Quarterly report pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d)

Description of Business and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (Policies)

v2.4.0.8
Description of Business and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (Policies)
9 Months Ended
Dec. 31, 2013
Description of Business and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies [Abstract]  
Discontinued Operations
Discontinued Operations
 
Since 2009, the Company has engaged in a process of transitioning away from its legacy lines of business in semiconductor capital equipment. As a result of the sale of the Company’s Deep Reactive Ion Etch (“DRIE”) assets in the fiscal year 2011, and in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”), the DRIE business operations related to the designing, manufacturing, marketing and servicing of systems and parts within the semiconductor industry has been presented in discontinued operations in our condensed consolidated financial statements.   The exit from the DRIE operation was essentially completed by the end of the fourth quarter of our 2011 fiscal year.  However, the Company retained its intellectual property portfolio for Nanolayer Deposition Technology (“NLD”).  During fiscal year 2012, the Company, as part of its proposed sale of its NLD portfolio, completed the sale transactions of two of four patent lots for approximately $3,750.  The Company sold the last two patent lots for approximately $365 in the second quarter of the current fiscal year.  Net proceeds related to this sale were $267.  With this sale, the Company has no other intellectual property related to discontinued operations.

The Company recognized a reclassification out of accumulated other comprehensive loss and into Loss from Discontinued Operations, net of taxes.  The reclassification is related to the recognition of a non-cash loss of $142 of foreign exchange differences from its former Tegal foreign subsidiaries, primarily as a result of the final closing of the former Tegal German subsidiary.   The Company received permission to close the German subsidiary in June 2013.  No further audits or reviews are anticipated by foreign taxing authorities.

Basis of Presentation
Basis of Presentation

In the opinion of management, the unaudited condensed consolidated interim financial statements have been prepared on the same basis as the March 31, 2013 audited consolidated financial statements and include all adjustments, consisting only of normal recurring adjustments, necessary to fairly state the information set forth herein.  The financial statements have been prepared in accordance with the regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”), but omit certain information and footnote disclosures necessary to present the financial statements in accordance with GAAP.  These interim condensed consolidated financial statements should be read in conjunction with the audited consolidated financial statements and footnotes included in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2013.  The results of operations for the three and nine months ended December 31, 2013 are not necessarily indicative of results to be expected for the entire year.
 
Use of Estimates
Use of Estimates

The preparation of financial statements in conformity with GAAP requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosures of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting periods. Actual results could vary from those estimates.

Concentration of Credit Risk
Concentration of Credit Risk

Financial instruments that potentially subject the Company to significant concentrations of credit risk consist primarily of cash investments.  The Company’s accounts receivable balance is also subject to credit risk. Substantially all of the Company’s liquid investments are invested in money market funds. The Company’s accounts receivable are derived primarily from sales to customers located in the United States.  The Company performs ongoing credit evaluations of its customers and generally requires no collateral. The Company no longer maintains reserves for potential credit losses. There have been no write-offs during the periods presented.

For the three and nine months ended December 31, 2012, Sequel Power, LLC (“Sequel Power”) accounted for 100.0% and 60.0% of the Company’s revenue.  Everyday Health accounted for 0.0% and 40.0% of the Company’s revenue for the same period.  For the three and nine months ended December 31, 2013, Life Technologies accounted for 0% and 86.7%, respectively, of the Company’s revenue.  For the three and nine months ended December 31, 2013, Quest Diagnostics accounted for 89.8% and 8.7%, respectively, of the Company’s revenue.

Life Technologies, Inc. has been a major contributor to our revenue and gross profit for the past three quarters, however we have funded the Company’s operating expenses primarily with cash on hand and the net proceeds from the sale of discontinued assets, as disclosed in prior filings.  We are actively engaged in negotiations with several other companies who are interested in purchasing our content on similar terms or under annual subscriptions or software-as-a-service arrangements.

For the period ended December 31, 2013, Quest accounted for 90.9% of the balance in accounts receivable.

Cash and Cash Equivalents
Cash and Cash Equivalents

The Company considers all highly liquid debt instruments having a maturity of three months or less on the date of purchase to be cash equivalents.

