SITIME Corp

Previous wording

Historically we have derived a significant portion of our revenue from a limited number of customers. We sell our products primarily through distributors, who in turn sell to our end customers. We also sell directly to our end customers. Our top three distributors by revenue together accounted for approximately 55% and 45% of our revenue for the three months ended June 30, 2024 and 2023, respectively, and 54% and 44% of our revenue six months ended June 30, 2024 and 2023 respectively. Based on our shipment information, we believe that revenue attributable to our ten largest end customers accounted for 59% and 42% of our revenue for the three months ended June 30, 2024 and 2023, respectively, and 57% and 40% of our revenue for the six months ended June 30, 2024 and 2023 respectively. Sales attributable to Apple Inc., our largest end customer accounted for approximately 18% and 16% of our revenue for the three months ended June 30, 2024 and 2023 respectively, and 18% and 9% of our revenue for the six months ended June 30, 2024 and 2023 respectively. We anticipate revenue attributable to this customer will fluctuate from period to period. Although we sell our products to this customer through distributors on a purchase order basis, including Pernas Electronics Co., Ltd. (“Pernas”), Arrow Electronics, Inc. (“Arrow”), and Quantek Technology Corporation (“Quantek”), we have a development and supply agreement, which provides a general framework for certain transactions with Apple. This agreement continues until either party terminates for material breach. Under this agreement, we have agreed to develop and deliver new products to this end customer at its request, provided it also meets our business purposes, and have agreed to indemnify it for intellectual property infringement or any injury or damages caused by our products. This end customer does not have any minimum or binding purchase obligations to us under this agreement and could elect to discontinue making purchases from us with little or no notice. We expect the composition of our largest end customers to vary from period to period, and that revenue attributable to our largest ten end customers in any given period may decline over time. Our relationships with existing customers may deter potential customers who compete with these customers from buying our Precision Timing solutions.

Current wording

Historically we have derived a significant portion of our revenue from a limited number of customers. We sell our products primarily through distributors, who in turn sell to our end customers. We also sell directly to our end customers. Our top three distributors by revenue together accounted for approximately 55% and 61% of our revenue for the three months ended September 30, 2024 and 2023, respectively, and 55% and 50% of our revenue nine months ended September 30, 2024 and 2023, respectively. Based on our shipment information, we believe that revenue attributable to our ten largest end customers accounted for 63% and 60% of our revenue for the three months ended September 30, 2024 and 2023, respectively, and 59% and 46% of our revenue for the nine months ended September 30, 2024 and 2023, respectively. Sales attributable to Apple Inc., our largest end customer accounted for approximately 23% and 37% of our revenue for the three months ended September 30, 2024 and 2023, respectively, and 20% and 19% of our revenue for the nine months ended September 30, 2024 and 2023, respectively. We anticipate revenue attributable to this customer will fluctuate from period to period. Although we sell our products to this customer through distributors on a purchase order basis, including Pernas Electronics Co., Ltd., Arrow Electronics, Inc., and Quantek Technology Corporation, we have a development and supply agreement, which provides a general framework for certain transactions with Apple. This agreement continues until either party terminates for material breach. Under this agreement, we have agreed to develop and deliver new products to this end customer at its request, provided it also meets our business purposes, and have agreed to indemnify it for intellectual property infringement or any injury or damages caused by our products. This end customer does not have any minimum or binding purchase obligations to us under this agreement and could elect to discontinue making purchases from us with little or no notice. We expect the composition of our largest end customers to vary from period to period, and that revenue attributable to our largest ten end customers in any given period may decline over time. Our relationships with existing customers may deter potential customers who compete with these customers from buying our Precision Timing solutions.

