Unassociated Document
SECURITIES
AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington,
D.C. 20549
FORM
8-K
CURRENT
REPORT
PURSUANT
TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF
THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
Date
of
Report (Date of earliest event reported): June 13, 2008
SICLONE
INDUSTRIES, INC.
(Exact
name of registrant as specified in its charter)
Delaware
|
000-25809
|
87-0426999
|
(State
or Other Jurisdiction
|
(Commission
File
|
(I.R.S.
Employer
|
of
Incorporation)
|
Number)
|
Identification
Number)
|
1010
N.
Central Avenue, Suite 201, Glendale, CA 91202
(Address
of principal executive offices) (zip code)
(818)
507-4617
(Registrant's
telephone number, including area code)
Copies
to:
Andrea
Cataneo, Esq.
Sichenzia
Ross Friedman Ference LLP
61
Broadway
New
York,
New York 10006
Phone:
(212) 930-9700
Fax:
(212) 930-9725
(Former
name or former address, if changed since last report)
Check
the
appropriate box below if the Form 8-K filing is intended to simultaneously
satisfy the filing obligation of the registrant under any of the following
provisions (see General Instruction A.2. below):
o |
Written
communications pursuant to Rule 425 under the Securities Act (17
CFR
230.425)
|
o |
Soliciting
material pursuant to Rule 14a-12 under the Exchange Act (17 CFR
240.14a-12)
|
o |
Pre-commencement
communications pursuant to Rule 14d-2(b) under the Exchange Act (17
CFR
240.14d-2(b))
|
o |
Pre-commencement
communications pursuant to Rule 13e-4(c) under the Exchange Act (17
CFR
240.13e-4(c))
|
Item
1.01 Entry into a Material Definitive Agreement.
On
June
13, 2008, Siclone Industries, Inc. (the “Company”). Apollo Acquisition Co.,
Inc.., a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company (“Acquisition”), Apollo Medical
Management, Inc. (“Apollo”), and the shareholders of Apollo (the “Apollo
shareholders”), entered into an Agreement and Plan of Merger (the “Merger
Agreement”). Pursuant to the terms of the Merger Agreement, Apollo merged with
and into Acuisition, which became a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company
(the
“Merger”). In consideration for the merger, the Company issued an aggregate of
20,933,490 shares of common stock to the Apollo Shareholders at the closing
of
the merger.
In
accordance with the terms of the Merger Agreement, Mr. Paul Adams, the former
Chief Executive Officer and Principal Accounting Officer and a current director
of the Company, returned for cancellation 9,990,000 shares of common stock
of
the Company.
Item
2.01 Completion of Acquisition of Disposition of Assets
Description
of Apollo
Apollo
was incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware on October 17, 2006
and
is headquartered in Glendale, California. Apollo is a medical management company
focused on managing the provision of hospital-based medicine through its
affiliated medical groups, which currently consist of ApolloMed Hospitalists
(“AMH”) and Apollo Medical Associates (“AMA”). The Company’s goal is to become a
leading provider of management services to medical groups that provide
comprehensive inpatient care services such as hospitalists, emergency room
physicians, and other hospital-based specialists.
Apollo
is
currently operating under an oral agreement to provide management services
to
AMH and AMA, both of which are affiliates of Apollo, by virtue of their common
management and/or common ownership by Warren Hosseinion, M.D. and Adrian
Vazquez, M.D. AMH was founded in May 2001 and currently provides hospitalist
services at ten hospitals. AMA was founded in October 2006 as a vehicle for
acquisition of hospital-based medical practices.
AMH
and
Drs. Hosseinion and Vazquez developed and own, ApolloWeb, a proprietary
web-based, practice management software program for hospital-based physicians.
Under the oral agreement, Apollo is permitted to use the Apollo Web software
free of charge in exchange for its management services. Apollo is currently
negotiating the terms of a formal management services agreement with AMH. In
addition, Apollo is currently negotiating to acquire the ApolloWeb software
from
Drs. Hosseinion and Vazquez.
Relationships
with Physician Practices.
Apollo
provides its services through physician practices with which it has one of
two
types of relationships:
|
• |
Owned
Practices: Apollo could acquire practices in states which do not
prohibit
the corporate practice of medicine,
and
|
|
•
|
Managed
Practices: Apollo intends to manage practices, in states that prohibit
the
corporate practice of medicine. These practices are expected to
become
wholly-owned subsidiaries of
AMA.
|
Owned
Practices.
In a
typical owned practice, Apollo intends to acquire all, or substantially all,
of
the assets of a physician practice from the owner physicians. Apollo expects
to
establish a wholly-owned subsidiary to own and operate this practice, and
expects to enter into employment agreements with the selling physicians, which
could provide for base compensation and incentive compensation based upon
increases in operating earnings.
Managed
Practices.
In a
typical managed practice, Apollo or one of its management subsidiaries will
acquire all of the non-medical assets of a physician practice from the owner
physicians, or their professional organization, as the case may be, and then
enter into a management agreement with the physician organization to manage
the
practice for a fee. The management agreement is usually for a 20-year term.
In
effecting such an acquisition, one of the Apollo’s existing, or newly formed,
affiliated medical groups generally acquires medical assets, including such
things as HMO contracts, provider contracts and patient records from the owner
physicians, or their professional organization, as the case may be. If related
non-medical assets are to be acquired as part of the acquisition, such as,
management contracts, furniture, fixtures or equipment, non-medical personnel
or
real property leases, these are, as noted above, expected to be acquired by
Apollo. In some cases, the stock of an acquisition candidate is acquired rather
than its assets.
Hospitalist
Industry Overview
Hospitalists
are physicians who spend their professional time serving as the
physicians-of-record for inpatients, during which time they accept "hand-offs"
of hospitalized patients from primary care providers, returning the patients
back to the care of their primary care providers at the time of hospital
discharge. The number of hospitalists has grown from a few hundred in 1996
to
over 20,000 today in response to a need for more efficient delivery of inpatient
care according to the Society of Hospital Medicine. It is anticipated that
as
many as 33,000 hospitalists may be currently needed for full coverage of
inpatients in the United States.
Rising
healthcare expenditures is a key motivating factor behind the utilization of
hospitalists. An aging population, advancements in medical technology, and
the
rising cost of pharmaceuticals are just some of the forces which are driving
up
healthcare expenditures.
Hospital
medicine has developed as a specialty with unique characteristics and expertise.
Hospitalists have specialized skills, knowledge, and relationships that
contribute value to hospitals, physicians, patients, and health plans. These
skills go beyond the delivery of quality patient care to hospital inpatients
and
include:
|
·
|
Providing
measurable quality improvement through setting standards and
compliance
|
|
·
|
Saving
money and resources by reducing the patient’s length of stay and achieving
better utilization
|
|
·
|
Improving
the efficiency of the hospital by early patient discharge, better
throughput in the emergency department (ED), and the opening up of
ICU
beds
|
|
·
|
Creating
a seamless continuity from inpatient to outpatient care, from the
ED to
the floor, and from the ICU to the
floor
|
|
·
|
Creating
teams of healthcare professionals that make better use of the resources
at
the hospital and create a better working environment for nurses and
others
|
|
·
|
Creating
synergies between emergency and inpatient hospital services by the
management of both areas through the Company’s strategy of acquisitions of
both ER and hospitalist groups
|
|
·
|
Managing
acutely ill, complex hospitalized
patients.
|
Market
Opportunity
In
today’s healthcare environment, patients are generally admitted to hospitals and
cared for by primary care physicians (PCPs). Demands of modern medical practice,
however, require that PCPs spend most of their time in outpatient practices
limiting their availability to care for hospitalized patients. These
requirements and demands have led to ever-diminishing quality of inpatient
care,
longer hospital stays, and higher costs to the insurance companies. Over the
past few years, hospital-based physicians (i.e. those physicians that do not
have a separate outpatient practice) are becoming a regular part of the
healthcare landscape allowing PCPs to focus on outpatient office visits.
According to the Society of Hospital Medicine, a leading trade journal, hospital
medicine is the fastest growing medical specialty today growing from a few
hundred hospitalists in 1996 to approximately 20,000 hospitalists today.
