that for certain sales collectability at the time of the sale could not be reasonably assured, these sales did not meet the criteria of a sale for tax purposes. The Company recalculated its 2010 through 2012 tax liabilities and determined that no income taxes were owed for any of the years.

We filed amended tax returns for 2010 in June of 2012. We understood that filing such returns would likely result in tax audits on the part of both agencies. The IRS commenced its audit in November 2012. In March 2014 the IRS completed its examination. The IRS did not accept the Company’s assertion that certain sales did not meet the criteria of a sale for tax purposes, however; in part as a result of the utilization of NOL’s generated during 2011 and 2012, the IRS concluded that the Company’s aggregate tax liability for tax years 2010 through 2012 was only $26,000. In February 2013, the FTB notified the Company by letter that it would take no action on our amended California return until the IRS completed its examination. The FTB has not formally suspended collection and enforcement efforts but has continued to extend its Notice of Suspension deadlines on a quarterly basis pending the outcome of the eventual audit. As a result of the completion of the IRS examination the Company will initiate discussions with the FTB. There can be no assurances that the FTB will accept the conclusion of the IRS and will not pursue collection and enforcement efforts. If an initial adverse ruling were to occur, we would pursue the arbitration and appeal processes available to us under California tax regulations. If the ultimate disposition is unfavorable to the Company, we would likely not be in a position to pay the outstanding liabilities and could incur additional income tax liabilities for tax years subsequent to 2010.

Although it is likely that the FTB will arrive at the same conclusion as the IRS, we cannot predict the outcome of the FTB examination. If our position is rejected we would owe approximately $650,000 plus additional interest and penalties and would likely incur liabilities for income taxes in subsequent years. As of December 31, 2013, we have recorded $900,863 in prepaid federal and state income taxes on our balance sheet. As a result of the successful conclusion of the IRS examination, the Company expects to receive a refund from the IRS of approximately $550,000. If the outcome of the FTB examination is favorable to the Company then we anticipate a refund of the remaining prepaid taxes. If not, then prepaid state taxes would be removed from our balance sheet.