Previous wording

We operate an outsourced manufacturing business model. As a result, we rely on third parties for all of our manufacturing operations, including wafer fabrication, assembly, packaging, and testing. Although we use multiple third-party supplier sources, we depend on these third parties to supply us with material of a requested quantity in a timely manner that meets our standards for yield, cost, and manufacturing quality. The manufacturing processes of our third-party suppliers for our products require specialized technology that requires certain raw and engineered materials. Many major components, product equipment items, engineered materials, and raw materials, that are procured or subcontracted by our third-party suppliers for manufacturing of our products are procured or subcontracted on a single or sole-source basis. Except for our agreement with Bosch for MEMS wafers, we do not have any long-term supply agreements with any of our other manufacturing suppliers. These third-party manufacturers often serve customers that are larger than us or require a greater portion of their services, which may decrease our relative importance and negotiating leverage with these third parties.

Current wording

We operate an outsourced manufacturing business model. As a result, we rely on third parties for all of our manufacturing operations, including wafer fabrication, assembly, packaging, and testing. Although we use multiple third-party supplier sources, we depend on these third parties to supply us with material of a requested quantity in a timely manner that meets our standards for yield, cost, and manufacturing quality. The manufacturing processes of our third-party suppliers for our products require specialized technology that requires certain raw and engineered materials. Many major components, product equipment items, engineered materials, and raw materials, that are procured or subcontracted by our third-party suppliers for manufacturing of our products are procured or subcontracted on a single or sole-source basis. Except for our agreement with Robert Bosch LLC ("Bosch") for MEMS wafers, we do not have any long-term supply agreements with any of our other manufacturing suppliers. These third-party manufacturers often serve customers that are larger than us or require a greater portion of their services, which may decrease our relative importance and negotiating leverage with these third parties.

Previous wording

To ensure continued wafer supply, we may be required to establish alternative wafer supply sources, which could require significant expenditures and limit our negotiating leverage. We currently rely on Bosch and TSMC as our primary foundries and suppliers for our MEMS timing devices and analog circuits, respectively, and only a few foundry vendors have the capability to manufacture our most advanced solutions, in particular with respect to our MEMS solution. If we engage alternative supply sources, we may incur additional costs and encounter difficulties and/or delays in qualifying the supply sources. For example, we have a license agreement with Bosch under which Bosch granted us a license to use certain patents. Under this agreement, we are required to pay a royalty fee to Bosch if we engage third parties to manufacture, or if we decide to manufacture ourselves, certain generations of our MEMS wafers through March 31, 2024. In addition, shipments could be significantly delayed while these sources are qualified for volume production. If we are unable to maintain our relationship with Bosch or TSMC, our ability to produce high-quality products could suffer, which in turn could harm our business, financial condition, and results of operations.

Current wording

To ensure continued wafer supply, we may be required to establish alternative wafer supply sources, which could require significant expenditures and limit our negotiating leverage. We currently rely on Bosch for and TSMC as our primary foundries and suppliers for our MEMS timing devices and analog circuits, respectively, and only a few foundry vendors have the capability to manufacture our most advanced solutions, in particular with respect to our MEMS solution. If we engage alternative supply sources, we may incur additional costs and encounter difficulties and/or delays in qualifying the supply sources. For example, we have a license agreement with Bosch under which Bosch granted us a license to use certain patents. Under this agreement, we are required to pay a royalty fee to Bosch if we engage third parties to manufacture, or if we decide to manufacture ourselves, certain generations of our MEMS wafers through March 31, 2024. In addition, shipments could be significantly delayed while these sources are qualified for volume production. If we are unable to maintain our relationship with Bosch or TSMC, our ability to produce high-quality products could suffer, which in turn could harm our business, financial condition, and results of operations.

Previous wording

We currently primarily rely on Advanced Semiconductor Engineering, Inc. (“ASE”), Carsem (M) Sdn. Bhd. (“Carsem”), and United Test and Assembly Center Ltd. (“UTAC”) for assembly and testing, as well as Daishinku Corp. (“Daishinku”), UTAC, Hana Semiconductor (Ayutthaya) Co., Ltd, and ASE for ceramic packaging for some of our products. We enter into capacity agreements with certain of our OSATs from time to time which may adversely impact our gross margins and results of operations if we do not purchase required minimum quantities.