Generally hospital-based physicians:
|
·
|
are
medical doctors that spend their time in the inpatient environment,
making
them familiar with hospital systems, policies, services, departments,
and
staff;
|
|
·
|
are
in-patient experts who possess clinical credibility when addressing
key
issues regarding the inpatient environment;
and
|
|
·
|
understand
the tradeoffs involved in balancing the needs of the hospital with
those
of the medical staff; they tend to have an intimate knowledge of
the
issues that the hospital is facing and are invested in finding solutions
to these problems.
|
Principal
Services and Their Markets
Apollo
provides management services to medical groups that provide comprehensive
inpatient care services in the U.S. by offering a comprehensive set of
integrated medical services to hospitals, health carriers and medical groups
as
well as individual physicians, through its affiliated medical groups, as
follows:
Services
for Hospitals
|
· |
Providing
care from the emergency room through hospital discharge
|
|
·
|
Admission
and care of unassigned and/or uninsured
patients
|
|
·
|
Inpatient
internal medicine consultation
services
|
|
·
|
Emergency
room Clinical Decision Unit services to improve throughput and ease
overcrowding
|
|
·
|
Development
of hospital-based physicians programs, including pulmonary, critical
care,
cardiology and nephrology
|
|
·
|
24/7
in-hospital inpatient coverage
services
|
|
·
|
Development
of evidence-based medicine protocols for common
diagnoses
|
|
·
|
Implementation
of patient safety guidelines
|
|
·
|
Education
of nurses and hospital staff
|
|
·
|
Analysis
of statistics via the ApolloWeb (discussed further below) database,
including length of stay, bed days/1000 admissions, and readmission
rates
|
|
·
|
Care
of patients at academic medical centers, including the education
of
medical students, interns and
residents
|
Services
for Health Carriers and Medical Groups
|
·
|
Admission
and care of assigned patients
|
|
·
|
Consistent
communication with primary care physicians upon admission, during
the
patient’s hospital stay, and upon
discharge
|
|
·
|
Rapid
transfer of out-of-network patients back to designated
hospitals
|
|
·
|
24/7
in-hospital inpatient coverage
services
|
|
·
|
Consistent
communication with case managers, social workers, and medical group
personnel
|
|
·
|
Hospital-based
physician consulting services
|
|
·
|
Analysis
of statistics via the ApolloWeb database
technology.
|
Services
for Individual Physicians
Hospital-based
services for physicians on weekends, holidays, or for those who do not wish
to
come to the hospital; primary care physicians can benefit from this arrangement
because they have more time to focus on outpatient care.
Competition
Apollo
faces competition from numerous small hospitalist and emergency room practices
as well as several large physician groups. Some of these groups are funded
by
well capitalized venture capital firms and others.
|
·
|
IPC
(NASDAQ: IPCM). IPC was founded in 1995 and employs over 400 physicians.
Practice locations include: Chicago, Dallas, Denver, Fort Worth,
Houston,
Las Vegas, Oakland, Oklahoma City, Phoenix, San Antonio, St. Louis,
and
Tucson. IPC’s venture capital investors include Morgenthaler Venture
Partners, Bessemer Venture Partners, Piper Jaffrey, Crucible Group,
Bank
America Ventures, and CB Health Ventures. IPC recently completed
an
Initial Public Offering (IPO).
|
|
·
|
Emergency
Medical Services Corporation (NYSE:EMS). EMS through its subsidiaries,
provides emergency medical services in the United States. It operates
through two segments: AMR and EmCare. AMR segment provides emergency
and
non-emergency ambulance transport and related services in the United
States. EmCare segment provides outsourced emergency department and
hospitalist staffing, and related management services. Today, EmCare
employs over 240 full-time hospitalists. EMS is headquarted in Greenwood
Village, Colorado.
|
|
·
|
Cogent
Healthcare. Cogent was founded in 1997 and employs over 130 hospitalists.
They have practice locations in New York City, Jackson, MS, Brockton,
MA,
Richland, WA, Albany, GA, Fayetteville, NC, Ft. Myers, FL, Decatur,
AL,
and Milwaukee. Cogent’s venture capital investors include: Crosspoint
Venture Partners, CCP Equity Partners, Versant Ventures, Accel Partners,
and Mission Partners.
|
|
·
|
TeamHealth.
TeamHealth was founded in 1979 to provide emergency department
administrative and staffing services. The company subsequently developed
a
hospitalist division, and now employs more than 400 hospitalists.
TeamHealth was acquired by The Blackstone Group in
2005.
|
Growth
Strategy, Competitive Position in Industry and Methods of
Competition
Apollo
anticipates that it will grow by two primary methods, organic growth and
acquisitions.
Organic
Growth
Apollo
has initiated a marketing plan focused on targeting hospitals, hospital chains,
health carriers/HMOs, medical groups and individual physicians. Apollo also
plans to commence a physician recruitment campaign aimed at attracting
physicians to meet the expected increase in demand for its services. This
campaign will be driven by utilizing direct contacts with internal medicine
residency programs, advertising in professional journals, and on-line
advertising. Apollo believes it has a competitive advantage in attracting highly
qualified physicians by offering recruits, through its affiliated medical
groups, competitive salary and benefits including, if appropriate,
incentive-based stock options as part of the compensation package.
Key
personnel are expected to be added in order implement the Apollo’s growth
strategy. Management believes that this will include a marketing division,
establishing a physician recruiting division, expanding the billing department,
and establishing a case management division. Apollo also intends to upgrade
its
information technology systems to keep pace with growth. This could include:
(1)
upgrading the ApolloWeb technology, (2) integration of billing and collections
functions, (3) electronic medical records, and (4) upgrading the wireless
technology system.
Acquisitions
Apollo
also plans to grow through mergers/acquisitions. Targeted mergers/acquisitions
will focus on hospitalist groups, emergency room physician groups, and other
hospital-based specialty physicians. Apollo has identified a number of small
group practices, as well as larger groups with between 40 and 200 physicians
that may be potential merger/acquisition candidates. Apollo believes that it
may
have a competitive advantage in closing potential mergers/acquisitions as a
publicly-traded company, which could provide Apollo with access to additional
capital and the ability to utilize its stock as part of the compensation package
to the stockholders of the target companies.
Customers
Apollo
currently provides management services to AMH.
AMH,
which was founded in May 2001 by Drs. Hosseinion and Vazquez, has developed
the
following portfolio of hospitalist contracts, all of which will be under
management by Apollo:
|
·
|
May,
2001: AMH enters into an agreement with Glendale Memorial Medical
Group to
take care of inpatients at Glendale Memorial
Hospital.
|
|
·
|
September,
2001: AMH enters into an agreement with Preferred IPA to take care
of
inpatients at Glendale Memorial Hospital and Glendale Adventist
Hospital.
|
|
·
|
January,
2002: AMH enters into an agreement with Glendale Physician’s Alliance
(GPA) to take care of its inpatients at Glendale Memorial Hospital
and
Glendale Adventist Hospital.
|
|
·
|
July,
2002: AMH enters into an agreement with Lakeside IPA to take care
of its
inpatients at Glendale Memorial Hospital and Glendale Adventist
Hospital.
|
|
·
|
January,
2003: AMH enters into an agreement with La Vida Medical Group to
take care
of its inpatients at Providence-St. Joseph’s Hospital in
Burbank.
|
|
·
|
November,
2003: AMH enters into an agreement with La Vida Medical Group to
take care
of its inpatients at Glendale Memorial Hospital and Glendale Adventist
Hospital.
|
|
·
|
February,
2005: AMH enters into an agreement with Glendale Adventist Hospital
to
provide inpatient care of hospital employees and their
families.
|
|
·
|
May,
2005: AMH enters into an agreement with Verdugo Hills Medical Group
to
take care of its inpatients at Glendale Memorial Hospital and Glendale
Adventist Hospital.
|
|
·
|
August,
2005: AMH enters into an agreement with Family Care Specialists (FCS)
to
take care of its inpatients at Glendale Memorial Hospital and Glendale
Adventist Hospital.
|
|
·
|
September,
2005: AMH enters into an agreement with Regal Medical Group to take
care
of its inpatients at Providence-St. Joseph’s Hospital, Glendale Memorial
Hospital and Glendale Adventist
Hospital.
|
|
·
|
November,
2005: AMH enters into an agreement with Healthcare Partners Medical
Group
to take of its inpatients at Glendale Memorial
Hospital.
|
|
·
|
April,
2006: AMH enters into an agreement with LaVida Medical Group to take
care
of its inpatients at Daniel Freeman Memorial Hospital, Centinela
Hospital,
Daniel Freeman Marina Hospital, and Memorial Hospital of
Gardena.
|
|
·
|
January,
2007: AMH enters into an agreement with Allied Physicians of California
to
take care of its inpatients at San Gabriel Valley Medical Center,
Garfield
Medical Center, and Alhambra
Hospital.
|
Technology
AMH
and
Drs. Hosseinion and Vazquez have developed, and own, a proprietary web-based,
practice management software program for hospital-based physicians. The system,
known as ApolloWeb allows a physician to enter patient information in real-time
at a patient’s bedside via a 3G broadband-enabled PDA or a desktop computer.
ApolloWeb is capable of generating:
|
·
|
real-time,
comprehensive statistical data
|
|
·
|
complete
HCFA (Health
Care Financing Administration)
billing forms
|
|
·
|
patient
admissions and discharge summaries, including major test results
and
necessary follow-ups
|
|
·
|
faxes
or emails to primary care physicians with the aforementioned
information.
|
It
is
expected that additional features will be added to enhance the ApolloWeb
technology, several of which include an Electronic Medical Record (EMR) platform
and a quality control component in the near future.
In
exchange for Apollo’s management services, AMH and Drs. Hosseinion and Vazquez
currently make ApolloWeb available to the Company for its use at no charge
in
its business and operations. Apollo is currently negotiating to acquire the
rights to the ApolloWeb technology from AMH, and Drs. Hosseinion and
Vazquez.
Regulatory
Matters
Significant
Federal and State Healthcare Laws Governing Our Business
As
a
healthcare company, Apollo’s operations and relationships with healthcare
providers such as hospitals, other healthcare facilities, and healthcare
professionals are subject to extensive and increasing regulation by numerous
federal, state, and local government entities. These laws and regulations often
are interpreted broadly and enforced aggressively by multiple government
agencies, including the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Office
of
the Inspector General, or the OIG, the U.S. Department of Justice, and various
state authorities. We have included brief descriptions of some, but not all,
of
the laws and regulations that affect Apollo’s business.
