Significant Accounting Policies (Policies) |
12 Months Ended | |
|---|---|---|
Dec. 31, 2016 | ||
| Accounting Policies [Abstract] | ||
| Basis of Accounting, Policy [Policy Text Block] |
Basis of Presentation The Company’s financial statements have been prepared in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“GAAP”) and include all adjustments necessary for the fair presentation of the Company’s financial position for the periods presented. The Company has no subsidiaries. |
|
| Use of Estimates, Policy [Policy Text Block] |
Use of Estimates The preparation of financial statements in conformity with GAAP requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from those estimates. |
|
| Cash and Cash Equivalents, Policy [Policy Text Block] |
Cash and Cash Equivalents The Company considers all short-term investments with an original maturity of three months or less when purchased to be cash equivalents. |
|
| Receivables, Policy [Policy Text Block] |
Other Receivables Related Party Other receivables consist of amounts due to the Company from TGTX, a related party, and are recorded at the invoiced amount (see Note 3). |
|
| Research and Development Expense, Policy [Policy Text Block] |
Research and Development Costs Research and development costs are expensed as incurred. Advance payments for goods and services that will be used in future research and development activities are expensed when the activity has been performed or when the goods have been received rather than when the payment is made. Upfront and milestone payments due to third parties that perform research and development services on the Company’s behalf will be expensed as services are rendered or when the milestone is achieved. Research and development costs primarily consist of personnel related expenses, including salaries, benefits, travel, and other related expenses, stock-based compensation, payments made to third parties for license and milestone costs related to in-licensed products and technology, payments made to third party contract research organizations for preclinical and clinical studies, investigative sites for clinical trials, consultants, the cost of acquiring and manufacturing clinical trial materials, costs associated with regulatory filings, laboratory costs and other supplies. In accordance with Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) 730-10-25-1, Research and Development, costs incurred in obtaining technology licenses are charged to research and development expense if the technology licensed has not reached commercial feasibility and has no alternative future use. Such licenses purchased by the Company require substantial completion of research and development, regulatory and marketing approval efforts in order to reach commercial feasibility and has no alternative future use. |
|
| Equity Method Investments, Policy [Policy Text Block] |
Annual Equity Fee Under the Founder’s Agreement with Checkpoint dated March 17, 2015, and amended and restated on July 11, 2016, Fortress is entitled to an annual equity fee on each anniversary of the Agreement equal to 2.5% of fully diluted outstanding equity, payable in Checkpoint common shares (“Annual Equity Fee”). The Annual Equity Fee was part of the consideration payable for formation of the Company, identification of certain assets, including the license contributed to Checkpoint by Fortress. The Company records the Annual Equity Fee in connection with the Founders Agreement with Fortress as contingent consideration. Contingent consideration is recorded when probable and reasonably estimable. The Company’s future share prices and shares outstanding cannot be estimated prior to the issuance of the Annual Equity Fee due to the nature of its assets and the Company’s stage of development. Due to these uncertainties, the Company has concluded that it is unable to reasonably estimate the contingent consideration until shares are actually issued on March 17 of each year. Because the issuance of shares on March 17, 2017 and 2016 occurred prior to the issuance of the December 31, 2016 and 2015 financial statements, the Company recorded $3.9 million and $3.0 million in research and development expense and a credit to Common shares issuable - Founders Agreement during the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively. |
|
| Share-based Compensation, Option and Incentive Plans Policy [Policy Text Block] |
Stock-Based Compensation Expenses The Company expenses stock-based compensation to employees over the requisite service period based on the estimated grant-date fair value of the awards and forfeiture rates. For stock-based compensation awards to non-employees, the Company re-measures the fair value of the non-employee awards at each reporting period prior to vesting and finally at the vesting date of the award. Changes in the estimated fair value of these non-employee awards are recognized as stock-based compensation expense in the period of change. The Company estimates the fair value of stock option grants using the Black-Scholes option pricing model or 409A valuations as necessary. The assumptions used in calculating the fair value of stock-based awards represent management’s best estimates and involve inherent uncertainties and the application of management’s judgment. |
|
| Fair Value Measurement, Policy [Policy Text Block] |