At December 31, 2013 and March 31, 2013, all of the Company’s current investments are classified as cash equivalents in the condensed consolidated balance sheets. At December 31, 2013 and March 31, 2013, the fair value of the Company’s investments approximated cost.

Promissory Notes
Promissory Notes

On July 12, 2012, Tegal completed the acquisition of CollabRx.  As part of the purchase price, Tegal issued promissory notes in the amount of $500 in exchange for the existing CollabRx indebtedness.  The principal amount of the promissory notes is payable in equal installments on the third, fourth and fifth anniversaries of the date of issuance, along with the accrued but unpaid interest as of such dates.  See Note 8, CollabRx Acquisition.

On November 22, 2011, the Company completed a $300 strategic investment in NanoVibronix, Inc., (“NanoVibronix”) a private company that develops medical devices and products that implement its proprietary therapeutic ultrasound technology.  The Company’s investment in NanoVibronix is in the form of a convertible promissory note that bears interest at a rate of 10% per year compounded annually and matures on November 15, 2014.

At December 31, 2013 and March 31, 2013, the Convertible Promissory Note balance was $370 and $345, respectively, consisting of the original $300 investment and $70 and $45, respectively, in accrued interest.

Accounts Receivable - Allowance for Sales Returns and Doubtful Accounts
Accounts Receivable – Allowance for Sales Returns and Doubtful Accounts

For the nine months ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, the Company had zero reserves for potential credit losses as such risk was determined to be insignificant. The Company had zero write-offs during the periods presented.  The Company does not currently maintain an allowance for doubtful accounts receivable for potential estimated losses resulting from the inability of the Company’s customers to make required payments.  The Company believes no such reserve is currently required.  The Company reviews the estimated risk of current customers’ inability to make payments on a quarterly basis to determine if any amount is uncollectible.

Revenue Recognition
Revenue Recognition

Each contract sale of our interpretive data is evaluated individually in regard to revenue recognition.  We have integrated in our evaluation the related guidance included in Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) Topic 605 – “Revenue Recognition”. We recognize revenue when persuasive evidence of an arrangement exists, the seller’s price is fixed or determinable and collectibility is reasonably assured.

For arrangements that include multiple deliverables, we identify separate units of accounting based on the guidance under ASC 605-25 “Multiple Element Arrangements”, which provides that revenue arrangements with multiple deliverables should be divided into separate units of accounting, if certain criteria are met.  The consideration of the arrangement is allocated to the separate units of accounting using the relative selling price method.  Applicable revenue recognition criteria are considered separately for each separate unit of accounting.
 
Revenue from fixed price contracts is recognized primarily under the percentage of completion method.  Under this method we recognize estimated contract revenue and resulting income based on costs incurred to date as a percentage of the total estimated costs as we consider this model to best reflect the economics of these contracts.  In such contracts, the Company’s efforts, measured by time incurred, typically represents the contractual milestones or output measure.   If at any time during the contract period, we determine that a loss will occur, we recognize the loss in that period. Furthermore, if in previous periods a profit was recognized under the percentage-of completion method, the profit would be reversed during the period we determined a loss on the contract exists.

Derivative Instruments
Derivative Instruments

In June 2008, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”)  ratified the Emerging Issues Task Force (“EITF”) consensus on EITF Issue No. 07-05, Determining Whether an Instrument (or Embedded Feature) Is Indexed to an Entity's Own Stock (“EITF Issue 07-05”) (Topic 815) which applies to the determination of whether any freestanding financial instruments or embedded features that have the characteristics of a derivative, as defined by Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (“SFAS”) No. 133 (Topic 815), Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities, and to any freestanding financial instruments are potentially indexed to an entity’s own common stock.  EITF Issue No. 07-05 ("Topic 815") became effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2008.  The Company adopted Topic 815 as of April 1, 2009.  As a result, warrants to purchase 285,454 shares of our common stock previously treated as equity pursuant to the derivative treatment exemption were no longer afforded equity treatment. The warrants had exercise prices ranging from $30.00-$495.00 and expired or will expire between February 2010 and September 2013. As such, effective April 1, 2009, the Company reclassified the fair value of these warrants, which had exercise price reset features, from equity to liability status as if these warrants were treated as a derivative liability since their date of issue between February 2000 and January 2006.  On April 1, 2009, the Company reclassified $346 from additional paid-in capital, as a cumulative effect adjustment, to beginning accumulated deficit, and $502 to common stock warrant liability to recognize the fair value of such warrants on such date.  At December 31, 2013, the fair value of the warrants was $0, as these outstanding warrants expired on September 9, 2013.  Previous determinations of the fair value of the warrants were calculated using the Black-Scholes pricing model.  For the nine months ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively, the Company recorded non-cash gains of $10 and $3 related to these warrants.   As of the reporting date, the Company has no other derivative instruments.