Imposition
of sanctions associated with a violation of any of these healthcare laws and
regulations could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial
condition and results of operations. Apollo cannot guarantee that its
arrangements or business practices will not be subject to government scrutiny
or
be found to violate certain healthcare laws. Government investigations and
prosecutions, even if Apollo is ultimately found to be without fault, can be
costly and disruptive to its business. Moreover, changes in healthcare
legislation or government regulation may restrict our existing operations,
limit
the expansion of our business or impose additional compliance requirements
and
costs, any of which could have a material adverse affect on its business,
financial condition and results of operations.
False
Claims Acts
The
federal civil False Claims Act imposes civil liability on individuals or
entities that submit false or fraudulent claims for payment to the federal
government. The False Claims Act provides, in part, that the federal government
may bring a lawsuit against any person whom it believes has knowingly or
recklessly presented, or caused to be presented, a false or fraudulent request
for payment from the federal government, or who has made a false statement
or
used a false record to get a claim for payment approved. Private parties may
initiate qui
tam
whistleblower lawsuits against any person or entity under the False Claims
Act
in the name of the government and may share in the proceeds of a successful
suit.
The
federal government has used the False Claims Act to prosecute a wide variety
of
alleged false claims and fraud allegedly perpetrated against Medicare and state
healthcare programs. By way of illustration, these prosecutions may be based
upon alleged coding errors, billing for services not rendered, billing services
at a higher payment rate than appropriate, and billing for care that is not
considered medically necessary. The government and a number of courts also
have
taken the position that claims presented in violation of certain other statutes,
including the federal Anti-Kickback Statute or the Stark Law, can be considered
a violation of the False Claims Act based on the theory that a provider
impliedly certifies compliance with all applicable laws, regulations, and other
rules when submitting claims for reimbursement.
Penalties
for False Claims Act violations include fines ranging from $5,500 to $11,000
for
each false claim, plus up to three times the amount of damages sustained by
the
government. A False Claims Act violation may provide the basis for the
imposition of administrative penalties as well as exclusion from participation
in governmental healthcare programs, including Medicare and Medicaid. In
addition to the provisions of the False Claims Act, which provide for civil
enforcement, the federal government also can use several criminal statutes
to
prosecute persons who are alleged to have submitted false or fraudulent claims
for payment to the federal government.
A
number
of states have enacted false claims acts that are similar to the federal False
Claims Act. Even more states are expected to do so in the future because
Section 6031 of the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005, or the DRA, amended the
federal law to encourage these types of changes, along with a corresponding
increase in state initiated false claims enforcement efforts. Under the DRA,
if
a state enacts a false claims act that is at least as stringent as the federal
statute and that also meets certain other requirements, the state will be
eligible to receive a greater share of any monetary recovery obtained pursuant
to certain actions brought under the state’s false claims act. The OIG, in
consultation with the Attorney General of the United States, is responsible
for
determining if a state’s false claims act complies with the statutory
requirements. Currently, 19 states and the District of Columbia have some form
of a state false claims acts. As of August 2007, the OIG has determined that
eight of these satisfy the DRA standards, and we anticipate this figure will
continue to increase. As of August 2007, the eight states are: Hawaii, Illinois,
Massachusetts, Nevada, New York, Tennessee, Texas and Virginia. Of the sixteen
states in which we currently operate, the following nine states have some form
of a state false claims act: California, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Michigan,
Nevada, Oklahoma, Tennessee and Texas.
Anti-Kickback
Statutes
The
federal Anti-Kickback Statute contained in the Social Security Act prohibits
the
knowing and willful offer, payment, solicitation or receipt of any form of
remuneration in return for, or to induce, (1) the referral of a beneficiary
of Medicare, Medicaid or other governmental healthcare programs, (2) the
furnishing or arranging for the furnishing of items or services reimbursable
under Medicare, Medicaid or other governmental healthcare programs or
(3) the purchase, lease, or order or arranging or recommending the
purchasing, leasing or ordering of any item or service reimbursable under
Medicare, Medicaid or other governmental healthcare programs. Some courts and
the OIG interpret the statute to cover any arrangement where even one purpose
of
the remuneration is to influence referrals. A violation of the Anti-Kickback
Statute is a felony punishable by imprisonment, and criminal and civil fines
of
up to $50,000 per violation and three times the amount of the unlawful
remuneration. A violation also can result in exclusion from Medicare, Medicaid
or other governmental healthcare programs.
Due
to
the breadth of the Anti-Kickback Statute’s broad prohibition, there are a few
statutory exceptions that protect various common business transactions and
arrangements from prosecution. In addition, the OIG has published safe harbor
regulations that outline other arrangements that also are deemed protected
from
prosecution under the Anti-Kickback Statute, provided all applicable criteria
are met. The failure of an activity to meet all of the applicable safe harbor
criteria does not necessarily mean that the particular arrangement violates
the
Anti-Kickback Statute, but these arrangements will be subject to greater
scrutiny by enforcement agencies.
Some
states have enacted statutes and regulations similar to the Anti-Kickback
Statute, but which may be applicable regardless of the payor source of the
patient. These state laws may contain exceptions and safe harbors that are
different from those of the federal law and that may vary from state to
state.
Federal
Stark Law
The
federal Stark Law, also known as the physician self-referral law, generally
prohibits a physician from referring Medicare and Medicaid patients to an entity
(including hospitals) providing ‘‘designated health services,’’ if the physician
or a member of the physician’s immediate family has a ‘‘financial relationship’’
with the entity, unless a specific exception applies. Designated health services
include, among other services, inpatient and outpatient hospital services,
clinical laboratory services, certain imaging services, and other items or
services that our affiliated physicians may order. The prohibition applies
regardless of the reasons for the financial relationship and the referral;
and
therefore, unlike the federal Anti-Kickback Statute, intent to violate the
law
is not required. Like the Anti-Kickback Statute, the Stark Law contains a number
of statutory and regulatory exceptions intended to protect certain types of
transactions and business arrangements from penalty. Compliance with all
elements of the applicable Stark Law exception is mandatory.
The
penalties for violating the Stark Law include the denial of payment for services
ordered in violation of the statute, mandatory refunds of any sums paid for
such
services and civil penalties of up to $15,000 for each violation, double
damages, and possible exclusion from future participation in the governmental
healthcare programs. A person who engages in a scheme to circumvent the Stark
Law’s prohibitions may be fined up to $100,000 for each applicable arrangement
or scheme.
Some
states have enacted statutes and regulations similar to the Stark Law, but
which
may be applicable to the referral of patients regardless of their payor source
and which may apply to different types of services. These state laws may contain
statutory and regulatory exceptions that are different from those of the federal
law and that may vary from state to state.
Health
Information Privacy and Security Standards
Among
other directives, the Administrative Simplification Provisions of the Health
Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, or HIPAA, required the
Department of Health and Human Services, or the HHS, to adopt standards to
protect the privacy and security of certain health-related information. The
HIPAA privacy regulations contain detailed requirements concerning the use
and
disclosure of individually identifiable health information by “HIPAA covered
entities,” which include entities like Apollo, our affiliated hospitalists, and
practice groups.
In
addition to the privacy requirements, HIPAA covered entities must implement
certain administrative, physical, and technical security standards to protect
the integrity, confidentiality and availability of certain electronic health
information received, maintained, or transmitted. HIPAA also implemented the
use
of standard transaction code sets and standard identifiers that covered entities
must use when submitting or receiving certain electronic healthcare
transactions, including activities associated with the billing and collection
of
healthcare claims.
Violations
of the HIPAA privacy and security standards may result in civil and criminal
penalties, including: (1) civil money penalties of $100 per incident, to a
maximum of $25,000, per person, per year, per standard violated and
(2) depending upon the nature of the violation, fines of up to $250,000 and
imprisonment for up to ten years.
Many
states in which we operate also have laws that protect the privacy and security
of confidential, personal information. These laws may be similar to or even
more
protective than the federal provisions. Not only may some of these state laws
impose fines and penalties upon violators, but some may afford private rights
of
action to individuals who believe their personal information has been
misused.
Fee-Splitting
and Corporate Practice of Medicine
Some
states have laws that prohibit business entities, such as Apollo, from
practicing medicine, employing physicians to practice medicine, exercising
control over medical decisions by physicians, also known collectively as the
corporate practice of medicine, or engaging in certain arrangements, such as
fee-splitting, with physicians. In some states these prohibitions are expressly
stated in a statute or regulation, while in other states the prohibition is
a
matter of judicial or regulatory interpretation. Of the sixteen states in which
we currently operate, we believe that the following nine states prohibit the
corporate practice of medicine: California, Colorado, Georgia, Illinois,
Michigan, Nevada, North Carolina, Tennessee and Texas.
Apollo
operates by maintaining long-term management contracts with affiliated
professional organizations, which are each owned and operated by physicians
and
which employ or contract with additional physicians to provide hospitalist
services. Under these arrangements, we perform only non-medical administrative
services, do not represent that we offer medical services, and do not exercise
influence or control over the practice of medicine by the physicians or the
affiliated professional organizations.
Some
of
the relevant laws, regulations, and agency interpretations in the states in
which we operate have been subject to limited judicial and regulatory
interpretation. Moreover, state laws are subject to change and regulatory
authorities and other parties, including our affiliated physicians, may assert
that, despite these arrangements, we are engaged in the prohibited corporate
practice of medicine or that our arrangements constitute unlawful fee-splitting.