Fair Value Measurement The Company follows the accounting guidance in ASC 820 for its fair value measurements of financial assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis. Under this accounting guidance, fair value is defined as an exit price, representing the amount that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. As such, fair value is a market-based measurement that should be determined based on assumptions that market participants would use in pricing an asset or a liability. The accounting guidance requires fair value measurements be classified and disclosed in one of the following three categories: Level 1: Quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities. Level 2: Observable inputs other than Level 1 prices, for similar assets or liabilities that are directly or indirectly observable in the marketplace. Level 3: Unobservable inputs which are supported by little or no market activity and that are financial instruments whose values are determined using pricing models, discounted cash flow methodologies, or similar techniques, as well as instruments for which the determination of fair value requires significant judgment or estimation. The fair value hierarchy also requires an entity to maximize the use of observable inputs and minimize the use of unobservable inputs when measuring fair value. Assets and liabilities measured at fair value are classified in their entirety based on the lowest level of input that is significant to the fair value measurement. |
|
| Revenue Recognition, Policy [Policy Text Block] |
Revenue Recognition Collaborative Arrangements The Company is paid by TGTX, a related party, a share of the cost of the license, development and future milestone payments that are payable under the agreements as described in Note 3. The gross amount of these payments are reported as revenue in the accompanying Statements of Operations. The Company acts as a principal, bears credit risk, obtains subcontractors and may perform part of the services required in the transactions. Consistent with ASC 605-45-15 these payments are treated as revenue to the Company. The actual expenses creating the payments by TGTX are reflected as research and development expenses. The Company recognizes revenue for the performance of services or the shipment of products when each of the following four criteria is met: (i) persuasive evidence of an arrangement exists; (ii) products are delivered or as services are rendered; (iii) the sales price is fixed or determinable; and (iv) collectability is reasonably assured. The Company follows ASC 605-25, Revenue Recognition - Multiple-Element Arrangements and ASC 808, Collaborative Arrangements, if applicable, to determine the recognition of revenue under our collaborative research, development and commercialization agreements. The terms of these agreements generally contain multiple elements, or deliverables, which may include (i) grants of licenses, or options to obtain licenses, to our intellectual property, (ii) research and development services, (iii) drug product manufacturing, and/or (iv) participation on joint research and/or joint development committees. The payments we may receive under these arrangements typically include one or more of the following: non-refundable, up-front license fees; option exercise fees; funding of research and/or development efforts; amounts due upon the achievement of specified objectives; and/or royalties on future product sales. ASC 605-25 provides guidance relating to the separability of deliverables included in an arrangement into different units of accounting and the allocation of arrangement consideration to the units of accounting. The evaluation of multiple-element arrangements requires management to make judgments about (i) the identification of deliverables, (ii) whether such deliverables are separable from the other aspects of the contractual relationship, (iii) the estimated selling price of each deliverable, and (iv) the expected period of performance for each deliverable. To determine the units of accounting under a multiple-element arrangement, management evaluates certain separation criteria, including whether the deliverables have stand-alone value, based on the relevant facts and circumstances for each arrangement. Management then estimates the selling price for each unit of accounting and allocates the arrangement consideration to each unit utilizing the relative selling price method. The allocated consideration for each unit of accounting is recognized over the related obligation period in accordance with the applicable revenue recognition criteria. If there are deliverables in an arrangement that are not separable from other aspects of the contractual relationship, they are treated as a combined unit of accounting, with the allocated revenue for the combined unit recognized in a manner consistent with the revenue recognition applicable to the final deliverable in the combined unit. Payments received prior to satisfying the relevant revenue recognition criteria are recorded as deferred revenue in the Balance Sheet and recognized as revenue in the Statements of Operations when the related revenue recognition criteria are met. See Note 3 for a description of the collaborative arrangement. Revenue Recognition - Milestone Method The Company follows ASC 605-28, Revenue Recognition-Milestone Method to evaluate whether each milestone under a license agreement is substantive. This evaluation includes an assessment of whether (i) the consideration is commensurate with either (a) the entity's performance to achieve the milestone, or (b) the enhancement of the value of the delivered item as a result of a specific outcome resulting from the entity's performance to achieve the milestone, (ii) the consideration relates solely to past performance and (iii) the consideration is reasonable relative to all of the deliverables and payment terms within the arrangement. The Company evaluates factors such as the preclinical, clinical, regulatory, commercial and other risks that must be overcome to achieve the respective milestone, the level of effort and investment required and whether the milestone consideration is reasonable relative to all deliverables and payment terms in the arrangement in making this assessment. If a substantive milestone is achieved, the Company would recognize revenue related to the milestone in its entirety in the period in which the milestone was achieved, assuming all other revenue recognition criteria were met. Commercial milestones would be accounted for as royalties and recorded as revenue upon achievement of the milestone, assuming all other revenue recognition criteria were met. |