Current wording

We currently primarily rely on Advanced Semiconductor Engineering, Inc. (“ASE”), Carsem (M) Sdn. Bhd. and United Test and Assembly Center Ltd. (“UTAC”) for assembly and testing, as well as Daishinku Corp. (“Daishinku”), UTAC, Hana Semiconductor (Ayutthaya) Co., Ltd, and ASE for ceramic packaging for some of our products. We enter into capacity agreements with certain of our OSATs from time to time which may adversely impact our gross margins and results of operations if we do not purchase required minimum quantities.

Previous wording

We outsource the fabrication and assembly of all of our products to third parties that are primarily located in Germany and Asia. In addition, we conduct research and development activities in locations including the United States, Japan, the Netherlands, Taiwan, Ukraine, Finland, and India. We also conduct marketing and administrative functions in the United States, Japan, the Netherlands, China, Taiwan, Malaysia, Ukraine, and India. Members of our sales force are located in various locations outside of the United States. Certain of the critical functions for our business are performed in locations outside of the United States. In addition, approximately 91% and 85% of our revenue for the three months ended June 30,

Current wording

We outsource the fabrication and assembly of all of our products to third parties that are primarily located in Germany and Asia. In addition, we conduct research and development activities in locations including the United States, Japan, the Netherlands, Taiwan, Ukraine, Finland, and India. We also conduct marketing and administrative functions in the United States, Japan, the Netherlands, China, Taiwan, Malaysia, Ukraine, and India. Members of our sales force are located in various locations outside of the United States. Certain of the critical functions for our business are performed in locations outside of the United States. In addition, approximately 93% and 89% of our revenue for the three months ended September 30, 2024 and 2023, respectively, and approximately 92% and 85% of our revenue for the nine months ended September 30, 2024 and 2023, respectively, was from distributors with ship-to locations outside the United States, although we believe the majority of our end customers are based in the U.S. based on sell-through information provided by these distributors. As a result of our international focus, we face numerous challenges and risks, including:

Previous wording

Our target markets include the communications, datacenter, and enterprise, automotive, industrial, aerospace, and mobile, IoT, and consumer markets. Substantially all of our revenue to date has been attributable to sales of MEMS oscillators. We have expanded our products to include clock IC and timing sync solutions. Any deterioration in our target customer or product markets or reduction in capital spending to support these markets could lead to a reduction in demand for our products, which would adversely affect our revenue and results of operations. Further, if our target customer markets do not grow or develop in ways that we currently expect, demand for our technology may not materialize as expected, which would also negatively impact our business, financial condition, and results of operations.

Current wording

Our target markets include the communications, datacenter, and enterprise, automotive, industrial, aerospace, and mobile, IoT, and consumer markets. Substantially all of our revenue to date has been attributable to sales of MEMS oscillators. We have expanded our products to include clock IC and timing synchronization solutions. Any deterioration in our target customer or product markets or reduction in capital spending to support these markets could lead to a reduction in demand for our products, which would adversely affect our revenue and results of operations. Further, if our target customer markets do not grow or develop in ways that we currently expect, demand for our technology may not materialize as expected, which would also negatively impact our business, financial condition, and results of operations.

Previous wording

Our revenue has fluctuated over time. Our revenue was $43.9 million and $27.7 million for the three months ended June 30, 2024 and 2023, respectively, and $76.9 million and $66.1 million for the six months ended June 30, 2024 and 2023, respectively. You should not rely on our revenue for any previous quarterly or annual periods as any indication of our revenue for future fiscal periods. As we grow our business, our revenue may fluctuate in future periods due to a number of reasons, which may include macroeconomic conditions, slowing demand for our products, increasing competition, a decrease in the growth of our overall market or market saturation, or our failure to capitalize on growth opportunities.