If this occurred, we could be subject to civil or criminal penalties, our
contracts could be found legally invalid and unenforceable (in whole or in
part), or we could be required to restructure our contractual
arrangements.
Deficit
Reduction Act of 2005
Among
other mandates, the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005, or the DRA, created a new
Medicaid Integrity Program designed to enhance federal and state efforts to
detect Medicaid fraud, waste and abuse. Additionally, section 6032 of the DRA
requires entities that make or receive annual Medicaid payments of $5.0 million
or more from any one state to provide their employees, contractors and agents
with written policies and employee handbook materials on federal and state
False
Claims Acts and related statues. At this time, we are not required to comply
with section 6032 because we receive less than $5.0 million in Medicaid payments
annually from any one state. However, we will likely be required to comply
in
the future as our Medicaid billings increase, but we cannot predict when that
will occur. We also cannot predict what new state statutes or enforcement
efforts may emerge from the DRA and what impact they may have on our
operations.
Other
Federal Healthcare Fraud and Abuse Laws
We
are
also subject to other federal healthcare fraud and abuse laws. Under HIPAA,
there are two additional federal crimes that could have an impact on our
business: ‘‘Health Care Fraud’’ and ‘‘False Statements Relating to Health Care
Matters.’’ The Health Care Fraud statute prohibits any person from knowingly and
recklessly executing a scheme or artifice to defraud any healthcare benefit
program. Healthcare benefit programs include both government and private payors.
A violation of this statute is a felony and may result in fines, imprisonment
and/or exclusion from governmental healthcare programs.
The
False
Statements Relating to Health Care Matters statute prohibits knowingly and
willfully falsifying, concealing or covering a material fact by any trick,
scheme or device or making any materially false, fictitious or fraudulent
statement in connection with the delivery of or payment for healthcare benefits,
items or services. A violation of this statute is a felony and may result in
fines and/or imprisonment.
The
OIG
may impose administrative sanctions or civil monetary penalties against any
person or entity that knowingly presents or causes to be presented a claim
for
payment to a governmental healthcare program for services that were not provided
as claimed, is fraudulent, is for a service by an unlicensed physician, or is
for medically unnecessary services. Violations may result in penalties of up
to
$10,000 per claim, treble damages, and exclusion from governmental healthcare
funded programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid. In addition, the OIG may impose
administrative sanctions against any physician who knowingly accepts payment
from a hospital as an inducement to reduce or limit services provided to
Medicare and Medicaid program beneficiaries.
Other
State Fraud and Abuse Provisions
In
addition to the state laws previously described, we also are subject to other
state fraud and abuse statutes and regulations. Many of the states in which
we
operate have adopted a form of anti-kickback law, self-referral prohibition,
and
false claims and insurance fraud prohibition. The scope of these laws and the
interpretations of them vary from state to state and are enforced by state
courts and regulatory authorities, each with broad discretion. Generally, state
laws reach to all healthcare services and not just those covered under a
governmental healthcare program. A determination of liability under any of
these
laws could result in fines and penalties and restrictions on our ability to
operate in these states. We cannot assure that our arrangements or business
practices will not be subject to government scrutiny or be found to violate
applicable fraud and abuse laws.
Fair
Debt Collection Practices Act
Some
of
our operations may be subject to compliance with certain provisions of the
Fair
Debt Collection Practices Act and comparable statutes in many states. Under
the
Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, a third-party collection company is
restricted in the methods it uses to contact consumer debtors and elicit
payments with respect to placed accounts. Requirements under state collection
agency statutes vary, with most requiring compliance similar to that required
under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.
U.S.
Sentencing Guidelines
The
U.S.
Sentencing Guidelines are used by federal judges in determining sentences in
federal criminal cases. The guidelines are advisory, not mandatory. With respect
to corporations, the guidelines states that having an effective ethics and
compliance program may be a relevant mitigating factor in determining
sentencing. To comply with the guidelines, the compliance program must be
reasonably designed, implemented, and enforced such that it is generally
effective in preventing and detecting criminal conduct. The guidelines also
state that a corporation should take certain steps such as periodic monitoring
and appropriately responding to detected criminal conduct. Apollo has yet to
develop a formal ethics and compliance program.
Licensing,
Certification, Accreditation and Related Laws and
Guidelines
Clinical
personnel of Apollo’s affiliated companies are subject to numerous federal,
state and local licensing laws and regulations, relating to, among other things,
professional credentialing and professional ethics. Since Apollo performs
services at hospitals and other types of healthcare facilities, it may
indirectly be subject to laws applicable to those entities as well as ethical
guidelines and operating standards of professional trade associations and
private accreditation commissions, such as the American Medical Association
and
the Joint Commission on Accreditation of Health Care Organizations. There are
penalties for non-compliance with these laws and standards, including loss
of
professional license, civil or criminal fines and penalties, loss of hospital
admitting privileges, and exclusion from participation in various governmental
and other third-party healthcare programs.
Professional
Licensing Requirements
Apollo’s
affiliated hospitalists must satisfy and maintain their professional licensing
in the states where they practice medicine. Activities that qualify as
professional misconduct under state law may subject them to sanctions, or to
even lose their license and could, possibly, subject us to sanctions as well.
Some state boards of medicine impose reciprocal discipline, that is, if a
physician is disciplined for having committed professional misconduct in one
state where he or she is licensed, another state where he or she is also
licensed may impose the same discipline even though the conduct occurred in
another state. Professional licensing sanctions may also result in exclusion
from participation in governmental healthcare programs, such as Medicare and
Medicaid, as well as other third-party programs.
Employees
As
of
June 13, 2008, Apollo employs a total of 7 employees. Apollo believes that
it
has a good working relationship with its employees. The company is not a party
to any collective bargaining agreements.
Description
of Property
Apollo’s
principal executive offices are located at 1010 N. Central Avenue, Suite 201,
Glendale, California. This office consists of approximately 500 square feet
of
space which we rent for $1,800 per month. This office is leased on a
month-to-month basis. Apollo believes that its current office space are
sufficient to meet our present needs and do not anticipate any difficulty
securing alternative or additional space, as needed, on terms
acceptable.
Legal
Proceedings
From
time to time, Apollo may become involved in various lawsuits and legal
proceedings, which arise in the ordinary course of business. However, litigation
is subject to inherent uncertainties, and an adverse result in these or other
matters may arise from time to time that may harm our business. Apollo is not
currently not aware of any such legal proceedings or claims that it believe
will
have, individually or in the aggregate, a material adverse affect on our
business, financial condition or operating results.
RISK
FACTORS
Risk
Relating to Our Business
Apollo
has a limited operating history that makes it impossible to reliably predict
future growth and operating results.
Apollo
was incorporated on October 19, 2006, and will serve as the management company
initially for two medical groups, AMH and AMA. Accordingly, Apollo has a limited
operating history upon which you can evaluate its business prospects, which
makes it difficult to forecast Apollo’s future operating results. The evolving
nature of the current medical services industry increases these
uncertainties.
Apollo
has an unproven business model with no assurance of significant revenues or
operating profit.
The
current business model is unproven and the profit potential, if any, is unknown
at this time. Apollo is subject to all of the risks inherent in the creation
of
a new business. Apollo has not yet commenced full operations and its ability
to
achieve profitability is dependent, among other things, on its initial marketing
to generate sufficient operating cash flow to fund future expansion. There
can
be no assurance that Apollo's results of operations or business strategy will
achieve significant revenue or profitability.
The
growth strategy of Apollo
may not prove viable and expected growth and value may not be realized.
Apollo’s
strategy is to rapidly grow by financing the acquisition and establishment,
and
managing a network, of medical groups providing certain hospital-based services,
as described in more detail below. Where permitted by local law, Apollo may
also
acquire such medical groups directly. Groups managed (or owned) by the Apollo
are referred to herein as “Affiliated Medical Groups.” Identifying quality
acquisition candidates is a time-consuming and costly process. There can be
no
assurance that Apollo will be successful in identifying and establishing
relationships with these and other candidates. If Apollo is successful in
identifying and acquiring other businesses, there is no assurance that it will
be able to manage the growth of such businesses effectively.
The
success of Apollo’s
growth strategy depends on the successful identification, completion and
integration of acquisitions.
Apollo’s
future success will depend on the ability to identify, complete, and integrate
the acquired businesses with Apollo’s existing operations. The growth strategy
will result in additional demands on Apollo’s infrastructure, and will place
further strain on limited management, administrative, operational, financial
and
technical resources. Acquisitions involve numerous risks, including, but not
limited to:
|
·
|
the
possibility that Apollo is not able to identify suitable acquisition
candidates or consummate acquisitions on acceptable terms, if at
all;
|
|
·
|
possible
decreases in capital resources or dilution to existing
stockholders;
|
|
·
|
difficulties
and expenses incurred in connection with an
acquisition;
|
|
·
|
the
diversion of management’s attention from other business
concerns;
|
|
·
|
the
difficulties of managing an acquired
business;
|
|
·
|
the
potential loss of key employees and customers of an acquired
business;
|
|
·
|
in
the event that the operations of an acquired business do not meet
expectations, Apollo may be required to restructure the acquired
entity or
write-off the value of some or all of the assets of the
acquisition.
|
Apollo’s
future growth could be harmed if it loses the services of its key
personnel.