Income Taxes
Income Taxes

We account for income taxes in accordance with ASC Topic 740 – “Income Taxes”, ("ASC 740"), which requires that deferred tax assets and liabilities be recognized using enacted tax rates for the effect of temporary differences between the book and tax bases of recorded assets and liabilities. Under ASC 740, the liability method is used in accounting for income taxes. Deferred tax assets and liabilities are determined based on the differences between financial reporting and the tax basis of assets and liabilities, and are measured using the enacted tax rates and laws that will be in effect when the differences are expected to reverse. ASC 740 also requires that deferred tax assets be reduced by a valuation allowance if it is more likely than not that some or all of the deferred tax asset will not be realized. We evaluate annually the realizability of our deferred tax assets by assessing our valuation allowance and by adjusting the amount of such allowance, if necessary. The factors used to assess the likelihood of realization include our forecast of future taxable income and available tax planning strategies that could be implemented to realize the net deferred tax assets. In 2013 and 2012, we have recorded a full valuation allowance for our deferred tax assets based on our past losses and uncertainty regarding our ability to project future taxable income. In future periods, if we are able to generate income we may reduce or eliminate the valuation allowance.

Investment in Unconsolidated Affiliate
Investment in Unconsolidated Affiliate

Sequel Power

On January 14, 2011, we entered into a Formation and Contribution Agreement with se2quel Partners and Sequel Power.  We contributed $2 million in cash to Sequel Power and issued warrants to purchase shares of our common stock in exchange for an approximate 25% ownership interest in Sequel Power.  Sequel Power was focused on the promotion of solar power plant development projects worldwide.  The management services provided to Sequel Power represented the Company’s sole source of revenue for fiscal 2012.   We impaired the entire book value of our investment in Sequel Power on March 31, 2012.  On March 21, 2013, Sequel Power and se2quel Partners irrevocably assigned and transferred to the Company for cancelation the balance of Sequel Power’s warrants representing the right to purchase 44,578 shares of the Company’s common stock, leaving a balance of 92,888 warrants still outstanding.  In exchange, we agreed to terminate our Management Services Agreement and to waive receivables related to accrued fees thereunder. We do not anticipate making any additional investments in Sequel Power or any other solar-related businesses.

Management evaluates our joint venture arrangements to determine whether they should be recorded on a consolidated basis.  The percentage of ownership interest in the joint venture, an evaluation of control and whether a variable interest entity (“VIE”) exists are all considered in the consolidation assessment.

We account for our investment in joint ventures where we own a non-controlling interest or where we are not the primary beneficiary of a VIE using the equity method of accounting. Under the equity method, our cost of investment is adjusted for our share of equity in the earnings of the unconsolidated affiliate and reduced by distributions received.

Any differences between the cost of our investment in an unconsolidated affiliate and our underlying equity as reflected in the unconsolidated affiliate’s financial statements generally result from a different basis in assets contributed to the joint venture. The net difference between our investment in unconsolidated affiliates and the underlying equity of unconsolidated affiliates is generally amortized over a period of ten years, which was determined to be the estimated useful life of the underlying intangibles which created the difference in carrying amount.

 On a periodic basis, we assess whether there are any indicators that the fair value of our investments in unconsolidated affiliates may be impaired. An investment is impaired only if our estimate of the fair value of the investment is less than the carrying value of the investment, and such decline in value is deemed to be other than temporary. To the extent impairment has occurred, the loss is measured as the excess of the carrying amount of the investment over the fair value of the investment. Our estimates of fair value for each investment are based on a number of assumptions such as future revenue projections, operating forecasts, discount rates and capitalization rates, among others.  These assumptions are subject to economic and market uncertainties. As these factors are difficult to predict and are subject to future events that may alter our assumptions, the fair values estimated in the impairment analyses may not be realized.