Current wording

Our revenue has fluctuated over time. Our revenue was $57.7 million and $35.5 million for the three months ended September 30, 2024 and 2023, respectively, and $134.6 million and $101.6 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2024 and 2023, respectively. You should not rely on our revenue for any previous quarterly or annual periods as any indication of our revenue for future fiscal periods. As we grow our business, our revenue may fluctuate in future periods due to a number of reasons, which may include macroeconomic conditions, slowing demand for our products, increasing competition, a decrease in the growth of our overall market or market saturation, or our failure to capitalize on growth opportunities.

Previous wording

Our ability to compete in the future will depend on our ability to identify and ensure compliance with evolving industry standards in our target markets, as well as in the timing IC industry. The emergence of new industry standards could render our products incompatible with products developed by third-party suppliers or make it difficult for our products to meet the requirements of certain OEMs. If our customers or our third-party suppliers adopt new or competing industry standards with which our solutions are not compatible, or if industry groups fail to adopt standards with which our solutions are compatible, our products would become less desirable to our current or prospective customers. As a result, our sales would suffer, and we could be required to make significant expenditures to develop new products. Although we believe our products are compliant with applicable industry standards, proprietary enhancements may not in the future result in conformance with existing industry standards under all circumstances. If our products do not conform to, or are not compatible with, existing or emerging standards, it would harm our business, financial condition, and results of operations.

Current wording

Our ability to compete in the future will depend on our ability to identify and ensure compliance with evolving industry standards in our target markets, as well as in the timing semiconductor industry. The emergence of new industry standards could render our products incompatible with products developed by third-party suppliers or make it difficult for our products to meet the requirements of certain OEMs. If our customers or our third-party suppliers adopt new or competing industry standards with which our solutions are not compatible, or if industry groups fail to adopt standards with which our solutions are compatible, our products would become less desirable to our current or prospective customers. As a result, our sales would suffer, and we could be required to make significant expenditures to develop new products. Although we believe our products are compliant with applicable industry standards, proprietary enhancements may not in the future result in conformance with existing industry standards under all circumstances. If our products do not conform to, or are not compatible with, existing or emerging standards, it would harm our business, financial condition, and results of operations.

Previous wording

The global semiconductor market in general, and the timing market in particular, is highly competitive. We expect competition to increase and intensify as additional companies enter our target markets, and as internal silicon design resources of large OEMs grow. Increased competition could result in price pressure, reduced gross margins and loss of market share, any of which could harm our business, financial condition, and results of operations. Our competitors range from large, international companies offering a wide range of timing products to smaller companies, including start-ups, specializing in narrow market verticals. Companies that we primarily compete with include, but are not limited to, Abracon LLC, Daishinku Corporation, Diodes Incorporated, Kyocera Corporation, Microchip Technology Inc., Murata Manufacturing Co., Ltd., Nihon Dempa Kogyo Co., Ltd., Rakon Limited, Renesas Electronics Corporation, Seiko Epson Corporation, Skyworks Solutions, Inc., Texas Instruments Incorporated, and TXC Corporation. We expect competition in our current markets to increase in the future as existing competitors improve or expand their technology and product offerings and as new competitors enter these markets. In addition, our future growth will depend in part on our ability to successfully enter and compete in new markets. Some of these markets will likely be served by only a few large, multinational OEMs with substantial negotiating and buying power relative to us and, in some instances, with internally developed silicon solutions that can be competitive to our products.

Current wording

The global semiconductor market in general, and the timing market in particular, is highly competitive. We expect competition to increase and intensify as additional companies enter our target markets, and as internal silicon design resources of large OEMs grow. Increased competition could result in price pressure, reduced gross margins and loss of market share, any of which could harm our business, financial condition, and results of operations. Our competitors range from large, international companies offering a wide range of timing products to smaller companies, including start-ups, specializing in narrow market verticals. Companies that we primarily compete with include, but are not limited to, Abracon LLC, Daishinku, Diodes Incorporated, Kyocera Corporation, Microchip Technology Inc., Murata Manufacturing Co., Ltd., Nihon Dempa Kogyo Co., Ltd., Rakon Limited, Renesas Electronics Corporation, Seiko Epson Corporation, Skyworks Solutions, Inc., Texas Instruments Incorporated, and TXC Corporation. We expect competition in our current markets to increase in the future as existing competitors improve or expand their technology and product offerings and as new competitors enter these markets. In addition, our future growth will depend in part on our ability to successfully enter and compete in new markets. Some of these markets will likely be served by only a few large, multinational OEMs with substantial negotiating and buying power relative to us and, in some instances, with internally developed silicon solutions that can be competitive to our products.

