Quarterly report pursuant to sections 13 or 15(d)

2. Summary of significant accounting policies

v2.4.0.8
2. Summary of significant accounting policies
9 Months Ended
Sep. 30, 2013
Accounting Policies [Abstract]  
Note 2. Summary of significant accounting policies

Development stage enterprise 

 

The Company is a development stage enterprise.  All losses accumulated since the inception of the Company have been considered as part of the Company’s development stage activities.

 

The Company’s focus is on product development and marketing of proprietary devices that are designed to improve the operational parameters of petrochemical pipeline transport systems and has not yet generated any revenues.  The Company is currently transitioning from the product development cycle to the commercial manufacturing and sales cycle.  Expenses have been funded through the sale of shares of common stock for cash, issuance of convertible notes for cash and the proceeds from exercise of options and warrants.  The Company has taken actions to secure the intellectual property rights to the proprietary technologies and is the worldwide exclusive licensee for the intellectual property the Company co-developed with its intellectual property partner, Temple University of Philadelphia, PA.

 

Estimates

 

The preparation of financial statements in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles 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 revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Certain significant estimates were made in connection with preparing the Company’s financial statements. Actual results could differ from those estimates

 

Basic Income per share

 

The Company’s computation of earnings per share (“EPS”) includes basic and diluted EPS.  Basic EPS is measured as the income (loss) available to common stockholders divided by the weighted average common shares outstanding for the period.  Diluted EPS is similar to basic EPS but presents the dilutive effect on a per share basis of potential common shares (e.g., warrants and options) as if they had been converted at the beginning of the periods presented, or issuance date, if later.  Potential common shares that have an anti-dilutive effect (i.e., those that increase income per share or decrease loss per share) are excluded from the calculation of diluted EPS.

 

Income (loss) per common share is computed by dividing net income (loss) by the weighted average number of shares of common stock outstanding during the respective periods. Basic and diluted (loss) per common share is the same for periods in which the company reported an operating loss because all warrants and stock options outstanding are anti-dilutive.

 

Stock-Based Compensation

 

The Company periodically issues stock options and warrants to employees and non-employees in non-capital raising transactions for services and for financing costs. The Company accounts for stock option and warrant grants issued and vesting to employees based on the authoritative guidance provided by the Financial Accounting Standards Board whereas the value of the award is measured on the date of grant and recognized over the vesting period. The Company accounts for stock option and warrant grants issued and vesting to non-employees in accordance with the authoritative guidance of the Financial Accounting Standards Board whereas the value of the stock compensation is based upon the measurement date as determined at either a) the date at which a performance commitment is reached, or b) at the date at which the necessary performance to earn the equity instruments is complete. Non-employee stock-based compensation charges generally are amortized over the vesting period on a straight-line basis. In certain circumstances where there are no future performance requirements by the non-employee, option grants are immediately vested and the total stock-based compensation charge is recorded in the period of the measurement date.

 

The fair value of the Company's common stock option grant is estimated using the Black-Scholes option pricing model, which uses certain assumptions related to risk-free interest rates, expected volatility, expected life of the common stock options, and future dividends. Compensation expense is recorded based upon the value derived from the Black-Scholes option pricing model, and based on actual experience. The assumptions used in the Black-Scholes option pricing model could materially affect compensation expense recorded in future periods.

 

Accounting for Derivatives

 

The Company evaluates all of its financial instruments to determine if such instruments are derivatives or contain features that qualify as embedded derivatives. For derivative financial instruments that are accounted for as liabilities, the derivative instrument is initially recorded at its fair value and is then re-valued at each reporting date, with changes in the fair value reported in the consolidated statements of operations. For stock-based derivative financial instruments, the Company uses a probability weighted average series Black-Scholes-Merton option pricing models to value the derivative instruments at inception and on subsequent valuation dates.

 

The classification of derivative instruments, including whether such instruments should be recorded as liabilities or as equity, is evaluated at the end of each reporting period. Derivative instrument liabilities are classified in the balance sheet as current or non-current based on whether or not net-cash settlement of the derivative instrument could be required within 12 months of the balance sheet date.