Fair Value Measurements
Fair Value Measurements

The Company defines fair value as the price that would be received from selling an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. When determining fair value measurements for assets and liabilities required or permitted to be recorded at fair value, we consider the principal or most advantageous market in which we would transact and we consider what assumptions market participants would use when pricing the asset or liability, such as inherent risk, transfer restrictions, and risk of nonperformance.   The fair value hierarchy distinguishes between (1) market participant assumptions developed based on market data obtained from independent sources (observable inputs) and (2) an entity’s own assumptions about market participant assumptions developed based on the best information available in the circumstances (unobservable inputs). The fair value hierarchy consists of three broad levels, which gives the highest priority to unadjusted quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities (Level 1) and the lowest priority to unobservable inputs (Level 3). The three levels of the fair value hierarchy are described below:
 
· Level 1: Quoted prices (unadjusted) in active markets that are accessible at the measurement date for assets or liabilities.

· Level 2: Directly or indirectly observable inputs as of the reporting date through correlation with market data, including quoted prices for similar assets and liabilities in active markets and quoted prices in markets that are not active. Level 2 also includes assets and liabilities that are valued using models or other pricing methodologies that do not require significant judgment since the input assumptions used in the models, such as interest rates and volatility factors, are corroborated by readily observable data from actively quoted markets for substantially the full term of the financial instrument.

· Level 3: Unobservable inputs that are supported by little or no market activity and reflect the use of significant management judgment. These values are generally determined using pricing models for which the assumptions utilize management’s estimates of market participant assumptions.
 
In determining fair value, the Company utilizes valuation techniques that maximize the use of observable inputs and minimize the use of unobservable inputs to the extent possible as well as considers counterparty credit risk in its assessment of fair value.
 
The Company’s financial instruments consist primarily of money market funds.  At December 31, 2013, all of our investments were classified as cash equivalents in the condensed consolidated balance sheets. The carrying amounts of our cash equivalents are valued using Level 1 inputs.  Our cash equivalents total $2,366.  The value of our warrant liability is determined using Level 3 inputs.  The Company uses the Black-Scholes option pricing model as its method of valuation for warrants that are subject warrant liability accounting.  The determination of the fair value as of the reporting date is affected by the Company’s stock price as well as assumptions regarding a number of highly complex and subjective variables which could provide differing variables.  These variables include, but are not limited to, expected stock price volatility over the term of the security and risk free interest rate.  In addition, the Black-Scholes option pricing model requires the input of an expected life for the securities for which we have estimated based upon the stage of the Company’s development.  The fair value of the warrant liability is revalued each balance sheet date utilizing the Black-Scholes option pricing model computations with the decrease or increase in the fair value being reported in the Consolidated Statement of Operations and Comprehensive Loss as other income, net.  A significant increase (decrease) of any of the subjective variables independent of other changes would result in a correlated increase (decrease) in the liability and an inverse effect on net income.

Other than the Sequel related balance of 92,888 warrants still outstanding, which are not subject to liability accounting, the Company’s warrant liability has been extinguished, and the Company has no other financial instruments subject to using Level 3 inputs as of December 31, 2013.
 
The change in the fair value of warrants is as follows:

 
 
Nine Months Ended
 
 
 
December 31,
 
 
 
2013
   
2012
 
Balance at the beginning of the period
 
$
10
   
$
19
 
Issuance of warrants
   
-
     
-
 
Change in fair value recorded in earnings
   
(10
)
   
(3
)
Balance at the end of the period
 
$
0
   
$
16
 

Intangible Assets
Intangible Assets

Intangible assets include patents, trade names, software, non-compete agreements, customer relationships and trademarks that are amortized on a straight-line basis over periods ranging from three to ten years.  The Company performs an ongoing review of its identified intangible assets to determine if facts and circumstances exist that indicate the useful life is shorter than originally estimated or the carrying amount may not be recoverable.  If such facts and circumstances exist, the Company assesses the recoverability of identified intangible assets by comparing the projected undiscounted net cash flow associated with the related asset or group of assets over their remaining lives against their respective carrying amounts.  Impairment, if any, is based on the excess of the carrying amount over the fair value of those assets.   As of the current reporting period, the Company’s remaining intangible assets, not including those related to the acquisition of CollabRx, were internally developed, which have a carrying value of zero.     Currently the Company expenses all costs incurred to renew or extend the term of a recognized intangible asset.