|
| Income Tax, Policy [Policy Text Block] |
Income Taxes The Company records income taxes using the asset and liability method. Deferred income tax assets and liabilities are recognized for the future tax effects attributable to temporary differences between the financial statement carrying amounts of existing assets and liabilities and their respective income tax bases, and operating loss and tax credit carryforwards. The Company establishes a valuation allowance if management believes it is more likely than not that the deferred tax assets will not be recovered based on an evaluation of objective verifiable evidence. For tax positions that are more likely than not of being sustained upon audit, the Company recognizes the largest amount of the benefit that is greater than 50% likely of being realized. For tax positions that are not more likely than not of being sustained upon audit, the Company does not recognize any portion of the benefit. The Company files a separate tax return under Subchapter C of the Internal Revenue Code. Prior to October 1, 2015, the Company was a subsidiary included in the consolidated tax return of Fortress. As a result of issuances of its common stock, the Company exited the consolidated tax group for federal and state income tax purposes. For financial reporting purposes, the Company calculated income tax provision and deferred income tax balances for the year ended December 31, 2015 as if it was a separate entity and had filed its own separate tax return under Subchapter C of the Internal Revenue Code. |
|
| Derivatives, Reporting of Derivative Activity [Policy Text Block] |
Valuation of Warrant Related to NSC Note In accordance with ASC 815, the Company classified the fair value of the warrant (“Contingently Issuable Warrants”) that may have been granted in connection with the promissory note through National Securities Corporation (the “NSC Note”) transferred to the Company in various tranches from March 19, 2015 to August 31, 2015 as a derivative liability as there was a potential that the Company would not have a sufficient number of authorized common shares available to settle this instrument. The Company valued these Contingently Issuable Warrants using an option pricing model (which approximates intrinsic value) with estimates for an expected dividend yield, a risk-free interest rate, and expected volatility together with management’s estimate of the probability of issuance of the Contingently Issuable Warrants (see Note 9). At each reporting period, as long as the Contingently Issuable Warrants were potentially issuable and there was a potential for an insufficient number of authorized shares available to settle the Contingently Issuable Warrants, the Contingently Issuable Warrants should be revalued and any difference from the previous valuation date would be recognized as a change in fair value in the Company’s Statement of Operations. |
|
| Earnings Per Share, Policy [Policy Text Block] |
Net Loss per Share Net loss per share is computed by dividing net loss by the weighted average number of common shares outstanding during the period. Since dividends are declared, paid and set aside among the holders of shares of common stock and Class A common stock pro-rata on an as-if-converted basis, the two-class method of computing net loss per share is not required. Diluted net loss per share does not reflect the effect of shares of common stock to be issued upon the exercise of stock options and warrants, as their inclusion would be anti-dilutive. There are 2,533,063 shares of unvested restricted stock, 4,331,106 warrants and 60,000 options outstanding as of December 31, 2016, which are not included in the computation of net loss per share. For the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015, the Company had a net loss of $1.04 and $1.41 per share, respectively, on 21,544,205 and 9,855,668 weighted average common shares outstanding, respectively. |
|
| New Accounting Pronouncements, Policy [Policy Text Block] |
Recently Issued Accounting Standards
In January 2017, the Financial Accounting Standards Board ("FASB") issued an Accounting Standards Update ("ASU") 2017-01, “Business Combinations (Topic 805) Clarifying the Definition of a Business”. The amendments in this ASU clarify the definition of a business with the objective of adding guidance to assist entities with evaluating whether transactions should be accounted for as acquisitions (or disposals) of assets or businesses. The definition of a business affects many areas of accounting including acquisitions, disposals, goodwill, and consolidation. The guidance is effective for annual periods beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim periods within those periods. The Company is currently evaluating the impact of adopting this guidance.