Previous wording

Our products and technology are subject to U.S. export controls, including the U.S. Department of Commerce’s Export Administration Regulations (“EAR”) and economic and trade sanctions regulations administered by the U.S. Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Controls. These regulations may limit the export of our products and technology, and provision of our services outside of the United States, or may require export authorizations, including by license, a license exception, or other appropriate government authorizations and conditions, including annual or semi-annual reporting. Export control and economic sanctions laws may also include prohibitions on the sale or supply of certain of our products to embargoed or sanctioned countries, regions, governments, persons, and entities. For example, we sell to markets in Asia where multiple companies have been added to the Entity List, requiring license for exports of items subject to control under the EAR. To our knowledge, we have not sold products subject to the EAR to Entity List persons. In addition, various countries regulate the importation of certain products, through import permitting and licensing requirements, and have enacted laws that could limit our ability to distribute our products. The exportation, re-exportation, and importation of our products and technology and the provision of services, including by our partners, must comply with

Current wording

Our products and technology are subject to U.S. export controls, including the U.S. Department of Commerce’s Export Administration Regulations (“EAR”) and economic and trade sanctions regulations administered by the U.S. Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Controls. These regulations may limit the export of our products and technology, and provision of our services outside of the United States, or may require export authorizations, including by license, a license exception, or other appropriate government authorizations and conditions, including annual or semi-annual reporting. Export control and economic sanctions laws may also include prohibitions on the sale or supply of certain of our products to embargoed or sanctioned countries, regions, governments, persons, and entities. For example, we sell to markets in Asia where multiple companies have been added to the Entity List, requiring license for exports of items subject to control under the EAR. To our knowledge, we have not sold products subject to the EAR to Entity List persons. In addition, various countries regulate the importation of certain products, through import permitting and licensing requirements, and have enacted laws that could limit our ability to distribute our products. The exportation, re-exportation, and importation of our products and technology and the provision of services, including by our partners, must comply with U.S. and other laws or else we may be adversely affected through reputational harm, government investigations, penalties, and a denial or curtailment of our ability to export our products and technology. Although we take precautions to prevent our products and technology from being provided in violation of such laws, our products and technology may have previously been, and could in the future be, provided inadvertently in violation of such laws, despite the precautions we take. Changes in export or import laws or sanctions policies also may adversely impact our operations, delay the introduction and sale of our products in international markets, or, in some cases, prevent the export or import of our products and technology to certain countries, regions, governments, persons, or entities altogether, which could adversely affect our business, financial condition, and results of operations.

Previous wording

New or future changes in tax laws, regulations, and treaties, or the interpretation thereof, in addition to tax regulations enacted but not in effect, tax policy initiatives and reforms under consideration in the United States or related to the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development’s (“OECD”), Base Erosion and Profit Shifting Project (“BEPSP”), the European Commission’s state aid investigations, and other initiatives could have an adverse effect on the taxation of international businesses. Furthermore, countries where we are subject to taxes, including the United States, are independently evaluating their tax policy and we may see significant changes in legislation and regulations concerning taxation. Certain countries have already enacted legislation, including those related to BEPSP, which could affect international businesses, and other countries have become more aggressive in their approach to audits and enforcement of their applicable tax laws. In addition, we are unable to predict what future tax reform may be proposed or enacted or what effect such changes would have on our business, but any changes, to the extent they are brought into tax legislation, regulations, policies, or practices, could increase our effective tax rates in the countries where we have operations and have an adverse effect on our overall tax rate, along with increasing the complexity, burden and cost of tax compliance, all of which could impact our business, financial condition, and results of operations.