During fiscal year 2012, the Company, as part of its proposed sale of its intellectual property portfolio for Nanolayer Deposition Technology (“NLD”), completed the sale of two of the four lots for the received purchase price of approximately $3,750.  The Company sold the last two patent lots for approximately $365 during the quarter ended September 30, 2013.  The related commission expense was $89.  An additional $10 of related expenses was recognized.  With this sale, the Company has no other intellectual property related to discontinued operations.  NLD is a process technology that bridges the gap between high throughput, non-conformal chemical vapor deposition (“CVD”) and highly conformal, low throughput atomic layer deposition (“ALD”).  The entire portfolio included over 35 US and international patents in the areas of pulsed-CVD, plasma-enhanced ALD, and NLD.

With the acquisition of CollabRx, the Company acquired software, trade names, customer relationships, non-compete agreements and goodwill.  The lives of the acquired intangible assets range from three to ten years.  Intangible assets, except for trade names, are amortized on a straight-line basis.  Intangible assets related to trade names are not amortized.  The Company tests for impairment at least annually.  The fair values of these assets are reviewed for impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount might not be recoverable. If undiscounted expected future cash flows are less than the carrying value of the assets, an impairment loss will be recognized based on the excess of the carrying amount over the fair value of the assets.  The amortization expense for the nine months ended December 31, 2013 and 2012 was $156 and $82, respectively.   The amortization expense included in cost of revenue is related to the acquired software and is amortized on a straight-line basis over the expected life of the asset, which the Company believes to be ten years.

Impairment of Long-Lived Assets
Impairment of Long-Lived Assets

Long-lived assets are reviewed for indicators of impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount may not be recoverable, as well as at fiscal year end. If undiscounted expected future cash flows are less than the carrying value of the assets, an impairment loss is recognized based on the excess of the carrying amount over the fair value of the assets.

The Company recorded zero disposal losses for fixed assets for the three months ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively.  The Company recorded disposal losses of $0 and $17 for fixed assets for the nine months ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively.    The Company disposed of certain assets in the prior period in connection with the relocation of its main offices from Petaluma, CA to San Francisco, CA.

Deferred Offering Costs
Deferred Offering Costs

Deferred offering costs represent expenses incurred to raise equity capital related to financing transactions which have not yet been completed as of the balance sheet dates.
Stock-Based Compensation
Stock-Based Compensation

We have adopted several stock plans that provide for issuance of equity instruments to our employees and non-employee directors. Our plans include incentive and non-statutory stock options and restricted stock awards.  These equity awards generally vest ratably over a four-year period on the anniversary date of the grant, and stock options expire ten years after the grant date. Certain restricted stock awards may vest on the achievement of specific performance targets.  We also have an Employee Stock Purchase Plan (“ESPP”) that allows qualified employees to purchase Company shares at 85% of the fair market value on specified dates.

Total stock-based compensation expense related to stock options and restricted stock units (“RSUs”) for the nine months ended December 31, 2013 and 2012 was $272 and $507, respectively.  The total compensation expense related to non-vested stock options and RSUs not yet recognized at December 31, 2013 is $495, and will be recognized over an estimated weighted average period of 2.6 and 1.55 years, respectively.

The Company utilized the following valuation assumptions to estimate the fair value of options that were granted for the nine month periods ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively.

STOCK OPTIONS:
 
2013
   
2012
 
Expected life (years)
   
6.0
     
6.0
 
Volatility
   
152.4
%
   
156.8
%
Risk-free interest rate
   
1.48
%
   
0.64
%
Dividend yield
   
0
%
   
0
%

ESPP awards are valued using the Black-Scholes option pricing model with expected volatility calculated using a six-month historical volatility.   No ESPP awards were made in the three or nine month periods ended December 31, 2013.

Valuation and Other Assumptions for Stock Options
 
Valuation and Amortization Method.    We estimate the fair value of stock options granted using the Black-Scholes option pricing model. We estimate the fair value using a single option approach and amortize the fair value on a straight-line basis for options expected to vest. All options are amortized over the requisite service periods of the awards, which are generally the vesting periods.
 