In August 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-15, Statement of Cash Flows - Classification of Certain Cash Receipts and Cash Payments, which addresses eight specific cash flow issues with the objective of reducing the existing diversity in practice in how certain cash receipts and cash payments are presented and classified in the statement of cash flows. The standard is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim periods within those fiscal years. Early adoption is permitted, including adoption in an interim period. The Company is currently in the process of evaluating the impact of this new pronouncement on its statements of cash flows. In March 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-09 Compensation-Stock Compensation (Topic 718), Improvements to Employee Share-Based Payment Accounting (“ASU 2016-09”). The amendment is to simplify several aspects of the accounting for share-based payment transactions including the income tax consequences, classification of awards as either equity or liabilities, and classification on the statement of cash flows. For public entities, the amendments in ASU 2016-09 are effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2016. The Company does not expect this standard to have a material impact on our financial statements upon adoption. In March 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-08, “Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606): Principal versus Agent Considerations” (“ASU 2016-08”). The purpose of ASU 2016-08 is to clarify the implementation of guidance on principal versus agent considerations. The amendments in ASU 2016-08 are effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2017. The Company is currently evaluating the impact of implementation and transition approach of ASU 2016-08 on its financial statements and related disclosures, including the impact the new ASU will have on its collaborative arrangements accounted for pursuant to ASC 808. In February 2016, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) No. 2016-02, Leases (Topic 842) which supersedes FASB ASC Topic 840, Leases (Topic 840) and provides principles for the recognition, measurement, presentation and disclosure of leases for both lessees and lessors. The new standard requires lessees to apply a dual approach, classifying leases as either finance or operating leases based on the principle of whether or not the lease is effectively a financed purchase by the lessee. This classification will determine whether lease expense is recognized based on an effective interest method or on a straight-line basis over the term of the lease, respectively. A lessee is also required to record a right-of-use asset and a lease liability for all leases with a term of greater than twelve months regardless of classification. Leases with a term of twelve months or less will be accounted for similar to existing guidance for operating leases. The standard is effective for annual and interim periods beginning after December 15, 2018, with early adoption permitted upon issuance. The Company is currently evaluating the method of adoption and the impact of adopting ASU 2016-02 on its financial statements. Since the Company currently does not have any leases, it does not expect this guidance to have a material impact on its financial statements. In November 2015, the FASB issued ASU No. 2015-17, Balance Sheet Classification of Deferred Taxes (“ASU 2015-17”). ASU 2015-17 requires that deferred tax liabilities and assets be classified as noncurrent in a classified statement of financial position. ASU 2015-17 is effective for financial statements issued for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2016, and interim periods within those fiscal years. The Company adopted ASU No. 2015-17 in the fourth quarter of 2016, and its adoption did not have a material impact on the Company’s financial statements. In April 2015, the FASB issued ASU No. 2015-03, Simplifying the Presentation of Debt Issuance Costs (“ASU 2015-03”), which requires debt issuance costs to be presented in the balance sheet as a direct deduction from the carrying value of the associated debt liability, consistent with the presentation of a debt discount. ASU 2015-03 is effective for the interim and annual periods ending after December 15, 2015, with early adoption permitted. The Company adopted ASU 2015-03 and such adoption resulted in debt issuance costs presented as an offset against notes payable, long-term, in the accompanying balance sheet. In August 2014, the FASB issued ASU No. 2014-15, Disclosure of Uncertainties about an Entity’s Ability to Continue as a Going Concern (“ASU No. 2014-15”) that will require management to evaluate whether there are conditions and events that raise substantial doubt about an entity’s ability to continue as a going concern within one year after the financial statements are issued on both an interim and annual basis. Management will be required to provide certain footnote disclosures if it concludes that substantial doubt exists or when its plans alleviate substantial doubt about the entity’s ability to continue as a going concern. The Company adopted ASU No. 2014-15 in the fourth quarter of 2016, and its adoption did not have a material impact on the Company’s financial statements. In May 2014, the FASB issued ASU No. 2014-09, Revenue from Contracts with Customers (“ASU 2014-09”), an updated standard on revenue recognition. ASU 2014-09 provides enhancements to the quality and consistency of how revenue is reported by companies while also improving comparability in the financial statements of companies reporting using International Financial Reporting Standards or GAAP. The main purpose of the new standard is for companies to recognize revenue to depict the transfer of goods or services to customers in amounts that reflect the consideration to which a company expects to be entitled in exchange for those goods or services. The new standard also will result in enhanced disclosures about revenue, provide guidance for transactions that were not previously addressed comprehensively and improve guidance for multiple-element arrangements. In July 2015, the FASB voted to approve a one-year deferral of the effective date of ASU 2014-09, which will now be effective for the Company in the first quarter of fiscal year 2018 and may be applied on a full retrospective or modified retrospective approach. The Company is evaluating the impact of implementation and transition approach of this standard on its financial statements. When adopted, the Company does not expect this guidance to have a material impact on its financial statements. |