Current wording

New or future changes in tax laws, regulations, and treaties, or the interpretation thereof, in addition to tax regulations enacted but not in effect, tax policy initiatives and reforms under consideration in the United States or related to the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development’s, Base Erosion and Profit Shifting Project (“BEPSP”), the European Commission’s state aid investigations, and other initiatives could have an adverse effect on the taxation of international businesses. Furthermore, countries where we are subject to taxes, including the United States, are independently evaluating their tax policy and we may see significant changes in legislation and regulations concerning taxation. Certain countries have already enacted legislation, including those related to BEPSP, which could affect international businesses, and other countries have become more aggressive in their approach to audits and enforcement of their applicable tax laws. In addition, we are unable to predict what future tax reform may be proposed or enacted or what effect such changes would have on our business, but any changes, to the extent they are brought into tax legislation, regulations, policies, or practices, could increase our effective tax rates in the countries where we have operations and have an adverse effect on our overall tax rate, along with increasing the complexity, burden and cost of tax compliance, all of which could impact our business, financial condition, and results of operations.

Previous wording

A tax authority may disagree with tax positions that we have taken. For example, the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”), or another tax authority could challenge our allocation of income by tax jurisdiction and the amounts paid between our affiliated companies pursuant to our intercompany arrangements and transfer pricing policies, including amounts paid with respect to our intellectual property in connection with our intercompany research and development cost sharing arrangement and legal structure. A tax authority may take the position that material income tax liabilities, interest, and penalties are payable by us, in which case, we expect that we might contest such assessment. Contesting such an assessment may be lengthy and costly and if we were unsuccessful in disputing the assessment, the implications could be materially adverse to us and affect our anticipated effective tax rate or operating income, and we could be required to pay substantial penalties and interest where applicable.

Current wording

A tax authority may disagree with tax positions that we have taken. For example, the Internal Revenue Service, or another tax authority could challenge our allocation of income by tax jurisdiction and the amounts paid between our affiliated companies pursuant to our intercompany arrangements and transfer pricing policies, including amounts paid with respect to our intellectual property in connection with our intercompany research and development cost sharing arrangement and legal structure. A tax authority may take the position that material income tax liabilities, interest, and penalties are payable by us, in which case, we expect that we might contest such assessment. Contesting such an assessment may be lengthy and costly and if we were unsuccessful in disputing the assessment, the implications could be materially adverse to us and affect our anticipated effective tax rate or operating income, and we could be required to pay substantial penalties and interest where applicable.

Previous wording

As of December 31, 2023, we had U.S. federal, state and foreign net operating loss (“NOL”), carryforwards of approximately $230.2 million, $83.7 million and $1.7 million, respectively, and U.S. federal and state research and development tax credit carryforwards of approximately $3.9 million and $3.6 million, respectively. The U.S. federal, state, and the foreign NOL carryforwards begin to expire in 2028. The U.S. federal research and development tax credit carryforwards begin to expire in 2025 and the state research and development tax credit carryforwards carry forward indefinitely. These net operating loss and U.S. federal tax credit carryforwards could expire unused and/or be unavailable to offset future income tax liabilities. In addition, under Section 382 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”), and corresponding provisions of California state law, if a corporation undergoes an “ownership change,” which is generally defined as a greater than 50% change, by value, in its equity ownership over a three-year period, the corporation’s ability to use its pre-change net operating loss carryforwards and other pre-change tax attributes to offset its post-change income may be limited. We completed a Section 382 analysis and determined an ownership change occurred in 2014 and concluded that it had no impact on U.S. federal and California net operating losses or on U.S. federal research and development credits. Our initial public offering in November 2019 did not result in a change in ownership of greater than 50% under Section 382. We also had a follow-on offering on June 16, 2020, which resulted in greater than 50% change under Section 382. We completed an updated Section 382 analysis based on this new change event and determined that it will not prohibit us from eventually utilizing our carryforwards. We updated the Section 382 analysis through December 31, 2023 and concluded there have not been any additional ownership changes as defined under Section 382 since the June 16, 2020 follow-on offering. We may experience ownership changes in the future as a result of subsequent shifts in our stock ownership, some of which may be outside of our control. If we determine that an ownership change has occurred and our ability to use our historical net operating loss and tax credit carryforwards is materially limited, it would harm our future business, financial condition, and results of operations by effectively increasing our future tax obligations. In addition, under the Tax Act, federal NOLs incurred in 2018 and in future years may be carried forward indefinitely but generally may not be carried back and the deductibility of such NOLs is limited to 80% of taxable income. Under the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act, which was signed into law in 2020, an NOL from a tax year beginning in 2018, 2019 or 2020 can be carried back five years and would not be subject to the 80%-of-income limitation if they are exhausted durin…