 

Fair value of financial instruments 

 

Effective January 1, 2008, fair value measurements are determined by the Company's adoption of authoritative guidance issued by the FASB, with the exception of the application of the statement to non-recurring, non-financial assets and liabilities as permitted. The adoption of the authoritative guidance did not have a material impact on the Company's fair value measurements. Fair value is defined in the authoritative guidance as the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in the principal or most advantageous market for the asset or liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. A fair value hierarchy was established, which prioritizes the inputs used in measuring fair value into three broad levels as follows:

 

Level 1—Quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities.

 

Level 2—Inputs, other than the quoted prices in active markets, are observable either directly or indirectly.

 

Level 3—Unobservable inputs based on the Company's assumptions.

 

The Company is required to use observable market data if such data is available without undue cost and effort

 

The following table presents certain investments and liabilities of the Company’s financial assets measured and recorded at fair value on the Company’s condensed consolidated balance sheets on a recurring basis and their level within the fair value hierarchy as of September 30, 2013 and December 31, 2012.

 

    Level 1       Level 2     Level 3     Total  
Fair value of Derivative Liability-September 30, 2013 -0-     -0-     $ -0-     $ -0-  
Fair value of Derivative Liability-December 31, 2012 -0-     -0-     $ 3,221,138     $ 3,221,138  

 

Recent Accounting Pronouncements  

 

In January 2013, the FASB issued ASU 2013-01, Balance Sheet (Topic 210): Clarifying the Scope of Disclosures about Offsetting Assets and Liabilities. This ASU clarifies which instruments and transactions are subject to the offsetting disclosure requirements established by ASU 2011-11. This guidance is effective for annual and interim reporting periods beginning January 1, 2013. We do not believe the adoption of this update will have a material effect on our financial position and results of operations.

  

On March 4, 2013, the FASB issued ASU 2013-05, “Foreign Currency Matters (Topic 830): Parent’s Accounting for the Cumulative Translation Adjustment upon Derecognition of Certain Subsidiaries or Groups of Assets within a Foreign Entity or of an Investment in a Foreign Entity” (“ASU 2013-05”). ASU 2013-05 updates accounting guidance related to the application of consolidation guidance and foreign currency matters. This guidance resolves the diversity in practice about what guidance applies to the release of the cumulative translation adjustment into net income. This guidance is effective for interim and annual periods beginning after December 15, 2013. We do not believe the adoption of this update will have a material effect on our financial position and results of operations.

 

In July 2013, the FASB issued ASU No. 2013-11, Presentation of an Unrecognized Tax Benefit When a Net Operating Loss Carryforward, a Similar Tax Loss, or a Tax Loss, or a Tax Credit Carryforward Exists. Topic 740, Income Taxes, does not include explicit guidance on the financial statement presented of an unrecognized tax benefit when a net operating loss carryforward, a similar tax loss, or a tax credit carryforward exists. There is diversity in practice in the presentation of unrecognized tax benefits in those instances and the amendments in this update are intended to eliminate that diversity in practice. The amendments are effective for fiscal years, and interim periods within those years, beginning after December 15, 2013. The amendments should be applied prospectively to all unrecognized tax benefits that exist at the effective date. Early adoption is permitted. We do not believe the adoption of this update will have a material effect on our financial position and results of operations.

 

Other accounting pronouncements did not or are not believed by management to have a material impact on the Company's present or future consolidated financial statements.

 

Reclassification

 

In presenting the Company’s statement of operations for the three and nine month periods ended September 30, 2012, the Company reclassified certain salary and consulting expenses in the aggregate of $72,000 and $212,000 respectively that were previously reflected as operating expenses to research and development expenses.

 

In presenting the Company’s statement of operations from inception to September 30, 2013, the Company reclassified certain salary and consulting expenses in the aggregate $531,500 previously reflected as operating expenses to research and development expenses.