Apollo’s
success depends upon the services of a number of key employees, specifically
Warren Hosseinion, M.D. and Adrian Vazquez, M.D., and will depend upon certain
other additional key employees. Apollo is planning on entering into employment
agreements with and acquiring key man life insurance for Drs. Hosseinion and
Vazquez, and other key executives hired in the future. The loss of the services
of one or more of these key employees could harm Apollo’s business. Apollo’s
success also depends upon its ability to attract highly skilled new employees.
Competition for such employees is intense in the industries and geographic
areas
in which it operates. Apollo may rely on its ability to grant stock options
as
one mechanism for recruiting and retaining highly skilled talent. Recently
proposed accounting regulations requiring the expensing of stock options may
impair Apollo’s future ability to provide these incentives without incurring
significant compensation costs. If the Company is unable to compete successfully
for key employees, its results of operations, financial condition, business
and
prospects could be adversely affected.
Economic
conditions or changing consumer preferences could adversely impact
Apollo.
A
downturn in economic conditions in one or more of its markets could have a
material adverse effect on the results of operations, financial condition,
business and prospects. Although Apollo attempts to stay informed of customer
preferences, any sustained failure to identify and respond to trends could
have
a material adverse effect on its results of operations, financial condition,
business and prospects.
Apollo
may be unable to scale its operations successfully.
Apollo’s
growth strategy will place significant demands on management and its financial,
administrative and other resources. Operating results will depend substantially
on the ability of its officers and key employees to manage changing business
conditions and to implement and improve its financial, administrative and other
resources. If Apollo is unable to respond to and manage changing business
conditions, or the scale of its operations, then the quality of its services,
its ability to retain key personnel, and its business could be
harmed.
Apollo
may be unable to integrate new business entities and manage its
growth.
Apollo's
ability to manage its growth effectively will require it to continue to improve
its operational, financial and management controls and information systems
to
accurately forecast sales demand, to manage its operating costs, manage its
marketing programs in conjunction with an emerging market, and attract, train,
motivate and manage its employees effectively. If management fails to manage
the
expected growth, Apollo's results of operations, financial condition, business
and prospects could be adversely affected. In addition, Apollo's growth strategy
may depend on effectively integrating future entities, which requires
cooperative efforts from the managers and employees of the respective business
entities. If Apollo's management is unable to effectively integrate its various
business entities, its results of operations, financial condition, business
and
prospects could be adversely affected.
The
Company’s success depends upon its ability to adapt to a changing market and its
continued development of additional services.
Although
Apollo believes that it will provide a broad and competitive range of services,
there can be no assurance of acceptance by the marketplace. The procurement
of
new contracts by
Apollo’s Affiliated Medical Groups may be dependent upon the continuing results
achieved at the current facilities,
upon
pricing and operational considerations, as well as the potential need for
continuing improvement to existing services. Moreover, the markets for such
services may not develop as expected nor can there be any assurance that Apollo
will be successful in its marketing of any such services.
Changes
associated with reimbursement by third-party payers for Apollo’s services may
adversely affect operating results and financial
condition.
The
medical services industry is undergoing significant changes with third-party
payers that are taking measures to reduce reimbursement rates or in some cases,
denying reimbursement altogether. There is no assurance that third party payers
will continue to pay for the services provided by Apollo’s Affiliated Medical
Groups. Failure of third party payers to adequately cover the medical services
so provided by Apollo will have a material adverse affect on Apollo’s results of
operations, financial condition, business and prospects.
The
medical services industry is highly regulated and failure to comply with laws
and regulations applicable to Apollo could have an adverse affect on its
financial condition.
The
medical services currently provided by Apollo’s Affiliated Medical Groups and
those expected to be provided in the future are subject to stringent federal,
state, and local government health care laws and regulations. If Apollo fails
to
comply with applicable laws, it could be subject to civil or criminal penalties
while also being declined participation in Medicare, Medicaid, and other
government sponsored health care programs.
Federal
and state healthcare reform may have an adverse effect on the Company’s
financial condition and results of operations.
Federal
and state governments have continued to focus significant attention on health
care reform. A broad range of health care reform measures have been introduced
in Congress and in state legislatures. It is not clear at this time what
proposals, if any, will be adopted, or, if adopted, what effect, if any, such
proposals would have on the Company’s business.
Regulatory
authorities or other persons could assert that current or future relationships
with any acquired companies fail to comply with the anti-kickback law.
The
anti-kickback provisions of the Social Security Act prohibit anyone from
knowingly and willfully (a) soliciting or receiving any remuneration in return
for referrals for items and services reimbursable under most federal health
care
programs or (b) offering or paying any remunerations to induce a person to
make
referrals for items and services reimbursable under most federal health care
programs, which is referred to as the “anti-kickback law”. The prohibited
remunerations may be paid directly or indirectly, overtly or covertly, in cash
or in kind. If such a claim were successfully asserted, Apollo could be subject
to civil and criminal penalties and could be required to restructure or
terminate the applicable contractual arrangements. If Apollo were subjected
to
penalties or were unable to successfully restructure its relationships to comply
with the anti-kickback law, Apollo’s results of operations, financial condition,
business and prospects could be adversely affected.
Regulatory
authorities could assert that acquisitions or service agreements with third
parties fail to comply with the federal Stark Law and state laws prohibiting
physicians from referring to entities in which they have a financial
interest.
The
Stark
Law prohibits a physician from making a referral to an entity for the furnishing
of federally funded designated health services if the physician has a financial
relationship with the entity. Designated health services include clinical
laboratory services, physical and occupational therapy services, radiology
services such as magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and ultrasound services,
radiation therapy services and supplies, durable medical equipment and supplies,
and others. More detailed implementing regulations have been promulgated
by the Department of Health and Human Services. Some states have
comparable laws restricting referrals for designated health services paid by
any
payer. Unless an exception is satisfied, these laws and regulations
prevent physician investors and other physicians who have a financial
relationship with Apollo from referring patients to Apollo for designated health
services. The inability of these physicians to refer designated health
services to Apollo may have an adverse effect on the Apollo’s financial
condition and results of operations. In addition, Apollo could be required
to restructure or terminate acquisitions or service agreements to ensure
compliance with the Stark Law and applicable rules and regulations.
The provisions of the self-referral laws, like all statutes
affecting the health care industry, and the regulatory implementation and
interpretation of them may change, and the nature and timing of any such change
cannot be predicted.
Apollo
is subject to information privacy regulations.
Numerous
state, federal and international laws and regulations govern the collection,
dissemination, use and confidentiality of patient-identifiable health
information, including the Federal Health Insurance Portability and
Accountability Act of 1996 (“HIPAA”) and related rules and regulations. The
HIPAA Privacy Rule restricts the use and disclosure of patient information
and
requires entities to safeguard that information and to provide certain rights
to
individuals with respect to that information. The HIPAA Security Rule
establishes elaborate requirements for safeguarding patient information
transmitted or stored electronically. Apollo may be required to make costly
system purchases and modifications to comply with the HIPAA requirements that
will be imposed on us. Apollo’s failure to comply with these requirements could
result in liability and have a material adverse affect on its results of
operations, financial condition, business and prospects.
Service
Liability Exposure; Litigation Risk; Limited Insurance
Apollo’s
business may expose it to potential litigation. While Apollo intends to take
precautions it deems appropriate, there can be no assurance that it will be
able
to avoid significant liability or litigation exposure. Service liability
insurance is expensive, to the extent it is available at all. There can be
no
assurance that Apollo will be able to obtain such insurance on acceptable terms,
if at all, or that Apollo will be able to secure increased coverage or that
any
insurance policy will provide adequate protection against successful claims,
if
at all. A successful claim brought against Apollo in excess of the its insurance
coverage would have a material adverse effect upon the Apollo, its results
of
operations and financial condition.
We
face possible liability in connection with the proposed acquisition of a medical
management company.
In
connection with the proposed acquisition of a medical management company, the
billing company was notified approximately one month ago that Medicaid will
be
auditing some of their billing practices. The audit relates to inadvertent
billing of services for which the local hospital also billed. The Medicaid
audit
is expected to take 6 to 12 months. Assuming that the Company’s acquisition of
this medical management company is consummated, it is possible that the Company
will have the liability to reimburse Medicaid for these charges, along with
interest and penalties. The amount of such reimbursement, if any, cannot be
estimated at this time, but it could be material. In further negotiations with
the medical management company, management of the Company intends to seek a
mechanism whereby the Company would be able to recoup any amounts that it must
pay to Medicaid. However, no assurance can be given as to whether such
negotiations will be successful or whether the transaction will be completed.
Risks
Relating to Our Common Stock:
If
We Fail To Remain Current On Our Reporting Requirements, We Could Be Removed
From The OTC Bulletin Board Which Would Limit The Ability Of Broker-Dealers
To
Sell Our Securities And The Ability Of Stockholders To Sell Their Securities
In
The Secondary Market.
Companies
trading on the OTC Bulletin Board, such as us, must be reporting issuers under
Section 12 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and must be
current in their reports under Section 13, in order to maintain price quotation
privileges on the OTC Bulletin Board. If we fail to remain current on our
reporting requirements, we could be removed from the OTC Bulletin Board. As
a
result, the market liquidity for our securities could be severely adversely
affected by limiting the ability of broker-dealers to sell our securities and
the ability of stockholders to sell their securities in the secondary market.