Excerpt shortened here; the source contains the full paragraph.

Current wording

As of December 31, 2023, we had U.S. federal, state and foreign NOL, carryforwards of approximately $230.2 million, $83.7 million and $1.7 million, respectively, and U.S. federal and state research and development tax credit carryforwards of approximately $3.9 million and $3.6 million, respectively. The U.S. federal, state, and the foreign NOL carryforwards begin to expire in 2028. The U.S. federal research and development tax credit carryforwards begin to expire in 2025 and the state research and development tax credit carryforwards carry forward indefinitely. These NOL and U.S. federal tax credit carryforwards could expire unused and/or be unavailable to offset future income tax liabilities. In addition, under Section 382 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”), and corresponding provisions of California state law, if a corporation undergoes an “ownership change,” which is generally defined as a greater than 50% change, by value, in its equity ownership over a three-year period, the corporation’s ability to use its pre-change NOL carryforwards and other pre-change tax attributes to offset its post-change income may be limited. We completed a Section 382 analysis and determined an ownership change occurred in 2014 and concluded that it had no impact on U.S. federal and California NOLs or on U.S. federal research and development credits. Our initial public offering in November 2019 did not result in a change in ownership of greater than 50% under Section 382. We also had a follow-on offering on June 16, 2020, which resulted in greater than 50% change under Section 382. We completed an updated Section 382 analysis based on this new change event and determined that it will not prohibit us from eventually utilizing our carryforwards. We updated the Section 382 analysis through December 31, 2023 and concluded there have not been any additional ownership changes as defined under Section 382 since the June 16, 2020 follow-on offering. We may experience ownership changes in the future as a result of subsequent shifts in our stock ownership, some of which may be outside of our control. If we determine that an ownership change has occurred and our ability to use our historical NOL and tax credit carryforwards is materially limited, it would harm our future business, financial condition, and results of operations by effectively increasing our future tax obligations. In addition, under the Tax Act, federal NOLs incurred in 2018 and in future years may be carried forward indefinitely but generally may not be carried back and the deductibility of such NOLs is limited to 80% of taxable income. Under the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act, which was signed into law in 2020, an NOL from a tax year beginning in 2018, 2019 or 2020 can be carried back five years and would not be subject to the 80%-of-income limitation if they are exhausted during the five-year carryback period or during 2018, 2019 or 2020. The Company will not …

Excerpt shortened here; the source contains the full paragraph.