Expected Term.   The expected term of options granted represents the period of time that the options are expected to be outstanding. We estimate the expected term of options granted based on our historical experience of exercises including post-vesting exercises and termination.
 
Expected Volatility.    We estimate the volatility of our stock options at the date of grant using historical volatilities.  Historical volatilities are calculated based on the historical prices of our common stock over a period at least equal to the expected term of our option grants.
 
Risk-Free Interest Rate.    We base the risk-free interest rate used in the Black-Scholes option pricing model on the implied yield in effect at the time of option grant on U.S. Treasury zero-coupon issues with remaining terms equivalent to the expected term of our option grants.
 
Dividends.    We have never paid any cash dividends on common stock and we do not anticipate paying any cash dividends in the foreseeable future.
 
Forfeitures.    We use historical data to estimate pre-vesting option forfeitures. We record stock-based compensation expense only for those awards that are expected to vest.

During the three months ended December 31, 2013, the Company granted 10,000 options.

Stock Options

A summary of the stock option activity during the nine months ended December 31, 2013 is as follows:

 
 
   
   
Weighted-
   
 
 
 
   
Weighted-
   
Average
   
 
 
 
   
Average
   
Remaining
   
Aggregate
 
 
 
   
Exercise
   
Contractual
   
Intrinsic
 
 
 
Shares
   
Price
   
Term (in Years)
   
Value
 
Beginning outstanding
   
263,807
   
$
10.23
   
   
 
Granted
   
39,499
   
$
4.08
   
   
 
Exercised
   
--
           
   
 
Expired
   
(2,380
)
 
$
63.97
   
   
 
 
                 
   
 
Ending outstanding
   
300,926
   
$
9.00
     
7.24
   
$
20,148
 
Ending vested and expected to vest
   
300,743
   
$
9.00
     
7.24
   
$
20,142
 
Ending exercisable
   
175,301
   
$
12.60
     
6.02
   
$
16,098
 

The aggregate intrinsic value of stock options outstanding at December 31, 2013 is calculated as the difference between the exercise price of the underlying options and the market price of our common stock as of December 31, 2013.

The following table summarizes information with respect to stock options outstanding as of December 31, 2013:

   
   
   
   
   
Weighted-
 
   
   
Weighted-
   
   
   
Average
 
   
Number
   
Average
   
   
Number
   
Exercise
 
   
Outstanding
   
Remaining
   
Weighted-
   
Exercisable
   
Price
 
   
As of
   
Contractual
   
Average
   
As of
   
As of
 
Range of
   
December 31,
   
Term
   
Exercise
   
December 31,
   
December 31,
 
Exercise Prices
   
2013
   
(in years)
   
Price
   
2013
   
2013
 
$
2.90
   
$
4.50
     
200,496
     
8.82
   
$
3.83
     
74,871
   
$
3.65
 
 
6.00
     
11.70
     
48,690
     
4.98
     
11.12
     
48,690
     
11.12
 
 
17.80
     
28.10
     
39,244
     
3.72
     
21.63
     
39,244
     
21.63
 
 
34.20
     
89.52
     
12,496
     
1.68
     
43.65
     
12,496
     
43.65
 
                                                     
$
2.90
   
$
89.52
     
300,926
     
7.24
   
$
9.00
     
175,301
   
$
12.60
 

As of December 31, 2013, there was $275 of total unrecognized compensation cost related to outstanding options which the Company expects to recognize over an estimated weighted average period of 2.6 years.

Restricted Stock Units

The following table summarizes the Company’s unvested RSU activity for the nine months ended December 31, 2013:

 
Number
   
Weighted-
Average
 
 
of
   
Grant Date
 
 
 
Shares
   
Fair Value
 
Balance March 31, 2013
   
183,904
   
$
2.67
 
Granted
   
-
   
$
-
 
Forfeited
   
-
   
$
-
 
Vested
   
(57,250
)
 
$
2.42
 
Balance, December 31, 2013
   
126,654
   
$
2.78
 

Unvested Restricted Stock at December 31, 2013

As of December 31, 2013, there was $220 of total unrecognized compensation cost related to outstanding RSUs, which the Company expects to recognize over an estimated weighted average period of 1.55 years.