Our
Common Stock Is Subject To The "Penny Stock" Rules Of The SEC
And The Trading Market In Our Securities Is Limited, Which Makes Transaction
In
Our Stock Cumbersome And May Reduce The Value Of An Investment In Our
Stock.
The
SEC
has adopted Rule 3a51-1 which establishes the definition of a "penny stock,"
for
the 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 certain exceptions. For any transaction involving a penny
stock, unless exempt, Rule 15g-9 requires:
|
·
|
that
a broker or dealer approve a person's account for transactions in
penny
stocks; and
|
|
·
|
the
broker or dealer receives 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
or
dealer must:
|
·
|
obtain
financial information and investment experience objectives of the
person;
and
|
|
·
|
make
a reasonable determination that the transactions in penny stocks
are
suitable for that person and the person has sufficient knowledge
and
experience in financial matters to be capable of evaluating the risks
of
transactions in penny stocks.
|
The
broker or dealer must also deliver, prior to any transaction in a penny stock,
a
disclosure schedule prescribed by the SEC relating to the penny stock market,
which, in highlight form:
|
·
|
sets
forth the basis on which the broker or dealer made the suitability
determination; and
|
|
·
|
that
the broker or dealer received a signed, written agreement from the
investor prior to the transaction.
|
Disclosure
also has to be made about the risks of investing in penny stocks in both public
offerings and in secondary trading and about the 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.
Generally,
brokers may be less willing to execute transactions in securities subject to
the
"penny stock" rules. This may make it more difficult for investors to dispose
of
our common stock and cause a decline in the market value of our
stock.
Efforts
To Comply With Recently Enacted Changes In Securities Laws And Regulations
Will
Increase Our Costs And Require Additional Management Resources, And We Still
May
Fail To Comply.
As
directed by Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the SEC adopted
rules
requiring public companies to include a report of management on the company’s
internal controls over financial reporting in their annual reports on Form
10-K.
In addition, the public accounting firm auditing the company’s financial
statements must attest to and report on management’s assessment of the
effectiveness of the company’s internal controls over financial reporting. These
requirements are not presently applicable to us but we will become subject
to
these requirements at the end of 2007. If and when these regulations become
applicable to us, and if we are unable to conclude that we have effective
internal controls over financial reporting or if our independent auditors are
unable to provide us with an unqualified report as to the effectiveness of
our
internal controls over financial reporting as required by Section 404 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, investors could lose confidence in the reliability
of our financial statements, which could result in a decrease in the value
of
our securities. We have not yet begun a formal process to evaluate our internal
controls over financial reporting. Given the status of our efforts, coupled
with
the fact that guidance from regulatory authorities in the area of internal
controls continues to evolve, substantial uncertainty exists regarding our
ability to comply by applicable deadlines.
Trading
on the OTC Bulletin Board may be volatile and sporadic, which could depress
the
market price of our common stock and make it difficult for our stockholders
to
resell their shares.
Our
common stock is quoted on the OTC Bulletin Board service of the Financial
Industry Regulatory Authority (“FINRA”). Trading in stock quoted on the OTC
Bulletin Board is often thin and characterized by wide fluctuations in trading
prices due to many factors that may have little to do with our operations
or
business prospects. This volatility could depress the market price of our
common
stock for reasons unrelated to operating performance. Moreover, the OTC Bulletin
Board is not a stock exchange, and trading of securities on the OTC Bulletin
Board is often more sporadic than the trading of securities listed on a
quotation system like Nasdaq or a stock exchange like the American Stock
Exchange. Accordingly, our shareholders may have difficulty reselling any
of
their shares.
FORWARD
LOOKING STATEMENTS
Some
of
the statements contained in this Form 8-K that are not historical facts are
"forward-looking statements" which can be identified by the use of terminology
such as "estimates," "projects," "plans," "believes," "expects," "anticipates,"
"intends," or the negative or other variations, or by discussions of strategy
that involve risks and uncertainties. We urge you to be cautious of the
forward-looking statements, that such statements, which are contained in this
Form 8-K, reflect our current beliefs with respect to future events and involve
known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors affecting our
operations, market growth, services, products and licenses. No assurances can
be
given regarding the achievement of future results, as actual results may differ
materially as a result of the risks we face, and actual events may differ from
the assumptions underlying the statements that have been made regarding
anticipated events. Factors that may cause actual results, our performance
or
achievements, or industry results, to differ materially from those contemplated
by such forward-looking statements include without limitation:
|
·
|
Our
ability to attract and retain management, and to integrate and maintain
technical information and management information systems;
|
|
·
|
Our
ability to raise capital when needed and on acceptable terms and
conditions;
|
|
·
|
The
intensity of competition; and
|
|
·
|
General
economic conditions.
|
All
written and oral forward-looking statements made in connection with this Form
8-K that are attributable to us or persons acting on our behalf are expressly
qualified in their entirety by these cautionary statements. Given the
uncertainties that surround such statements, you are cautioned not to place
undue reliance on such forward-looking statements.
Information
regarding market and industry statistics contained in this 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. We have not reviewed
or
included data from all sources, and we cannot assure you of the accuracy or
completeness of the data included in this report. 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.
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 "Risk Factors" for a more detailed discussion of uncertainties
and risks that may have an impact on future results.
MANAGEMENT’S
DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS
All
references to the "Company," "we," "our" and "us" for periods prior to the
closing of the Merger refer to Siclone, and references to the "Company," "we,"
"our" and "us" for periods subsequent to the closing of the Merger refer to
Apollo.
The
following discussion highlights the principal factors that have affected our
financial condition and results of operations as well as our liquidity and
capital resources for the periods described. This discussion contains
forward-looking statements. Please see "Forward-Looking Statements" and "Risk
Factors" for a discussion of the uncertainties, risks and assumptions associated
with these forward-looking statements.
On
June
13, 2008, Siclone Industries, Inc. (the “Company”). Apollo Acquisition Co.,
Inc.., a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company (“Acquisition”), Apollo Medical
Management, Inc. (“Apollo”), and the shareholders of Apollo (the “Apollo
shareholders”), entered into an Agreement and Plan of Merger (the “Merger
Agreement”). Pursuant to the terms of the Merger Agreement, Apollo merged with
and into Acquisition, which became a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company
(the
“Merger”). In consideration for the merger, the Company issued an aggregate of
20,933,490 shares of common stock to the Apollo Shareholders at the closing
of
the merger.
The
transaction will be accounted as a recapitalization effected by a share
exchange, wherein Apollo is considered the acquirer for accounting and financial
reporting purposes. The assets and liabilities of the acquired entity (Siclone)
will be brought forward at their book values and no goodwill will be recognized.
Prior to the closing of the Merger Agreement, Siclone agreed to change its
name
Apollo Medical Holdings, Inc.. The closing of the Merger Agreement was subject
to customary closing conditions.
Results
of Operations for the Year Ended January 31, 2008
The
Company was established on October 16, 2006 while we began operations on January
1, 2007. Accordingly, comparative information for the year ended January 31,
2008 to the same period last year is not comparable.
For
the
year ended January 31, 2008, we generated revenue of $90,500, consisting
exclusively of management fees earned for providing management services to
AMH.
For
the
year ended January 31, 2008, the cost of revenue totaled $44,643; general and
administrative expenses totaled $199,519 resulting in net loss of
($154,462).
Liquidity
and Capital Resources
Cash
and
cash equivalents totaled $44,352 at January 31, 2008.
Our
cash
position is insufficient to meet our continuing anticipated expenses or fund
anticipated operating expenses, in accordance with our full business plan.
Accordingly, we will be required to raise substantial additional capital to
sustain operations and implement our business plan, including our general
acquisition strategy, the completion of the transaction(s) with the
merger/acquisition candidates and the Reverse Merger, among other things.
Our
current source of liquidity is revenue in the form of management fees earned
for
providing management services to AMH. We are actively pursuing numerous
alternatives for our current and longer-term financial requirements, including
additional raises of capital from investors in the form of debt and equity.
No
commitments have been received and, accordingly, no assurance can be given
that
any financing will be available or, if available, that it will be on terms
that
are satisfactory to the Company. It is also unlikely that we will be able to
qualify for bank debt until such time as our operations are considerably more
advanced and we are able to demonstrate our financial strength to provide
confidence to a commercial lender.
CRITICAL
ACCOUNTING POLICIES
Basis
of Presentation
The
accompanying financial statements have been prepared in conformity with
accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.
Use
of
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.
Fair
Value of Financial Instruments
Statement
of financial accounting standard No. 107, Disclosures about fair value of
financial instruments, requires that the Company disclose estimated fair values
of financial instruments. The carrying amounts reported in the statements of
financial position for assets and liabilities qualifying as financial
instruments are a reasonable estimate of fair value.
Concentration
of Credit Risk
Financial
instruments, which potentially subject the Company to concentrations of credit
risk, consist of cash and cash equivalents. The Company monitors its exposure
for credit losses and maintains allowances for anticipated losses, as required.
Stock-based
compensation
On
October 17, 2006 the Company adopted SFAS No. 123R, “Share-Based Payment, an
Amendment of FASB Statement No. 123.” As of the date of this report the Company
has no stock based incentive plan in effect.