Previous wording

Our success depends, in part, on our ability to protect our intellectual property. We rely primarily on patent, copyright, trademark, and trade secret laws, as well as confidentiality and non-disclosure agreements, and other contractual protections, to protect our technologies and proprietary know-how, all of which offer only limited protection. The steps we have taken to protect our intellectual property rights may not be adequate to prevent the misappropriation, infringement, or other violation of our proprietary information or infringement of our intellectual property rights, and our ability to prevent such misappropriation, infringement, or other violation is uncertain, particularly in countries outside of the United States. As of June 30, 2024, we had 129 issued U.S. patents, expiring generally between 2026 and 2040 and 43 pending U.S. patent applications (including 14 provisional applications). We also had five foreign issued patents expiring in 2036 and four pending foreign patent applications. Our issued patents and pending patent applications generally relate to our MEMS fabrication process, MEMS resonators, circuits, packaging, and oscillator systems. We cannot assure you that any patents from any pending patent applications (or from any future patent applications) will be issued, and even if the pending patent applications are granted, the scope of the rights granted to us may not be meaningful or provide us with any commercial advantage. For example, these patents could be opposed, contested, circumvented, designed around by third parties, be narrowed or declared invalid or unenforceable in judicial or administrative proceedings including re-examination, inter partes review, post-grant review, interference and derivation proceedings and equivalent proceedings in foreign jurisdictions, or be subject to ownership claims by third parties. The failure of our patents to adequately protect our technology might make it easier for our competitors to offer similar products or technologies. Our foreign patent protection is less comprehensive than our U.S. patent protection and may not protect our intellectual property rights in some countries where our products are sold or may be sold in the future. Even if foreign patents are granted, effective enforcement in foreign countries may not be available. Further, we are currently unable to take advantage of selling our products online in certain countries where we do not own trademarks for our corporate name. Many U.S.-based companies have encountered substantial third-party intellectual property infringement in foreign countries, including countries where we sell products. If such an impermissible use of our intellectual property or trade secrets were to occur, our ability to sell our solutions at competitive prices may be adversely affected and our business, financial condition, and results of operations could be adversely affected.

Current wording

Our success depends, in part, on our ability to protect our intellectual property. We rely primarily on patent, copyright, trademark, and trade secret laws, as well as confidentiality and non-disclosure agreements, and other contractual protections, to protect our technologies and proprietary know-how, all of which offer only limited protection. The steps we have taken to protect our intellectual property rights may not be adequate to prevent the misappropriation, infringement, or other violation of our proprietary information or infringement of our intellectual property rights, and our ability to prevent such misappropriation, infringement, or other violation is uncertain, particularly in countries outside of the United States. As of September 30, 2024, we had 132 issued U.S. patents, expiring generally between 2026 and 2040, and 40 pending U.S. patent applications (including 13 provisional applications). We also had five foreign issued patents expiring in 2036 and five pending foreign patent applications. Our issued patents and pending patent applications generally relate to our MEMS fabrication process, MEMS resonators, circuits, packaging, and oscillator systems. We cannot assure you that any patents from any pending patent applications (or from any future patent applications) will be issued, and even if the pending patent applications are granted, the scope of the rights granted to us may not be meaningful or provide us with any commercial advantage. For example, these patents could be opposed, contested, circumvented, designed around by third parties, be narrowed or declared invalid or unenforceable in judicial or administrative proceedings including re-examination, inter partes review, post-grant review, interference and derivation proceedings and equivalent proceedings in foreign jurisdictions, or be subject to ownership claims by third parties. The failure of our patents to adequately protect our technology might make it easier for our competitors to offer similar products or technologies. Our foreign patent protection is less comprehensive than our U.S. patent protection and may not protect our intellectual property rights in some countries where our products are sold or may be sold in the future. Even if foreign patents are granted, effective enforcement in foreign countries may not be available. Further, we are currently unable to take advantage of selling our products online in certain countries where we do not own trademarks for our corporate name. Many U.S.-based companies have encountered substantial third-party intellectual property infringement in foreign countries, including countries where we sell products. If such an impermissible use of our intellectual property or trade secrets were to occur, our ability to sell our solutions at competitive prices may be adversely affected and our business, financial condition, and results of operations could be adversely affected.

Previous wording

Based on the latest filings with the SEC, holders of 5% or more of our common stock and their affiliates, beneficially owned approximately 56.7% of the outstanding shares of our common stock, based on the number of shares outstanding as of June 30, 2024. As a result, this group of stockholders has the ability to significantly influence us through this ownership position.

Current wording

Based on the latest filings with the SEC, holders of 5% or more of our common stock and their affiliates, beneficially owned approximately 58.0% of the outstanding shares of our common stock, based on the number of shares outstanding as of September 30, 2024. As a result, this group of stockholders has the ability to significantly influence us through this ownership position.