Basic
and Diluted Earnings Per Share
Earnings
per share is calculated in accordance with the Statement of financial accounting
standards No. 128 (SFAS No. 128), “Earnings per share”. SFAS No. 128 superseded
Accounting Principles Board Opinion No.15 (APB 15). Net income (loss) per share
for all periods presented has been restated to reflect the adoption of SFAS
No.
128. Basic net income per share is based upon the weighted average number of
common shares outstanding. Diluted net income (loss) per share is based on
the
assumption that all dilutive convertible shares and stock options were converted
or exercised. Dilution is computed by applying the treasury stock method. Under
this method, options and warrants are assumed to be exercised at the beginning
of the period (or at the time of issuance, if later), and as if funds obtained
thereby were used to purchase common stock at the average market price during
the period.
Cash
and cash equivalents
Cash
and
cash equivalents include cash in bank representing Company’s current operating
account.
Income
taxes
The
Company utilizes SFAS No. 109, “Accounting for Income Taxes,” which requires the
recognition of deferred tax assets and liabilities for the expected future
tax
consequences of events that have been included in the financial statements
or
tax returns. Under this method, deferred income taxes are recognized for the
tax
consequences in future years of differences between the tax bases of assets
and
liabilities and their financial reporting amounts at each period end based
on
enacted tax laws and statutory tax rates applicable to the periods in which
the
differences are expected to affect taxable income. Valuation allowances are
established, when necessary, to reduce deferred tax assets to the amount
expected to be realized.
Costs
of services
The
Company bears all the costs of services which include insurance, maintenance,
professional privileges and communications costs.
MANAGEMENT
Executive
Officers and Directors
Below
are
the names and certain information regarding the Company’s executive officers and
directors following completion of the acquisition.
Name
|
Age
|
Position
|
Dr.
Warren Hosseinion
|
36
|
Chief
Executive Officer, Principal Accounting Officer and
Director
|
Paul
Adams
|
48
|
Director
|
Officers
are elected annually by the Board of Directors, at our annual meeting, to hold
such office until an officer's successor has been duly appointed and qualified,
unless an officer sooner dies, resigns or is removed by the Board.
Background
of Executive Officers and Directors
Dr.
Warren Hosseinion - Chief Executive Officer, Principal Accounting Officer and
Director
On
June
14, 2008, Dr. Warren Hosseinion was appointed as a member of our Board of
Directors and as our Chief Executive Officer, and Principal Accounting Officer.
Dr. Hosseinion has been Chief Executive Officer and a Director of AMH since
June
2001. Dr. Hosseinion holds a B.S. in Biology from the University of San
Francisco, M.S. from Georgetown University in Physiology and Biophysics, and
a
M.D. from Georgetown University School of Medicine. He completed a residency
in
Internal Medicine at USC Medical Center, and is a Diplomate of the American
Board of Internal Medicine.
Paul
Adams - Director
From
approximately 1992 to present, Mr. Adams has primarily been involved in
manufacturing and retail sales in the sports fishing industry s the owner of
his
own business. Since 2000, he has owned and operated Coco Motive Candy Company,
a
business specializing in the “corporate gift” market. Mr. Adams resigned as
Chief Executive Officer and Principal Executive Officer of the Company on June
14, 2008.
Executive
Compensation
Summary
Compensation Table
The
following table sets forth all compensation paid in respect of the Company’s
Chief Executive Officer and those individuals who received compensation in
excess of $100,000 per year (collectively, the "Named Executive Officers")
for
our last three completed fiscal years.
SUMMARY
COMPENSATION TABLE
Name
and principal position
|
Year
|
Salary
($)
|
Bonus
($)
|
Stock
Awards
($)
|
Option
Awards
($)
|
Non-Equity
Incentive Plan
($)
|
Non-qualified
Deferred Compen-
sation
Earnings ($)
|
All
other compen-sation
($)
|
Total
($)
|
Paul
Adams, CEO and Principal Accounting Officer
|
2007
2006
2005
|
12,000
9,000
nil
|
n/a
nil
nil
|
n/a
nil
nil
|
n/a
nil
nil
|
n/a
nil
nil
|
n/a
nil
nil
|
n/a
nil
nil
|
12,000
9,000
nil
|
OUTSTANDING
EQUITY AWARDS
Option
Awards
|
Stock
Awards
|
Name
|
Number
of
Securities
Underlying
Unexercised
Options
(#)
Exercisable
|
Number
of
Securities
Underlying
Unexercised
Options
(#)
Unexercisable
|
Equity
Incentive
Plan
Awards:
Number
of
Securities
Underlying
Unexercised
Unearned
Options
(#)
|
Option
Exercise
Price
($)
|
Option
Expiration
Date
|
Number
of
Shares
or
Units
of
Stock
That
Have
Not
Vested
(#)
|
Market
Value
of
Shares
or
Units
of
Stock
That
Have
Not
Vested
($)
|
Equity
Incentive
Plan
Awards:
Number
of
Unearned
Shares,
Units
or
Other
Rights
That
Have
Not
Vested
(#)
|
Equity
Incentive
Plan
Awards:
Market
or Payout
Value
of
Unearned
Shares,
Units
or
Other
Rights
That
Have
Not
Vested
($)
|
Paul
Adams, CEO and Principal Accounting Officer
|
nil
|
nil
|
nil
|
nil
|
nil
|
nil
|
nil
|
nil
|
nil
|
DIRECTOR
COMPENSATION
TRANSACTIONS
WITH RELATED PERSONS, PROMOTERS AND CERTAIN CONTROL
PERSONS
Related
Transactions
No
member
of management, executive officer or security holder has had any direct or
indirect interest in any transaction to which we are a party, except for the
following:
Apollo’s
Affiliated Medical Groups, AMH and AMA, are owned and managed by Dr. Adrian
Vazquez and Dr. Warren Hosseinion, Apollo’s Chief Executive Officer and
Principal Accounting Officer. Under the current agreement between Apollo and
AMH, Apollo provides management services to AMA and AMH in exchange for use
of
the ApolloWeb software, which was developed and is owned by Drs. Vazquez and
Hosseinion. Apollo is currently negotiating the terms of formal management
agreements with AMA and AMH. In addition, Apollo is currently negotiating to
acquire the rights to the ApolloWeb software from Drs. Vazquez and
Hosseinion.
SECURITY
OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT
The
following table sets forth the beneficial ownership of our company’s capital
stock as of June 14, 2008, as to
|
· |
Each
person known to beneficially own more than 5% of the Company’s common
stock
|
|
· |
All
directors and officers as a group
|
Except
as
otherwise indicated, each of the stockholders listed below has sole voting
and
investment power over the shares beneficially owned.
Name
of Beneficial Owner (1)
|
Amount
Beneficially
Owned (2)
|
Percentage
of
Class(2)
|
Title
of Class
|
Dr.
Warren Hosseinion
|
9,123,387
|
35.72%
|
Common
|
Dr.
Adrian Vazquez
|
9,123,387
|
35.72%
|
Common
|
Paul
Adams
|
10,000
|
<1%
|
Common
|
|
All
officers and directors as a group (2
persons)
|
|
|
|
(1) Except
as
otherwise indicated, the address of each beneficial owner is c/o Siclone
Industries, Inc.,
1010 N.
Central Avenue, Suite 201, Glendale, CA 91202.
(2) Applicable
percentage ownership is based on 25,540,420 shares of common stock outstanding
as of June 14, 2008, together with securities exercisable or convertible into
shares of common stock within 60 days of June 14, 2008 for each stockholder.
Beneficial ownership is determined in accordance with the rules of the
Securities and Exchange Commission and generally includes voting or investment
power with respect to securities. Shares of common stock that are currently
exercisable or exercisable within 60 days of June 14, 2008 are deemed to be
beneficially owned by the person holding such securities for the purpose of
computing the percentage of ownership of such person, but are not treated as
outstanding for the purpose of computing the percentage ownership of any other
person.
DESCRIPTION
OF SECURITIES
Our
authorized capital stock consists of 100,000,000 shares of common stock at
a par
value of $0.001 per share and 5,000,000 shares of preferred stock at a par
value
of $0.001 par value per share. As of June 14, 2008, there were 25,540,420 shares
of
our common stock issued and outstanding that are held by approximately 303
stockholders of record and 0 shares of Preferred Stock issued and
outstanding.
Common
stock
The
holders of our common stock:
•
|
have
equal ratable rights to dividends from funds legally available if
and when
declared by our board of directors;
|
•
|
are
entitled to share ratably in all of our assets available for distribution
to holders of common stock upon liquidation, dissolution or winding
up of
our affairs;
|
•
|
do
not have preemptive, subscription or conversion rights;
|
•
|
do
not have any provisions for purchase for cancellation, surrender
or
sinking or purchase funds or rights;
|
•
|
may
be restricted from transferring the shares by the board of directors
by
giving us or the holder a first right of refusal to purchase the
stock, by
making the stock redeemable, or by restricting the transfer of the
stock
under such terms and in such manner as the board of directors may
deem
necessary and as are not inconsistent with the laws of the State
of
Delaware; and
|
•
|
Are
entitled to one non-cumulative vote per share on all matters on which
stockholders may vote.
|
All
shares of common stock now outstanding are fully paid for and non-assessable.
Non-cumulative
voting
Holders
of shares of Siclone’s common stock do not have cumulative voting rights, which
means that the holders of more than 50% of the outstanding shares, voting for
the election of directors, can elect all of the directors to be elected, if
they
so choose, and, in that event, the holders of the remaining shares will not
be
able to elect any of Siclone’s directors.
Cash
dividends
As
of the
date of this report, we have not paid any cash dividends to stockholders. The
declaration of any future cash dividend will be at the discretion of our board
of directors and will depend upon our earnings, if any, its capital requirements
and financial position, its general economic conditions, and other pertinent
conditions. It is our present intention not to pay any cash dividends in the
foreseeable future, but rather to reinvest earnings, if any, in its business
operations.
Preferred
Stock
Our
authorized capital consists of 5,000,000 shares of preferred stock at a par
value of $0.001 par value per share.
MARKET
FOR COMMON EQUITY AND RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS
The
Company's common stock is quoted on the OTC Bulletin Board of the National
Association of Securities Dealers, Inc. (the "NASD") under the symbol "SICL".
The
following table represents the range of the high and low bid prices of the
Company’s stock as reported by the OTC Bulletin Board Historical Data Service.
These quotations represent prices between dealers and may not include retail
markups, markdowns, or commissions and may not necessarily represent actual
transactions. The Company cannot ensure that an active public market will
develop in its common stock or that a stockholder may be able to liquidate
his
investment without considerable delay, if at all.
On
April
11, 2008 the current bid price was $0.0001, which does not take into account
any
retail markups, markdowns, or commissions and may not necessarily represent
actual transactions.
Year
|
Quarter
Ended
|
High
|
Low
|
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
|
March
31
|
$0.0001
|
$0.0001
|
|
|
|
|
|
June
30
|
.0001
|
.0001
|
|
|
|
|
|
September
30
|
.0001
|
.0001
|
|
|
|
|
|
December
31
|
.0001
|
.0001
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
|
|
March
31
|
$0.0001
|
$0.0001
|
|
|
|
|
|
June
30
|
.0001
|
.0001
|
|
|
|
|
|
September
30
|
.0001
|
.0001
|
|
|
|
|
|
December
31
|
.0001
|
.0001
|
The
Company’s shares are subject to section 15(g) and rule 15g-9 of the Securities
and Exchange Act, commonly referred to as the “penny stock” rule. The rule
defines penny stock to be any equity security that has a market price less
than
$5.00 per share, subject to certain exceptions. The rule provides that any
equity security is considered to be a penny stock unless that security is;
registered and traded on a national securities exchange meeting specified
criteria set by the SEC; authorized for quotation from the NASDAQ stock market;
issued by a registered investment company; excluded from the definition on
the
basis of price at least $5.00 per share or the issuer’s net tangible assets. The
Company’s shares are deemed to be penny stock, trading in the shares will be
subject to additional sales practice requirements on broker-dealers who sell
penny stocks to persons other than established customers and accredited
investors. Accredited investors, in general, include individuals with assets
in
excess of $1,000,000 or annual income exceeding $200,000 or $300,000 together
with their spouse, and certain institutional investors.
For
transactions covered by these rules, broker-dealers must make a special
suitability determination for the purchase of such security and must have
received the purchaser’s written consent to the transaction prior to the
purchase. Additionally, for the transaction involving a penny stock, other
rules
apply. Consequently, these rules may restrict the ability of broker-dealers
to
trade or maintain a market in our common stock and may affect the ability of
stockholders to sell their shares.
Dividends.
There
has
not been an active market for the Company’s stock since 1990. The Company has
not declared any cash dividends with respect to its common stock, and does
not
intend to declare dividends in the foreseeable future. The present intention
of
management is to utilize all available funds for the development of the
Company's business. The Company’s ability to pay dividends is subject to
limitations imposed by Delaware law. Under Delaware law, dividends may be paid
to the extent that a corporation’s assets exceed its liabilities and it is able
to pay its debts as they become due in the usual course of
business.
Holders
As
of
June 14, 2008, the Company had approximately 303 stockholders of record.
Securities
Authorized for Issuance Under Equity Compensation Plans
The
following table shows information with respect to each equity compensation
plan
under which the Company’s common stock is authorized for issuance as of the
fiscal year ended December 31, 2006.
EQUITY
COMPENSATION PLAN INFORMATION
Plan
category
|
Number
of securities
to
be issued upon
exercise
of
outstanding
options,
warrants
and rights
|
Weighted
average
exercise
price of
outstanding
options,
warrants
and rights
|
Number
of securities
remaining
available for future issuance under equity compensation plans (excluding
securities reflected in column (a)
|
|
(a)
|
(b)
|
(c)
|
Equity
compensation plans approved by security holders
|
-0-
|
-0-
|
-0-
|
|
|
|
|
Equity
compensation plans not approved by security
holders
|
-0-
|
-0-
|
-0-
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
-0-
|
-0-
|
-0-
|
INDEMNIFICATION
OF DIRECTORS AND OFFICERS
The
Delaware General Corporation Law permits indemnification of directors, officers,
and employees of corporations under certain conditions subject to certain
limitations Insofar
as indemnification for liabilities arising under the Securities Act of 1933
may
be permitted to directors, officers or persons controlling us pursuant to the
foregoing provisions, or otherwise, the Company has been advised that in the
opinion of the Securities and Exchange Commission, such indemnification is
against public policy as expressed in the Act and is, therefore,
unenforceable.
Item
3.02 Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities.
See
Item
1.01
Item
4.01 Change in Registrant’s Certifying Accountants
On
June
17, 2008 (the “Dismissal Date”), Siclone advised Child, Van Wagoner &
Bradshaw, PLLC (the “Former Auditor”) that it was dismissed as the Company’s
independent registered public accounting firm. The decision to
dismiss the Former Auditor as the Company’s independent registered public
accounting firm was approved by the Company’s Board of Directors on June 17,
2008. The reason for the change in accounting firm is that the
Company’s operating businesses have previously been audited by Kabani &
Company, Inc. and our new management elected to continue this existing
relationship.
Except
as
noted in the paragraph immediately below, the reports of the Former Auditor
on
the Company’s consolidated financial statements for the years ended December 31,
2007 and 2006 did not contain an adverse opinion or disclaimer of opinion,
and
such reports were not qualified or modified as to uncertainty, audit scope,
or
accounting principle.
The
reports of the Former Auditor on the Company’s
consolidated financial statements as of and for the years ended December 31,
2007 and 2006 contained an explanatory paragraph which noted that there was
substantial doubt as to the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern as
the Company has suffered recurring losses from operations and has no operating
capital.
During
the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2006, and through June 17, 2008, the
Company has not had any disagreements with the Former Auditor on any matter
of
accounting principles or practices, financial statement disclosure or auditing
scope or procedure, which disagreements, if not resolved to the Former Auditor’s
satisfaction, would have caused them to make reference thereto in their reports
on the Company’s consolidated financial statements for such years.
During
the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2006, and through June 14, 2008, there
were no reportable events, as defined in Item 304(a)(1)(v) of
Regulation S-K.
New
independent registered public accounting firm
On
June
17, 2008 (the “Engagement Date”), the Company engaged Kabani & Company,
Inc., (“New Auditor”) as its independent registered public accounting
firm for the Company’s fiscal year ended January 31, 2009. The decision to
engage the New Auditor as the Company’s independent registered public accounting
firm was approved by the Company’s Board of Directors.
During
the two most recent fiscal years and through the Engagement Date, Siclone has
not consulted with the New Auditor regarding either:
1.
|
the
application of accounting principles to any specified transaction,
either
completed or proposed, or the type of audit opinion that might be
rendered
on the Company’s financial statements, and neither a written report was
provided to the Company nor oral advice was provided that the New
Auditor
concluded was an important factor considered by the Company in reaching
a
decision as to the accounting, auditing or financial reporting issue;
or
|
2.
|
any
matter that was either subject of disagreement or event, as defined
in
Item 304(a)(1)(iv)(A) of Regulation S-B and the related instruction
to
Item 304 of Regulation S-B, or a reportable event, as that term is
explained in Item 304(a)(1)(iv)(A) of Regulation
S-B.
|
Item
5.01 Changes in Control of Registrant.
See
Item
2.01.
See
Item
1.01.
Item
5.03 Amendments to Articles of Incorporation or Bylaws; Change in Fiscal
Year
On
June
14, 2008, we changed our fiscal year end from December 31 to January 31 to
conform to the fiscal year end of our principal operating business.
Item
5.06 Change in Shell Company Status.
See
Item
2.01
Item
9.01 Financial Statements and Exhibits.
(a)
Financial statements of business acquired.
(b)
Pro
forma financial information.
(c)
Exhibits
Exhibit
Number
|
|
Description
|
10.1
|
|
Agreement
and Plan of Merger
|
16.1
|
|
Letter
re Change in certifying Accountant
|
99.1
|
|
Audited
Financial Statements for the year ended January 31, 2008 of Apollo
Medical
Management, Inc.
|
99.2
|
|
Unaudited
Pro Forma Consolidated Financial Statements for the period ended
January
31, 2008
|
SIGNATURES
Pursuant
to the requirements of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant
has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned
hereunto duly authorized.
|
SICLONE
INDUSTRIES, INC.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dated:
June 19, 2008
|
By:
|
/s/
Warren Hosseinion
|
|
|
Name:
|
Warren
Hosseinion
|
|
|
Title:
|
Chief
Executive Officer and Principal Accounting
Officer
|